Jessa Duggar had an abortion

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The most insane part of this ridiculous thread:
Conservatives trying to use semantics to convince people that a D&C isn’t an “abortion” 😂

We live in the worst time line.

I’m pro-choice, and I had a miscarriage with a D&C, and I wouldn’t go and say that I had an abortion (even though that is the medical term). The accepted connotation of “abortion” is voluntarily ending a pregnancy.

If your body doesn’t expel the fetus and you elect to have a d & c, you’re voluntarily ending the pregnancy on your own terms — which is a choice that should be between you and your doctor and should not involve lawmakers, but here we are.

I didn’t consider myself pregnant once I found out the fetus was not living.

Okay, but pregnancy isn’t like gender; it’s not about how you identify.

Ok
preg·nant
/ˈpreɡnənt/
adjective
1.
(of a woman or female animal) having a child or young developing in the uterus.

DEVELOPING in the uterus.
If it is dead, it is not developing.
My pregnancy ended when the fetus died and stopped developing.

[Anonymous]

What if further development is dangerous to the person carrying this zygote or fetus?

Because in many of these poorly written laws, that doesn’t matter - you incubate until you can’t anymore.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The most insane part of this ridiculous thread:
Conservatives trying to use semantics to convince people that a D&C isn’t an “abortion” 😂

We live in the worst time line.

I’m pro-choice, and I had a miscarriage with a D&C, and I wouldn’t go and say that I had an abortion (even though that is the medical term). The accepted connotation of “abortion” is voluntarily ending a pregnancy.

If your body doesn’t expel the fetus and you elect to have a d & c, you’re voluntarily ending the pregnancy on your own terms — which is a choice that should be between you and your doctor and should not involve lawmakers, but here we are.

I didn’t consider myself pregnant once I found out the fetus was not living.

Okay, but pregnancy isn’t like gender; it’s not about how you identify.

Ok
preg·nant
/ˈpreɡnənt/
adjective
1.
(of a woman or female animal) having a child or young developing in the uterus.

DEVELOPING in the uterus.
If it is dead, it is not developing.
My pregnancy ended when the fetus died and stopped developing.

And how pregnant could you have gotten with a fetus, alive or dead, currently occupying the premises? I’ll tell you: not very. So: developing or not, embryo/fetus on board = pregnant.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The most insane part of this ridiculous thread:
Conservatives trying to use semantics to convince people that a D&C isn’t an “abortion” 😂

We live in the worst time line.

I’m pro-choice, and I had a miscarriage with a D&C, and I wouldn’t go and say that I had an abortion (even though that is the medical term). The accepted connotation of “abortion” is voluntarily ending a pregnancy.

Precision of terminology is important. If the term abortion is fully understood in its medical definition then sweeping abortion bans would have to be rewritten. But GOP doesn’t want that. They like the fear that the imprecision brings along because it makes the law even stricter than what they claim it is. Your procedure was legal, but there are extremists put there who would want to make it illegal.

And if we stopped demonizing the word abortion it wouldn’t matter to people what medical records say.

Yes, let’s just kill the unborn and call it “health care.”

The "unborn" don't even have souls. What's your problem with a woman removing these soulless creatures from their bodies?

How do you know unborn babies don’t have souls? Do you have a link to a confirmation via a scientific test? Post it.

Why is “unborn” in quotes? Are we not discussing unborn humans? Are you suggesting they are not unborn?

No they’re fetuses. Fetuses about whom you don’t care except for forcing women to birth them. You don’t like prenatal care, you think socialized healthcare is the devil, teaching critical thinking is “grooming” kids but that child marriage is a good idea, you think any kind of safety regulation is contrary to God’s law and that guns should be everywhere up to and including on a kindergarten teacher’s back.

You are a forced birther, hostile to life and progress. You do the work of the Devil and say it’s for the Lord.

They are human fetuses. Not whale fetuses, or mice fetuses, or giraffe fetuses, or dog fetuses. They are human fetuses.

You have zero idea at what I like and don’t like.

I think people who put words in someone else’s mouth are weak and ignorant, because you can’t speak for yourself and have to make up lies about other people.

It’s a fetus inside the body of an existing woman. It’s fun to watch you excuse her illegal abortion. You should be calling for her to be charged.

And I don’t have to make up words to put in your mouth. I have statistics. And statistically, forced birthers are Republicans and statistically forced birthers are for and against all those things I listed and statistically I’m right. Forced birthers want the medieval period back, women enslaved, no science. Go live your sad life however hypocritically you want but you keep trying to force the rest of us to live your backwards lifestyle.

Lol. Show me the law of *literally any state* that would make her d&c illegal. You’re the true definition of idiot. I can’t believe you’re allowed to vote.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The most insane part of this ridiculous thread:
Conservatives trying to use semantics to convince people that a D&C isn’t an “abortion” 😂

We live in the worst time line.

I’m pro-choice, and I had a miscarriage with a D&C, and I wouldn’t go and say that I had an abortion (even though that is the medical term). The accepted connotation of “abortion” is voluntarily ending a pregnancy.

Precision of terminology is important. If the term abortion is fully understood in its medical definition then sweeping abortion bans would have to be rewritten. But GOP doesn’t want that. They like the fear that the imprecision brings along because it makes the law even stricter than what they claim it is. Your procedure was legal, but there are extremists put there who would want to make it illegal.

And if we stopped demonizing the word abortion it wouldn’t matter to people what medical records say.

Yes, let’s just kill the unborn and call it “health care.”

The "unborn" don't even have souls. What's your problem with a woman removing these soulless creatures from their bodies?

also, why do you call humans “creatures?”

They aren’t creatures, they are humans.

Until they get a soul, they're not human. Sign of the godless times we live in; thinking you can be human without a soul. Surely, you'll agree that there is something more to being human (something holy!) than simply having biological functions and the correct number of chromosomes.

Are you trying to base laws on your spiritual beliefs?

God's laws. Not mine. If it were up to me, I'd give fetuses a soul at conception.

Damn. I grew up as a Southern Baptist, and I’m pretty sure if I said that at church it would’ve been considered blasphemous, thinking you could do a better job than God. No wonder you think you should control women, you think you know better than God so of course you know better than all the baby mamas. That post really cleared things up for me.

And this is why we can never win with logic against people like this. There is none, and they simultaneously want to use god to control other people and criticize god for not doing a good enough job.

What are you talking about? I don't know better than God. If God chooses to give these beings souls at the quickening and not before, it's not up to me to second guess His will.

Why would a doctor intervene? If your god wanted Jessa to survive this, certainly he would have expelled the fetus. Otherwise, his will is clearly for her to die along with her unborn child.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The most insane part of this ridiculous thread:
Conservatives trying to use semantics to convince people that a D&C isn’t an “abortion” 😂

We live in the worst time line.

I’m pro-choice, and I had a miscarriage with a D&C, and I wouldn’t go and say that I had an abortion (even though that is the medical term). The accepted connotation of “abortion” is voluntarily ending a pregnancy.

Precision of terminology is important. If the term abortion is fully understood in its medical definition then sweeping abortion bans would have to be rewritten. But GOP doesn’t want that. They like the fear that the imprecision brings along because it makes the law even stricter than what they claim it is. Your procedure was legal, but there are extremists put there who would want to make it illegal.

And if we stopped demonizing the word abortion it wouldn’t matter to people what medical records say.

Yes, let’s just kill the unborn and call it “health care.”

The "unborn" don't even have souls. What's your problem with a woman removing these soulless creatures from their bodies?

also, why do you call humans “creatures?”

They aren’t creatures, they are humans.

Until they get a soul, they're not human. Sign of the godless times we live in; thinking you can be human without a soul. Surely, you'll agree that there is something more to being human (something holy!) than simply having biological functions and the correct number of chromosomes.

Are you trying to base laws on your spiritual beliefs?

God's laws. Not mine. If it were up to me, I'd give fetuses a soul at conception.

Damn. I grew up as a Southern Baptist, and I’m pretty sure if I said that at church it would’ve been considered blasphemous, thinking you could do a better job than God. No wonder you think you should control women, you think you know better than God so of course you know better than all the baby mamas. That post really cleared things up for me.

And this is why we can never win with logic against people like this. There is none, and they simultaneously want to use god to control other people and criticize god for not doing a good enough job.

What are you talking about? I don't know better than God. If God chooses to give these beings souls at the quickening and not before, it's not up to me to second guess His will.

Why would a doctor intervene? If your god wanted Jessa to survive this, certainly he would have expelled the fetus. Otherwise, his will is clearly for her to die along with her unborn child.

You're the extremist here. You are the only one arguing against D&C.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The most insane part of this ridiculous thread:
Conservatives trying to use semantics to convince people that a D&C isn’t an “abortion” 😂

We live in the worst time line.

I’m pro-choice, and I had a miscarriage with a D&C, and I wouldn’t go and say that I had an abortion (even though that is the medical term). The accepted connotation of “abortion” is voluntarily ending a pregnancy.

Precision of terminology is important. If the term abortion is fully understood in its medical definition then sweeping abortion bans would have to be rewritten. But GOP doesn’t want that. They like the fear that the imprecision brings along because it makes the law even stricter than what they claim it is. Your procedure was legal, but there are extremists put there who would want to make it illegal.

And if we stopped demonizing the word abortion it wouldn’t matter to people what medical records say.

Yes, let’s just kill the unborn and call it “health care.”

The "unborn" don't even have souls. What's your problem with a woman removing these soulless creatures from their bodies?

also, why do you call humans “creatures?”

They aren’t creatures, they are humans.

Until they get a soul, they're not human. Sign of the godless times we live in; thinking you can be human without a soul. Surely, you'll agree that there is something more to being human (something holy!) than simply having biological functions and the correct number of chromosomes.

Are you trying to base laws on your spiritual beliefs?

God's laws. Not mine. If it were up to me, I'd give fetuses a soul at conception.

Damn. I grew up as a Southern Baptist, and I’m pretty sure if I said that at church it would’ve been considered blasphemous, thinking you could do a better job than God. No wonder you think you should control women, you think you know better than God so of course you know better than all the baby mamas. That post really cleared things up for me.

And this is why we can never win with logic against people like this. There is none, and they simultaneously want to use god to control other people and criticize god for not doing a good enough job.

What are you talking about? I don't know better than God. If God chooses to give these beings souls at the quickening and not before, it's not up to me to second guess His will.

Why would a doctor intervene? If your god wanted Jessa to survive this, certainly he would have expelled the fetus. Otherwise, his will is clearly for her to die along with her unborn child.

You're the extremist here. You are the only one arguing against D&C.

No, I’m asking why these obvious holes exist in your logic. If only god can take a life, why should Jessa be spared? She is just a vessel, right? Why would a doctor intervene if god’s will is to end her life? I thought God was all knowing.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The most insane part of this ridiculous thread:
Conservatives trying to use semantics to convince people that a D&C isn’t an “abortion” 😂

We live in the worst time line.

I’m pro-choice, and I had a miscarriage with a D&C, and I wouldn’t go and say that I had an abortion (even though that is the medical term). The accepted connotation of “abortion” is voluntarily ending a pregnancy.

Precision of terminology is important. If the term abortion is fully understood in its medical definition then sweeping abortion bans would have to be rewritten. But GOP doesn’t want that. They like the fear that the imprecision brings along because it makes the law even stricter than what they claim it is. Your procedure was legal, but there are extremists put there who would want to make it illegal.

And if we stopped demonizing the word abortion it wouldn’t matter to people what medical records say.

Yes, let’s just kill the unborn and call it “health care.”

The "unborn" don't even have souls. What's your problem with a woman removing these soulless creatures from their bodies?

also, why do you call humans “creatures?”

They aren’t creatures, they are humans.

Until they get a soul, they're not human. Sign of the godless times we live in; thinking you can be human without a soul. Surely, you'll agree that there is something more to being human (something holy!) than simply having biological functions and the correct number of chromosomes.

Are you trying to base laws on your spiritual beliefs?

God's laws. Not mine. If it were up to me, I'd give fetuses a soul at conception.

Damn. I grew up as a Southern Baptist, and I’m pretty sure if I said that at church it would’ve been considered blasphemous, thinking you could do a better job than God. No wonder you think you should control women, you think you know better than God so of course you know better than all the baby mamas. That post really cleared things up for me.

And this is why we can never win with logic against people like this. There is none, and they simultaneously want to use god to control other people and criticize god for not doing a good enough job.

What are you talking about? I don't know better than God. If God chooses to give these beings souls at the quickening and not before, it's not up to me to second guess His will.

Why would a doctor intervene? If your god wanted Jessa to survive this, certainly he would have expelled the fetus. Otherwise, his will is clearly for her to die along with her unborn child.

You're the extremist here. You are the only one arguing against D&C.

No, I’m asking why these obvious holes exist in your logic. If only god can take a life, why should Jessa be spared? She is just a vessel, right? Why would a doctor intervene if god’s will is to end her life? I thought God was all knowing.

By your logic, no health care could ever be legal. Very extreme position.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The most insane part of this ridiculous thread:
Conservatives trying to use semantics to convince people that a D&C isn’t an “abortion” 😂

We live in the worst time line.

I’m pro-choice, and I had a miscarriage with a D&C, and I wouldn’t go and say that I had an abortion (even though that is the medical term). The accepted connotation of “abortion” is voluntarily ending a pregnancy.

If your body doesn’t expel the fetus and you elect to have a d & c, you’re voluntarily ending the pregnancy on your own terms — which is a choice that should be between you and your doctor and should not involve lawmakers, but here we are.

I didn’t consider myself pregnant once I found out the fetus was not living.

Okay, but pregnancy isn’t like gender; it’s not about how you identify.

Ok
preg·nant
/ˈpreɡnənt/
adjective
1.
(of a woman or female animal) having a child or young developing in the uterus.

DEVELOPING in the uterus.
If it is dead, it is not developing.
My pregnancy ended when the fetus died and stopped developing.

And how pregnant could you have gotten with a fetus, alive or dead, currently occupying the premises? I’ll tell you: not very. So: developing or not, embryo/fetus on board = pregnant.

Is that supposed to be logic? There a a lot of medical conditions that would interfere with conception. A dead fetus occupying the uterus is one.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The most insane part of this ridiculous thread:
Conservatives trying to use semantics to convince people that a D&C isn’t an “abortion” 😂

We live in the worst time line.

I’m pro-choice, and I had a miscarriage with a D&C, and I wouldn’t go and say that I had an abortion (even though that is the medical term). The accepted connotation of “abortion” is voluntarily ending a pregnancy.

Precision of terminology is important. If the term abortion is fully understood in its medical definition then sweeping abortion bans would have to be rewritten. But GOP doesn’t want that. They like the fear that the imprecision brings along because it makes the law even stricter than what they claim it is. Your procedure was legal, but there are extremists put there who would want to make it illegal.

And if we stopped demonizing the word abortion it wouldn’t matter to people what medical records say.

Yes, let’s just kill the unborn and call it “health care.”

The "unborn" don't even have souls. What's your problem with a woman removing these soulless creatures from their bodies?

also, why do you call humans “creatures?”

They aren’t creatures, they are humans.

Until they get a soul, they're not human. Sign of the godless times we live in; thinking you can be human without a soul. Surely, you'll agree that there is something more to being human (something holy!) than simply having biological functions and the correct number of chromosomes.

Are you trying to base laws on your spiritual beliefs?

God's laws. Not mine. If it were up to me, I'd give fetuses a soul at conception.

Damn. I grew up as a Southern Baptist, and I’m pretty sure if I said that at church it would’ve been considered blasphemous, thinking you could do a better job than God. No wonder you think you should control women, you think you know better than God so of course you know better than all the baby mamas. That post really cleared things up for me.

And this is why we can never win with logic against people like this. There is none, and they simultaneously want to use god to control other people and criticize god for not doing a good enough job.

What are you talking about? I don't know better than God. If God chooses to give these beings souls at the quickening and not before, it's not up to me to second guess His will.

Why would a doctor intervene? If your god wanted Jessa to survive this, certainly he would have expelled the fetus. Otherwise, his will is clearly for her to die along with her unborn child.

You're the extremist here. You are the only one arguing against D&C.

No, I’m asking why these obvious holes exist in your logic. If only god can take a life, why should Jessa be spared? She is just a vessel, right? Why would a doctor intervene if god’s will is to end her life? I thought God was all knowing.

By your logic, no health care could ever be legal. Very extreme position.

I said nothing about legality. I’m talking about god. This isn’t a theocracy, although the Duggars have advocated for one.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The most insane part of this ridiculous thread:
Conservatives trying to use semantics to convince people that a D&C isn’t an “abortion” 😂

We live in the worst time line.

I’m pro-choice, and I had a miscarriage with a D&C, and I wouldn’t go and say that I had an abortion (even though that is the medical term). The accepted connotation of “abortion” is voluntarily ending a pregnancy.

If your body doesn’t expel the fetus and you elect to have a d & c, you’re voluntarily ending the pregnancy on your own terms — which is a choice that should be between you and your doctor and should not involve lawmakers, but here we are.

I didn’t consider myself pregnant once I found out the fetus was not living.

Okay, but pregnancy isn’t like gender; it’s not about how you identify.

Ok
preg·nant
/ˈpreɡnənt/
adjective
1.
(of a woman or female animal) having a child or young developing in the uterus.

DEVELOPING in the uterus.
If it is dead, it is not developing.
My pregnancy ended when the fetus died and stopped developing.

Medically speaking, I was considered pregnant until my hcg level dropped below 5, though the fetus stopped developing weeks before that.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The most insane part of this ridiculous thread:
Conservatives trying to use semantics to convince people that a D&C isn’t an “abortion” 😂

We live in the worst time line.

I’m pro-choice, and I had a miscarriage with a D&C, and I wouldn’t go and say that I had an abortion (even though that is the medical term). The accepted connotation of “abortion” is voluntarily ending a pregnancy.

Precision of terminology is important. If the term abortion is fully understood in its medical definition then sweeping abortion bans would have to be rewritten. But GOP doesn’t want that. They like the fear that the imprecision brings along because it makes the law even stricter than what they claim it is. Your procedure was legal, but there are extremists put there who would want to make it illegal.

And if we stopped demonizing the word abortion it wouldn’t matter to people what medical records say.

Yes, let’s just kill the unborn and call it “health care.”

The "unborn" don't even have souls. What's your problem with a woman removing these soulless creatures from their bodies?

also, why do you call humans “creatures?”

They aren’t creatures, they are humans.

Until they get a soul, they're not human. Sign of the godless times we live in; thinking you can be human without a soul. Surely, you'll agree that there is something more to being human (something holy!) than simply having biological functions and the correct number of chromosomes.

Are you trying to base laws on your spiritual beliefs?

God's laws. Not mine. If it were up to me, I'd give fetuses a soul at conception.

Damn. I grew up as a Southern Baptist, and I’m pretty sure if I said that at church it would’ve been considered blasphemous, thinking you could do a better job than God. No wonder you think you should control women, you think you know better than God so of course you know better than all the baby mamas. That post really cleared things up for me.

And this is why we can never win with logic against people like this. There is none, and they simultaneously want to use god to control other people and criticize god for not doing a good enough job.

What are you talking about? I don't know better than God. If God chooses to give these beings souls at the quickening and not before, it's not up to me to second guess His will.

Why would a doctor intervene? If your god wanted Jessa to survive this, certainly he would have expelled the fetus. Otherwise, his will is clearly for her to die along with her unborn child.

God gave us the intellect to create medical techniques to extract the soulless fetus from a woman in need.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The most insane part of this ridiculous thread:
Conservatives trying to use semantics to convince people that a D&C isn’t an “abortion” 😂

We live in the worst time line.

I’m pro-choice, and I had a miscarriage with a D&C, and I wouldn’t go and say that I had an abortion (even though that is the medical term). The accepted connotation of “abortion” is voluntarily ending a pregnancy.

Precision of terminology is important. If the term abortion is fully understood in its medical definition then sweeping abortion bans would have to be rewritten. But GOP doesn’t want that. They like the fear that the imprecision brings along because it makes the law even stricter than what they claim it is. Your procedure was legal, but there are extremists put there who would want to make it illegal.

And if we stopped demonizing the word abortion it wouldn’t matter to people what medical records say.

Yes, let’s just kill the unborn and call it “health care.”

The "unborn" don't even have souls. What's your problem with a woman removing these soulless creatures from their bodies?

also, why do you call humans “creatures?”

They aren’t creatures, they are humans.

Until they get a soul, they're not human. Sign of the godless times we live in; thinking you can be human without a soul. Surely, you'll agree that there is something more to being human (something holy!) than simply having biological functions and the correct number of chromosomes.

Are you trying to base laws on your spiritual beliefs?

God's laws. Not mine. If it were up to me, I'd give fetuses a soul at conception.

Damn. I grew up as a Southern Baptist, and I’m pretty sure if I said that at church it would’ve been considered blasphemous, thinking you could do a better job than God. No wonder you think you should control women, you think you know better than God so of course you know better than all the baby mamas. That post really cleared things up for me.

And this is why we can never win with logic against people like this. There is none, and they simultaneously want to use god to control other people and criticize god for not doing a good enough job.

What are you talking about? I don't know better than God. If God chooses to give these beings souls at the quickening and not before, it's not up to me to second guess His will.

Why would a doctor intervene? If your god wanted Jessa to survive this, certainly he would have expelled the fetus. Otherwise, his will is clearly for her to die along with her unborn child.

You're the extremist here. You are the only one arguing against D&C.

No, I’m asking why these obvious holes exist in your logic. If only god can take a life, why should Jessa be spared? She is just a vessel, right? Why would a doctor intervene if god’s will is to end her life? I thought God was all knowing.

Omnipotence, omniscience, and free will. Pick 2. Having all 3 is a metaphysical impossibility.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The most insane part of this ridiculous thread:
Conservatives trying to use semantics to convince people that a D&C isn’t an “abortion” 😂

We live in the worst time line.

I’m pro-choice, and I had a miscarriage with a D&C, and I wouldn’t go and say that I had an abortion (even though that is the medical term). The accepted connotation of “abortion” is voluntarily ending a pregnancy.

Precision of terminology is important. If the term abortion is fully understood in its medical definition then sweeping abortion bans would have to be rewritten. But GOP doesn’t want that. They like the fear that the imprecision brings along because it makes the law even stricter than what they claim it is. Your procedure was legal, but there are extremists put there who would want to make it illegal.

And if we stopped demonizing the word abortion it wouldn’t matter to people what medical records say.

Yes, let’s just kill the unborn and call it “health care.”

The "unborn" don't even have souls. What's your problem with a woman removing these soulless creatures from their bodies?

also, why do you call humans “creatures?”

They aren’t creatures, they are humans.

Until they get a soul, they're not human. Sign of the godless times we live in; thinking you can be human without a soul. Surely, you'll agree that there is something more to being human (something holy!) than simply having biological functions and the correct number of chromosomes.

Are you trying to base laws on your spiritual beliefs?

God's laws. Not mine. If it were up to me, I'd give fetuses a soul at conception.

Damn. I grew up as a Southern Baptist, and I’m pretty sure if I said that at church it would’ve been considered blasphemous, thinking you could do a better job than God. No wonder you think you should control women, you think you know better than God so of course you know better than all the baby mamas. That post really cleared things up for me.

And this is why we can never win with logic against people like this. There is none, and they simultaneously want to use god to control other people and criticize god for not doing a good enough job.

What are you talking about? I don't know better than God. If God chooses to give these beings souls at the quickening and not before, it's not up to me to second guess His will.

Why would a doctor intervene? If your god wanted Jessa to survive this, certainly he would have expelled the fetus. Otherwise, his will is clearly for her to die along with her unborn child.

God gave us the intellect to create medical techniques to extract the soulless fetus from a woman in need.

Why do you refuse to answer what Christian denomination you are a member of?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The most insane part of this ridiculous thread:
Conservatives trying to use semantics to convince people that a D&C isn’t an “abortion” 😂

We live in the worst time line.

I’m pro-choice, and I had a miscarriage with a D&C, and I wouldn’t go and say that I had an abortion (even though that is the medical term). The accepted connotation of “abortion” is voluntarily ending a pregnancy.

Precision of terminology is important. If the term abortion is fully understood in its medical definition then sweeping abortion bans would have to be rewritten. But GOP doesn’t want that. They like the fear that the imprecision brings along because it makes the law even stricter than what they claim it is. Your procedure was legal, but there are extremists put there who would want to make it illegal.

And if we stopped demonizing the word abortion it wouldn’t matter to people what medical records say.

Yes, let’s just kill the unborn and call it “health care.”

The "unborn" don't even have souls. What's your problem with a woman removing these soulless creatures from their bodies?

also, why do you call humans “creatures?”

They aren’t creatures, they are humans.

Until they get a soul, they're not human. Sign of the godless times we live in; thinking you can be human without a soul. Surely, you'll agree that there is something more to being human (something holy!) than simply having biological functions and the correct number of chromosomes.

Are you trying to base laws on your spiritual beliefs?

God's laws. Not mine. If it were up to me, I'd give fetuses a soul at conception.

Damn. I grew up as a Southern Baptist, and I’m pretty sure if I said that at church it would’ve been considered blasphemous, thinking you could do a better job than God. No wonder you think you should control women, you think you know better than God so of course you know better than all the baby mamas. That post really cleared things up for me.

And this is why we can never win with logic against people like this. There is none, and they simultaneously want to use god to control other people and criticize god for not doing a good enough job.

What are you talking about? I don't know better than God. If God chooses to give these beings souls at the quickening and not before, it's not up to me to second guess His will.

Why would a doctor intervene? If your god wanted Jessa to survive this, certainly he would have expelled the fetus. Otherwise, his will is clearly for her to die along with her unborn child.

You're the extremist here. You are the only one arguing against D&C.

No, I’m asking why these obvious holes exist in your logic. If only god can take a life, why should Jessa be spared? She is just a vessel, right? Why would a doctor intervene if god’s will is to end her life? I thought God was all knowing.

Omnipotence, omniscience, and free will. Pick 2. Having all 3 is a metaphysical impossibility.

But Jesus beheld them, and said unto them, With men this is impossible; but with God all things are possible.

Matthew 19:26


Also, pp who claimed unborn babies have no souls- what actual church teaches that?