Just Abortion theory

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Women don’t get the anatomy scan until 20w. Any ban before 24w isn’t realistic.

92% of abortions are prior to 13 weeks and many states had limits on voluntary abortion at 16 weeks. Most of the rest were done by 22 weeks. Only a tiny minority were conducted during third trimester and almost always for medical reasons. It was much more realistic than what the anti abortion states have now.

22w leaves very little time to have u/s scheduled, maybe get 2nd opinion, make decisions, and schedule procedures.

Prior to DOBs, 98-99% of women had abortions before 22 weeks … there was legal room for medical considerations after that if either life of mother or health of fetus is severely compromised after that time.

I don’t trust ignorant legislators to tease this out.

But I do trust doctors.

24w is minimum.

Well that was the federal standard pre Dobbs but many states enacted state bans at 16 weeks and even earlier. There was room for doctors to justify medical need later stages - but not common.

I would take 16 weeks over what the red states have now. So many women forced to give birth to children they can’t support - and endanger their ability to care for their existing children. The majority of women who aborted were single with other minors to care for.

The 24 criteria is ideal in terms of indicating medical non viability of fetus outside the womb .., However, IMO, this is not a hill to die on if the aim is to support as many women’s right to choose as possible in ways that a majority can live with. There have been studies in red states that most people do not feel Comfortable with abortions after 16 weeks or so unless it is medically indicated.

It was the standard before the religious zealots took over because that is the appropriate standard.

We won’t get anywhere until they are the minority/gone.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Women don’t get the anatomy scan until 20w. Any ban before 24w isn’t realistic.

92% of abortions are prior to 13 weeks and many states had limits on voluntary abortion at 16 weeks. Most of the rest were done by 22 weeks. Only a tiny minority were conducted during third trimester and almost always for medical reasons. It was much more realistic than what the anti abortion states have now.

22w leaves very little time to have u/s scheduled, maybe get 2nd opinion, make decisions, and schedule procedures.

Prior to DOBs, 98-99% of women had abortions before 22 weeks … there was legal room for medical considerations after that if either life of mother or health of fetus is severely compromised after that time.

I don’t trust ignorant legislators to tease this out.

But I do trust doctors.

24w is minimum.

Well that was the federal standard pre Dobbs but many states enacted state bans at 16 weeks and even earlier. There was room for doctors to justify medical need later stages - but not common.

I would take 16 weeks over what the red states have now. So many women forced to give birth to children they can’t support - and endanger their ability to care for their existing children. The majority of women who aborted were single with other minors to care for.

The 24 criteria is ideal in terms of indicating medical non viability of fetus outside the womb .., However, IMO, this is not a hill to die on if the aim is to support as many women’s right to choose as possible in ways that a majority can live with. There have been studies in red states that most people do not feel Comfortable with abortions after 16 weeks or so unless it is medically indicated.

It was the standard before the religious zealots took over because that is the appropriate standard.

We won’t get anywhere until they are the minority/gone.

America is divided and we need to find compromises a majority can live with

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Women don’t get the anatomy scan until 20w. Any ban before 24w isn’t realistic.

92% of abortions are prior to 13 weeks and many states had limits on voluntary abortion at 16 weeks. Most of the rest were done by 22 weeks. Only a tiny minority were conducted during third trimester and almost always for medical reasons. It was much more realistic than what the anti abortion states have now.

22w leaves very little time to have u/s scheduled, maybe get 2nd opinion, make decisions, and schedule procedures.

Prior to DOBs, 98-99% of women had abortions before 22 weeks … there was legal room for medical considerations after that if either life of mother or health of fetus is severely compromised after that time.

I don’t trust ignorant legislators to tease this out.

But I do trust doctors.

24w is minimum.

Well that was the federal standard pre Dobbs but many states enacted state bans at 16 weeks and even earlier. There was room for doctors to justify medical need later stages - but not common.

I would take 16 weeks over what the red states have now. So many women forced to give birth to children they can’t support - and endanger their ability to care for their existing children. The majority of women who aborted were single with other minors to care for.

The 24 criteria is ideal in terms of indicating medical non viability of fetus outside the womb .., However, IMO, this is not a hill to die on if the aim is to support as many women’s right to choose as possible in ways that a majority can live with. There have been studies in red states that most people do not feel Comfortable with abortions after 16 weeks or so unless it is medically indicated.

It was the standard before the religious zealots took over because that is the appropriate standard.

We won’t get anywhere until they are the minority/gone.

America is divided and we need to find compromises a majority can live with

You’re assuming the other side is working in good faith. They aren’t.

Clearly they weren’t willing to accept the existing compromise.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Scientifically speaking, humans go through many stages of development: fetal, newborn, toddlerhood, childhood, young adult, adult, senior. How can anyone dispute this? If you want to kill off people in a certain phase of development, you better have a much better argument than "mental health of the mother." The only possible rationale for abortion is that the fetus is residing within the mother while the human in other stages are outside of the mother. So that's why I posed the removal of fetus thought experiment. And all I heard was BS avoidance tactics. "You don't have a right to take my embryo!" Says who? You had a right to not create another human being, but you did and now that human should have some rights. While his rights might not trump the mothers, you don't have an absolute right to kill another human just for the sake of control (vs letting me or govt take it).

And it doesn't matter that third trimester terminations are rare. You all are arguing against any type of checks, only "my body my choice." So you better be ok with women terminating for unwanted gender (see China and East Asia), and down the road, height, eye color, skin pigment. Are you ok with that? If not, on what grounds would you object?

Anther woman's choices are NONE of my business. No, I have no objections. You've got some nerve.

Agree.

Plus third trimester abortions are extremely rare and almost always due to likely death of mother. This decision should be strictly between women and their doctors without pro-life zealots interfering .

Murder should be a private matter between the killer and their victim, and the state should not interfere. Further, you don’t know all the reasons that the murderer felt the need to kill, so you shouldn’t judge. There is likely a really good reason. Finally, murder is quite rare—only about 30,000 per year in a country of more than 300 million—so people who want murderers punished are lying about their motivations, they really just want to control other people’s behavior for religious reasons.

You are a tiresome judgmental no-nothing with no empathy or understanding for real women.

Embryos are not equal to live women. Real women sometimes need abortions for just reasons.

Keep telling yourself all these simplistic jingoisms with no medical basis so yiu can continue to feel morally superior while doing nothing for actual existing life.

Keep letting right wing extremists dominate political agendas with this wedge issue while ignoring issues that would actually help existing life - universal health care, gun controls, mitigating climate change and addressing the affordable housing crisis.

Keep acting morally superior while judging and ignoring the needs of existing women and their children.

That’s not true at all. I’m actually pro-choice, just sick of all these intellectually dishonest arguments suggesting that the pro-life movement is based on “the need to control women’s sexuality”, hurt feelings, or the desire to impose a right-wing theocracy when the simple, parsimonious, true answer is that it arises from a reasonable difference of opinion on when human life really begins. You can’t and won’t distinguish a 36-week abortion from infanticide, for example, you will just hand wave that question away.

I agree with this. I don't hear any intellectual arguments from the pro choice camp. Just emotional babies triggered by strawmen arguments who are incapable of actual logic and discussion.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Scientifically speaking, humans go through many stages of development: fetal, newborn, toddlerhood, childhood, young adult, adult, senior. How can anyone dispute this? If you want to kill off people in a certain phase of development, you better have a much better argument than "mental health of the mother." The only possible rationale for abortion is that the fetus is residing within the mother while the human in other stages are outside of the mother. So that's why I posed the removal of fetus thought experiment. And all I heard was BS avoidance tactics. "You don't have a right to take my embryo!" Says who? You had a right to not create another human being, but you did and now that human should have some rights. While his rights might not trump the mothers, you don't have an absolute right to kill another human just for the sake of control (vs letting me or govt take it).

And it doesn't matter that third trimester terminations are rare. You all are arguing against any type of checks, only "my body my choice." So you better be ok with women terminating for unwanted gender (see China and East Asia), and down the road, height, eye color, skin pigment. Are you ok with that? If not, on what grounds would you object?

Anther woman's choices are NONE of my business. No, I have no objections. You've got some nerve.

Agree.

Plus third trimester abortions are extremely rare and almost always due to likely death of mother. This decision should be strictly between women and their doctors without pro-life zealots interfering .

Murder should be a private matter between the killer and their victim, and the state should not interfere. Further, you don’t know all the reasons that the murderer felt the need to kill, so you shouldn’t judge. There is likely a really good reason. Finally, murder is quite rare—only about 30,000 per year in a country of more than 300 million—so people who want murderers punished are lying about their motivations, they really just want to control other people’s behavior for religious reasons.

You are a tiresome judgmental no-nothing with no empathy or understanding for real women.

Embryos are not equal to live women. Real women sometimes need abortions for just reasons.

Keep telling yourself all these simplistic jingoisms with no medical basis so yiu can continue to feel morally superior while doing nothing for actual existing life.

Keep letting right wing extremists dominate political agendas with this wedge issue while ignoring issues that would actually help existing life - universal health care, gun controls, mitigating climate change and addressing the affordable housing crisis.

Keep acting morally superior while judging and ignoring the needs of existing women and their children.

That’s not true at all. I’m actually pro-choice, just sick of all these intellectually dishonest arguments suggesting that the pro-life movement is based on “the need to control women’s sexuality”, hurt feelings, or the desire to impose a right-wing theocracy when the simple, parsimonious, true answer is that it arises from a reasonable difference of opinion on when human life really begins. You can’t and won’t distinguish a 36-week abortion from infanticide, for example, you will just hand wave that question away.

Strawman.

People use “life” as an excuse to suppress and control women. If they actually cared about “life” they would care about the living people already here. But they suddenly don’t care once the fetus is delivered.

That’s absurd. It’s perfectly consistent to oppose the affirmative taking of an innocent human life while still taking the view that it should otherwise be left to find its own way in the world. Being opposed to murder does not obligate you to support welfare programs for those not killed, and being opposed to theft does not commit you to economic redistribution programs to benefit those who otherwise might have stolen. “You’re not really in favor of private property because you are willing to let some people have very little.” It’s just a category error. You’re not even wrong.

It absolutely does. 100%. If you want these unwanted babies to born, you better be willing to support them from cradle to grave.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Scientifically speaking, humans go through many stages of development: fetal, newborn, toddlerhood, childhood, young adult, adult, senior. How can anyone dispute this? If you want to kill off people in a certain phase of development, you better have a much better argument than "mental health of the mother." The only possible rationale for abortion is that the fetus is residing within the mother while the human in other stages are outside of the mother. So that's why I posed the removal of fetus thought experiment. And all I heard was BS avoidance tactics. "You don't have a right to take my embryo!" Says who? You had a right to not create another human being, but you did and now that human should have some rights. While his rights might not trump the mothers, you don't have an absolute right to kill another human just for the sake of control (vs letting me or govt take it).

And it doesn't matter that third trimester terminations are rare. You all are arguing against any type of checks, only "my body my choice." So you better be ok with women terminating for unwanted gender (see China and East Asia), and down the road, height, eye color, skin pigment. Are you ok with that? If not, on what grounds would you object?

Anther woman's choices are NONE of my business. No, I have no objections. You've got some nerve.

Agree.

Plus third trimester abortions are extremely rare and almost always due to likely death of mother. This decision should be strictly between women and their doctors without pro-life zealots interfering .

Murder should be a private matter between the killer and their victim, and the state should not interfere. Further, you don’t know all the reasons that the murderer felt the need to kill, so you shouldn’t judge. There is likely a really good reason. Finally, murder is quite rare—only about 30,000 per year in a country of more than 300 million—so people who want murderers punished are lying about their motivations, they really just want to control other people’s behavior for religious reasons.

You are a tiresome judgmental no-nothing with no empathy or understanding for real women.

Embryos are not equal to live women. Real women sometimes need abortions for just reasons.

Keep telling yourself all these simplistic jingoisms with no medical basis so yiu can continue to feel morally superior while doing nothing for actual existing life.

Keep letting right wing extremists dominate political agendas with this wedge issue while ignoring issues that would actually help existing life - universal health care, gun controls, mitigating climate change and addressing the affordable housing crisis.

Keep acting morally superior while judging and ignoring the needs of existing women and their children.

That’s not true at all. I’m actually pro-choice, just sick of all these intellectually dishonest arguments suggesting that the pro-life movement is based on “the need to control women’s sexuality”, hurt feelings, or the desire to impose a right-wing theocracy when the simple, parsimonious, true answer is that it arises from a reasonable difference of opinion on when human life really begins. You can’t and won’t distinguish a 36-week abortion from infanticide, for example, you will just hand wave that question away.

Who is being intellectually dishonest ?

The only women who get abortions that late have their lives greatly at risk. The majority of states outlawed third term abortions unless doctors verify that it is absolutely medically necessary to save life of mother, it is extremely rare.

The overwhelming majority of abortions are before 13 weeks when the life is an embryo not a fetus .

Right, because everyone who ever wants to get abortion and everyone who supports abortion is a saint and just perfect and always doing what's right. Barf. Explain then why people consistently do not support born-alive bills, protecting the life of infants who miraculously survived an attempted abortion. Health of mother is no longer at stake. Leaving a living breathing infant to die is infanticide. If may be hard for you to accept because maybe you are a good person, but there are people out there who are perfectly fine killing their third (or apparently 4th) trimester babies.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Scientifically speaking, humans go through many stages of development: fetal, newborn, toddlerhood, childhood, young adult, adult, senior. How can anyone dispute this? If you want to kill off people in a certain phase of development, you better have a much better argument than "mental health of the mother." The only possible rationale for abortion is that the fetus is residing within the mother while the human in other stages are outside of the mother. So that's why I posed the removal of fetus thought experiment. And all I heard was BS avoidance tactics. "You don't have a right to take my embryo!" Says who? You had a right to not create another human being, but you did and now that human should have some rights. While his rights might not trump the mothers, you don't have an absolute right to kill another human just for the sake of control (vs letting me or govt take it).

And it doesn't matter that third trimester terminations are rare. You all are arguing against any type of checks, only "my body my choice." So you better be ok with women terminating for unwanted gender (see China and East Asia), and down the road, height, eye color, skin pigment. Are you ok with that? If not, on what grounds would you object?

Anther woman's choices are NONE of my business. No, I have no objections. You've got some nerve.

Agree.

Plus third trimester abortions are extremely rare and almost always due to likely death of mother. This decision should be strictly between women and their doctors without pro-life zealots interfering .

Murder should be a private matter between the killer and their victim, and the state should not interfere. Further, you don’t know all the reasons that the murderer felt the need to kill, so you shouldn’t judge. There is likely a really good reason. Finally, murder is quite rare—only about 30,000 per year in a country of more than 300 million—so people who want murderers punished are lying about their motivations, they really just want to control other people’s behavior for religious reasons.

You are a tiresome judgmental no-nothing with no empathy or understanding for real women.

Embryos are not equal to live women. Real women sometimes need abortions for just reasons.

Keep telling yourself all these simplistic jingoisms with no medical basis so yiu can continue to feel morally superior while doing nothing for actual existing life.

Keep letting right wing extremists dominate political agendas with this wedge issue while ignoring issues that would actually help existing life - universal health care, gun controls, mitigating climate change and addressing the affordable housing crisis.

Keep acting morally superior while judging and ignoring the needs of existing women and their children.

That’s not true at all. I’m actually pro-choice, just sick of all these intellectually dishonest arguments suggesting that the pro-life movement is based on “the need to control women’s sexuality”, hurt feelings, or the desire to impose a right-wing theocracy when the simple, parsimonious, true answer is that it arises from a reasonable difference of opinion on when human life really begins. You can’t and won’t distinguish a 36-week abortion from infanticide, for example, you will just hand wave that question away.

I agree with this. I don't hear any intellectual arguments from the pro choice camp. Just emotional babies triggered by strawmen arguments who are incapable of actual logic and discussion.

Easy to reject arguments when you reject the notion that women have value.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Scientifically speaking, humans go through many stages of development: fetal, newborn, toddlerhood, childhood, young adult, adult, senior. How can anyone dispute this? If you want to kill off people in a certain phase of development, you better have a much better argument than "mental health of the mother." The only possible rationale for abortion is that the fetus is residing within the mother while the human in other stages are outside of the mother. So that's why I posed the removal of fetus thought experiment. And all I heard was BS avoidance tactics. "You don't have a right to take my embryo!" Says who? You had a right to not create another human being, but you did and now that human should have some rights. While his rights might not trump the mothers, you don't have an absolute right to kill another human just for the sake of control (vs letting me or govt take it).

And it doesn't matter that third trimester terminations are rare. You all are arguing against any type of checks, only "my body my choice." So you better be ok with women terminating for unwanted gender (see China and East Asia), and down the road, height, eye color, skin pigment. Are you ok with that? If not, on what grounds would you object?

Anther woman's choices are NONE of my business. No, I have no objections. You've got some nerve.

Agree.

Plus third trimester abortions are extremely rare and almost always due to likely death of mother. This decision should be strictly between women and their doctors without pro-life zealots interfering .

Murder should be a private matter between the killer and their victim, and the state should not interfere. Further, you don’t know all the reasons that the murderer felt the need to kill, so you shouldn’t judge. There is likely a really good reason. Finally, murder is quite rare—only about 30,000 per year in a country of more than 300 million—so people who want murderers punished are lying about their motivations, they really just want to control other people’s behavior for religious reasons.

You are a tiresome judgmental no-nothing with no empathy or understanding for real women.

Embryos are not equal to live women. Real women sometimes need abortions for just reasons.

Keep telling yourself all these simplistic jingoisms with no medical basis so yiu can continue to feel morally superior while doing nothing for actual existing life.

Keep letting right wing extremists dominate political agendas with this wedge issue while ignoring issues that would actually help existing life - universal health care, gun controls, mitigating climate change and addressing the affordable housing crisis.

Keep acting morally superior while judging and ignoring the needs of existing women and their children.

That’s not true at all. I’m actually pro-choice, just sick of all these intellectually dishonest arguments suggesting that the pro-life movement is based on “the need to control women’s sexuality”, hurt feelings, or the desire to impose a right-wing theocracy when the simple, parsimonious, true answer is that it arises from a reasonable difference of opinion on when human life really begins. You can’t and won’t distinguish a 36-week abortion from infanticide, for example, you will just hand wave that question away.

Strawman.

People use “life” as an excuse to suppress and control women. If they actually cared about “life” they would care about the living people already here. But they suddenly don’t care once the fetus is delivered.

That’s absurd. It’s perfectly consistent to oppose the affirmative taking of an innocent human life while still taking the view that it should otherwise be left to find its own way in the world. Being opposed to murder does not obligate you to support welfare programs for those not killed, and being opposed to theft does not commit you to economic redistribution programs to benefit those who otherwise might have stolen. “You’re not really in favor of private property because you are willing to let some people have very little.” It’s just a category error. You’re not even wrong.

It absolutely does. 100%. If you want these unwanted babies to born, you better be willing to support them from cradle to grave.

WTF since when? So if we want to prevent you from passing bills to kill off everyone over 80, we better be willing to support everyone in that demographic? The right to live is basic and cannot be taken away. No one has a right to be on welfare.

Every child should be wanted.
Every person should live in dignity.

Unless you’re a sadist. Or maybe you think you get some religious bonus points for enduring or inflicting suffering.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Scientifically speaking, humans go through many stages of development: fetal, newborn, toddlerhood, childhood, young adult, adult, senior. How can anyone dispute this? If you want to kill off people in a certain phase of development, you better have a much better argument than "mental health of the mother." The only possible rationale for abortion is that the fetus is residing within the mother while the human in other stages are outside of the mother. So that's why I posed the removal of fetus thought experiment. And all I heard was BS avoidance tactics. "You don't have a right to take my embryo!" Says who? You had a right to not create another human being, but you did and now that human should have some rights. While his rights might not trump the mothers, you don't have an absolute right to kill another human just for the sake of control (vs letting me or govt take it).

And it doesn't matter that third trimester terminations are rare. You all are arguing against any type of checks, only "my body my choice." So you better be ok with women terminating for unwanted gender (see China and East Asia), and down the road, height, eye color, skin pigment. Are you ok with that? If not, on what grounds would you object?

Anther woman's choices are NONE of my business. No, I have no objections. You've got some nerve.

Agree.

Plus third trimester abortions are extremely rare and almost always due to likely death of mother. This decision should be strictly between women and their doctors without pro-life zealots interfering .

Murder should be a private matter between the killer and their victim, and the state should not interfere. Further, you don’t know all the reasons that the murderer felt the need to kill, so you shouldn’t judge. There is likely a really good reason. Finally, murder is quite rare—only about 30,000 per year in a country of more than 300 million—so people who want murderers punished are lying about their motivations, they really just want to control other people’s behavior for religious reasons.

You are a tiresome judgmental no-nothing with no empathy or understanding for real women.

Embryos are not equal to live women. Real women sometimes need abortions for just reasons.

Keep telling yourself all these simplistic jingoisms with no medical basis so yiu can continue to feel morally superior while doing nothing for actual existing life.

Keep letting right wing extremists dominate political agendas with this wedge issue while ignoring issues that would actually help existing life - universal health care, gun controls, mitigating climate change and addressing the affordable housing crisis.

Keep acting morally superior while judging and ignoring the needs of existing women and their children.

That’s not true at all. I’m actually pro-choice, just sick of all these intellectually dishonest arguments suggesting that the pro-life movement is based on “the need to control women’s sexuality”, hurt feelings, or the desire to impose a right-wing theocracy when the simple, parsimonious, true answer is that it arises from a reasonable difference of opinion on when human life really begins. You can’t and won’t distinguish a 36-week abortion from infanticide, for example, you will just hand wave that question away.

Strawman.

People use “life” as an excuse to suppress and control women. If they actually cared about “life” they would care about the living people already here. But they suddenly don’t care once the fetus is delivered.

That’s absurd. It’s perfectly consistent to oppose the affirmative taking of an innocent human life while still taking the view that it should otherwise be left to find its own way in the world. Being opposed to murder does not obligate you to support welfare programs for those not killed, and being opposed to theft does not commit you to economic redistribution programs to benefit those who otherwise might have stolen. “You’re not really in favor of private property because you are willing to let some people have very little.” It’s just a category error. You’re not even wrong.

It absolutely does. 100%. If you want these unwanted babies to born, you better be willing to support them from cradle to grave.

WTF since when? So if we want to prevent you from passing bills to kill off everyone over 80, we better be willing to support everyone in that demographic? The right to live is basic and cannot be taken away. No one has a right to be on welfare.

Correct, it cannot be taken away by a septic fetus, starvation or being shot with a gun.

[Anonymous]

The good news is, I don’t care what these zealots think. If I want an abortion, I am getting one no matter what.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The good news is, I don’t care what these zealots think. If I want an abortion, I am getting one no matter what.

The bad news is that they will drive away medical professionals from red states. So women and wanted fetuses will die.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The good news is, I don’t care what these zealots think. If I want an abortion, I am getting one no matter what.

The bad news is that they will drive away medical professionals from red states. So women and wanted fetuses will die.

Exactly it is a disaster for so many women … I am not worried for my DD as her reproductive rights are protected where we live but it is heart breaking for so many ..,

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Scientifically speaking, humans go through many stages of development: fetal, newborn, toddlerhood, childhood, young adult, adult, senior. How can anyone dispute this? If you want to kill off people in a certain phase of development, you better have a much better argument than "mental health of the mother." The only possible rationale for abortion is that the fetus is residing within the mother while the human in other stages are outside of the mother. So that's why I posed the removal of fetus thought experiment. And all I heard was BS avoidance tactics. "You don't have a right to take my embryo!" Says who? You had a right to not create another human being, but you did and now that human should have some rights. While his rights might not trump the mothers, you don't have an absolute right to kill another human just for the sake of control (vs letting me or govt take it).

And it doesn't matter that third trimester terminations are rare. You all are arguing against any type of checks, only "my body my choice." So you better be ok with women terminating for unwanted gender (see China and East Asia), and down the road, height, eye color, skin pigment. Are you ok with that? If not, on what grounds would you object?

Anther woman's choices are NONE of my business. No, I have no objections. You've got some nerve.

Agree.

Plus third trimester abortions are extremely rare and almost always due to likely death of mother. This decision should be strictly between women and their doctors without pro-life zealots interfering .

Murder should be a private matter between the killer and their victim, and the state should not interfere. Further, you don’t know all the reasons that the murderer felt the need to kill, so you shouldn’t judge. There is likely a really good reason. Finally, murder is quite rare—only about 30,000 per year in a country of more than 300 million—so people who want murderers punished are lying about their motivations, they really just want to control other people’s behavior for religious reasons.

You are a tiresome judgmental no-nothing with no empathy or understanding for real women.

Embryos are not equal to live women. Real women sometimes need abortions for just reasons.

Keep telling yourself all these simplistic jingoisms with no medical basis so yiu can continue to feel morally superior while doing nothing for actual existing life.

Keep letting right wing extremists dominate political agendas with this wedge issue while ignoring issues that would actually help existing life - universal health care, gun controls, mitigating climate change and addressing the affordable housing crisis.

Keep acting morally superior while judging and ignoring the needs of existing women and their children.

That’s not true at all. I’m actually pro-choice, just sick of all these intellectually dishonest arguments suggesting that the pro-life movement is based on “the need to control women’s sexuality”, hurt feelings, or the desire to impose a right-wing theocracy when the simple, parsimonious, true answer is that it arises from a reasonable difference of opinion on when human life really begins. You can’t and won’t distinguish a 36-week abortion from infanticide, for example, you will just hand wave that question away.

Strawman.

People use “life” as an excuse to suppress and control women. If they actually cared about “life” they would care about the living people already here. But they suddenly don’t care once the fetus is delivered.

That’s absurd. It’s perfectly consistent to oppose the affirmative taking of an innocent human life while still taking the view that it should otherwise be left to find its own way in the world. Being opposed to murder does not obligate you to support welfare programs for those not killed, and being opposed to theft does not commit you to economic redistribution programs to benefit those who otherwise might have stolen. “You’re not really in favor of private property because you are willing to let some people have very little.” It’s just a category error. You’re not even wrong.

It absolutely does. 100%. If you want these unwanted babies to born, you better be willing to support them from cradle to grave.

WTF since when? So if we want to prevent you from passing bills to kill off everyone over 80, we better be willing to support everyone in that demographic? The right to live is basic and cannot be taken away. No one has a right to be on welfare.

So you are pro-life until birth, and don’t care at all about public health.

Exactly

The self righteous hysteria about abortion and silence about all other forms of showing respect for the dignity and sanctity of life is so hypocritical

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Scientifically speaking, humans go through many stages of development: fetal, newborn, toddlerhood, childhood, young adult, adult, senior. How can anyone dispute this? If you want to kill off people in a certain phase of development, you better have a much better argument than "mental health of the mother." The only possible rationale for abortion is that the fetus is residing within the mother while the human in other stages are outside of the mother. So that's why I posed the removal of fetus thought experiment. And all I heard was BS avoidance tactics. "You don't have a right to take my embryo!" Says who? You had a right to not create another human being, but you did and now that human should have some rights. While his rights might not trump the mothers, you don't have an absolute right to kill another human just for the sake of control (vs letting me or govt take it).

And it doesn't matter that third trimester terminations are rare. You all are arguing against any type of checks, only "my body my choice." So you better be ok with women terminating for unwanted gender (see China and East Asia), and down the road, height, eye color, skin pigment. Are you ok with that? If not, on what grounds would you object?

Anther woman's choices are NONE of my business. No, I have no objections. You've got some nerve.

Agree.

Plus third trimester abortions are extremely rare and almost always due to likely death of mother. This decision should be strictly between women and their doctors without pro-life zealots interfering .

Murder should be a private matter between the killer and their victim, and the state should not interfere. Further, you don’t know all the reasons that the murderer felt the need to kill, so you shouldn’t judge. There is likely a really good reason. Finally, murder is quite rare—only about 30,000 per year in a country of more than 300 million—so people who want murderers punished are lying about their motivations, they really just want to control other people’s behavior for religious reasons.

You are a tiresome judgmental no-nothing with no empathy or understanding for real women.

Embryos are not equal to live women. Real women sometimes need abortions for just reasons.

Keep telling yourself all these simplistic jingoisms with no medical basis so yiu can continue to feel morally superior while doing nothing for actual existing life.

Keep letting right wing extremists dominate political agendas with this wedge issue while ignoring issues that would actually help existing life - universal health care, gun controls, mitigating climate change and addressing the affordable housing crisis.

Keep acting morally superior while judging and ignoring the needs of existing women and their children.

That’s not true at all. I’m actually pro-choice, just sick of all these intellectually dishonest arguments suggesting that the pro-life movement is based on “the need to control women’s sexuality”, hurt feelings, or the desire to impose a right-wing theocracy when the simple, parsimonious, true answer is that it arises from a reasonable difference of opinion on when human life really begins. You can’t and won’t distinguish a 36-week abortion from infanticide, for example, you will just hand wave that question away.

I agree with this. I don't hear any intellectual arguments from the pro choice camp. Just emotional babies triggered by strawmen arguments who are incapable of actual logic and discussion.

So ironic - it is the pro lifers who have failed to justify their extremism that is already resulting in so much loss of adult female life and eroding of medical services in red anti abortion states.

Repeating verbatim that life begins at conception and acting as if abortion occurs largely as viable fetuses are about to exit the womb are the hysterical strawman arguments.
The lack of common sense and critical reasoning is shocking

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Scientifically speaking, humans go through many stages of development: fetal, newborn, toddlerhood, childhood, young adult, adult, senior. How can anyone dispute this? If you want to kill off people in a certain phase of development, you better have a much better argument than "mental health of the mother." The only possible rationale for abortion is that the fetus is residing within the mother while the human in other stages are outside of the mother. So that's why I posed the removal of fetus thought experiment. And all I heard was BS avoidance tactics. "You don't have a right to take my embryo!" Says who? You had a right to not create another human being, but you did and now that human should have some rights. While his rights might not trump the mothers, you don't have an absolute right to kill another human just for the sake of control (vs letting me or govt take it).

And it doesn't matter that third trimester terminations are rare. You all are arguing against any type of checks, only "my body my choice." So you better be ok with women terminating for unwanted gender (see China and East Asia), and down the road, height, eye color, skin pigment. Are you ok with that? If not, on what grounds would you object?

Anther woman's choices are NONE of my business. No, I have no objections. You've got some nerve.

Agree.

Plus third trimester abortions are extremely rare and almost always due to likely death of mother. This decision should be strictly between women and their doctors without pro-life zealots interfering .

Murder should be a private matter between the killer and their victim, and the state should not interfere. Further, you don’t know all the reasons that the murderer felt the need to kill, so you shouldn’t judge. There is likely a really good reason. Finally, murder is quite rare—only about 30,000 per year in a country of more than 300 million—so people who want murderers punished are lying about their motivations, they really just want to control other people’s behavior for religious reasons.

You are a tiresome judgmental no-nothing with no empathy or understanding for real women.

Embryos are not equal to live women. Real women sometimes need abortions for just reasons.

Keep telling yourself all these simplistic jingoisms with no medical basis so yiu can continue to feel morally superior while doing nothing for actual existing life.

Keep letting right wing extremists dominate political agendas with this wedge issue while ignoring issues that would actually help existing life - universal health care, gun controls, mitigating climate change and addressing the affordable housing crisis.

Keep acting morally superior while judging and ignoring the needs of existing women and their children.

That’s not true at all. I’m actually pro-choice, just sick of all these intellectually dishonest arguments suggesting that the pro-life movement is based on “the need to control women’s sexuality”, hurt feelings, or the desire to impose a right-wing theocracy when the simple, parsimonious, true answer is that it arises from a reasonable difference of opinion on when human life really begins. You can’t and won’t distinguish a 36-week abortion from infanticide, for example, you will just hand wave that question away.

I agree with this. I don't hear any intellectual arguments from the pro choice camp. Just emotional babies triggered by strawmen arguments who are incapable of actual logic and discussion.

So ironic - it is the pro lifers who have failed to justify their extremism that is already resulting in so much loss of adult female life and eroding of medical services in red anti abortion states.

Repeating verbatim that life begins at conception and acting as if abortion occurs largely as viable fetuses are about to exit the womb are the hysterical strawman arguments.
The lack of common sense and critical reasoning is shocking

Word.