Just Abortion theory

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If only these "pro-life" people were equally concerned about actual living human beings. Imagine the mystery they could alleviate.

Instead they spend their time and energy trying to punish women for having sex.

Exactly. Instead they just force misery.

Says the person who advocates for a baby’s limbs to be torn off while they are alive. Spare us your self-victimization.

Spare us your sanctimonious judgment against women who need abortions - the overwhelming majority of which are performed during first trimesters.

I do hope that you are as fervent about protecting life in other ways - lobbying for safe gun controls, eliminating the death penalty, advocating for universal health care and social safety nets for all these babies you wish forced into existence even though their mothers cannot care properly for them. Hope you help out at homeless shelters and support decent mental health care.

If you are not protecting existing human life, you have zero credibility..

Capital punishment is rooted in a respect for innocent human life. There is a vast difference between punishing a convicted murderer and killing an innocent child.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Being alive doesn't make something a human being.

Having human DNA doesn't make something a human being.

Nevertheless, unless you're mandating that parents are forced by law to give their organs/blood/marrow to their kids (no exceptions), forcing a woman to carry a fetus to term isn't justifiable. Especially when there are so many beings on this earth that lack support and resources.

Researchers have identified three genes that appear to have been activated in humans alone, adapted from DNA that serves no function in other species.

Human DNA is specific to humans alone. An unborn babu has human DNA. An unborn baby is alive. Are you seriously trying to argue an unborn baby is not a human?

Medical textbooks and scientific reference works consistently agree that human life begins at conception.

Any civilized society restricts the individual’s freedom to choose whenever that choice would harm an innocent person.

Personhood is properly defined by membership in the human species, not by stage of development within that species.

Personhood is not a matter of size, skill, or degree of intelligence.

Once we grant that the unborn are human beings, it should settle the question of their right to live. The right to live doesn’t increase with age and size; otherwise toddlers and adolescents have less right to live than adults.

The comparison between a baby’s rights and a mother’s rights is unequal. What is at stake in abortion is the mother’s lifestyle, as opposed to the baby’s life.

It is reasonable for society to expect an adult to live temporarily with an inconvenience if the only alternative is killing a child.

Any civilized society restricts the individual’s freedom to choose whenever that choice would harm an innocent person.

That word; it doesn’t mean what you think it means.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If only these "pro-life" people were equally concerned about actual living human beings. Imagine the mystery they could alleviate.

Instead they spend their time and energy trying to punish women for having sex.

Exactly. Instead they just force misery.

Says the person who advocates for a baby’s limbs to be torn off while they are alive. Spare us your self-victimization.

Spare us your sanctimonious judgment against women who need abortions - the overwhelming majority of which are performed during first trimesters.

I do hope that you are as fervent about protecting life in other ways - lobbying for safe gun controls, eliminating the death penalty, advocating for universal health care and social safety nets for all these babies you wish forced into existence even though their mothers cannot care properly for them. Hope you help out at homeless shelters and support decent mental health care.

If you are not protecting existing human life, you have zero credibility..

Capital punishment is rooted in a respect for innocent human life. There is a vast difference between punishing a convicted murderer and killing an innocent child.

My alliance is with innocent childbearing women.

[Anonymous]

You need a theological framework to convince people to stop passing judgment on others and butting out of their business?? You sure there isn’t something in the Bible about not judging others…?

[Anonymous]

Forced-nurtures keep using the term “innocent babies” to imply that pregnant women aren’t innocent themselves. It’s as if they committed a crime.

[Anonymous]

Are these “pro-life” people wiring poor mothers monthly Children In The Shoe tuition? Of course not. They want to force women to give birth so they can rip their babies away from them at infancy to give to a “deserving” Christian couple.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If only these "pro-life" people were equally concerned about actual living human beings. Imagine the mystery they could alleviate.

Instead they spend their time and energy trying to punish women for having sex.

Exactly. Instead they just force misery.

Says the person who advocates for a baby’s limbs to be torn off while they are alive. Spare us your self-victimization.

Spare us your sanctimonious judgment against women who need abortions - the overwhelming majority of which are performed during first trimesters.

I do hope that you are as fervent about protecting life in other ways - lobbying for safe gun controls, eliminating the death penalty, advocating for universal health care and social safety nets for all these babies you wish forced into existence even though their mothers cannot care properly for them. Hope you help out at homeless shelters and support decent mental health care.

If you are not protecting existing human life, you have zero credibility..

Capital punishment is rooted in a respect for innocent human life. There is a vast difference between punishing a convicted murderer and killing an innocent child.

You are not being consistent about protecting life. The death penalty does not prevent violent crime evidenced by nigh higher rates of crime on the U.S. compared to other rich countries . Plus people of color are many times more likely to receive the death sentence. It is also incredibly expensive as most people on death row exhaust appeals before they are executed .

It is barbaric and inhuman. Civilized societies do not kill their own citizens.

Unsurprising to me me that anti abortion extremists support the death penalty.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Being alive doesn't make something a human being.

Having human DNA doesn't make something a human being.

Nevertheless, unless you're mandating that parents are forced by law to give their organs/blood/marrow to their kids (no exceptions), forcing a woman to carry a fetus to term isn't justifiable. Especially when there are so many beings on this earth that lack support and resources.

Researchers have identified three genes that appear to have been activated in humans alone, adapted from DNA that serves no function in other species.

Human DNA is specific to humans alone. An unborn babu has human DNA. An unborn baby is alive. Are you seriously trying to argue an unborn baby is not a human?

Medical textbooks and scientific reference works consistently agree that human life begins at conception.

Any civilized society restricts the individual’s freedom to choose whenever that choice would harm an innocent person.

Personhood is properly defined by membership in the human species, not by stage of development within that species.

Personhood is not a matter of size, skill, or degree of intelligence.

Once we grant that the unborn are human beings, it should settle the question of their right to live. The right to live doesn’t increase with age and size; otherwise toddlers and adolescents have less right to live than adults.

The comparison between a baby’s rights and a mother’s rights is unequal. What is at stake in abortion is the mother’s lifestyle, as opposed to the baby’s life.

It is reasonable for society to expect an adult to live temporarily with an inconvenience if the only alternative is killing a child.

Any civilized society restricts the individual’s freedom to choose whenever that choice would harm an innocent person.

You act like you have science and medicine on your side but you don’t. The more educated medical oractioners are the more likely they are to support women’s reproductive rights as a Matter of ethics as well as common sense.

There is a big difference between early embryonic life and viable festuses that can survive outside the womb of the mother . Unless you are going to feed, educate, shelter, love and nurture all these forced birth babies I suggest you get off your high horse.

The overwhelming majority of abortions take place in first trimester when the life is still embryos. There are many reasons for just abortions.

[Anonymous]

From the moment the sperm fertilizes the egg, there is a baby

Even the person who wrote this doesn’t believe it. If that person were stuck inside a burning building with 3 IVF embryos and one child but could save either the embryos or the child, they would choose the child, every time. Everyone would though presumably that means saving one life over 3.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

From the moment the sperm fertilizes the egg, there is a baby

Even the person who wrote this doesn’t believe it. If that person were stuck inside a burning building with 3 IVF embryos and one child but could save either the embryos or the child, they would choose the child, every time. Everyone would though presumably that means saving one life over 3.

Good point

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Being alive doesn't make something a human being.

Having human DNA doesn't make something a human being.

Nevertheless, unless you're mandating that parents are forced by law to give their organs/blood/marrow to their kids (no exceptions), forcing a woman to carry a fetus to term isn't justifiable. Especially when there are so many beings on this earth that lack support and resources.

Researchers have identified three genes that appear to have been activated in humans alone, adapted from DNA that serves no function in other species.

Human DNA is specific to humans alone. An unborn babu has human DNA. An unborn baby is alive. Are you seriously trying to argue an unborn baby is not a human?

Medical textbooks and scientific reference works consistently agree that human life begins at conception.

Any civilized society restricts the individual’s freedom to choose whenever that choice would harm an innocent person.

Personhood is properly defined by membership in the human species, not by stage of development within that species.

Personhood is not a matter of size, skill, or degree of intelligence.

Once we grant that the unborn are human beings, it should settle the question of their right to live. The right to live doesn’t increase with age and size; otherwise toddlers and adolescents have less right to live than adults.

The comparison between a baby’s rights and a mother’s rights is unequal. What is at stake in abortion is the mother’s lifestyle, as opposed to the baby’s life.

It is reasonable for society to expect an adult to live temporarily with an inconvenience if the only alternative is killing a child.

Any civilized society restricts the individual’s freedom to choose whenever that choice would harm an innocent person.

You act like you have science and medicine on your side but you don’t. The more educated medical oractioners are the more likely they are to support women’s reproductive rights as a Matter of ethics as well as common sense.

There is a big difference between early embryonic life and viable festuses that can survive outside the womb of the mother . Unless you are going to feed, educate, shelter, love and nurture all these forced birth babies I suggest you get off your high horse.

The overwhelming majority of abortions take place in first trimester when the life is still embryos. There are many reasons for just abortions.

The American Medical Association and the America College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists say that abortion is health care, and I agree. ACOG is very strong in their wording about supporting the right to access abortion.May 5, 2022

https://news.harvard.edu › 2022/05
How a bioethicist and doctor sees abortion - Harvard Gazette



CORE’s Survey of Doctors Highlights Widespread Support for Abortion Access
Posted on December 6, 2021
Our recent series of studies here at UW CORE, Collaborative for Reproductive Equity, document overwhelming support of abortion services among faculty physicians at the UW School of Medicine and Public Health. More than three-quarters of doctors surveyed expressed support for abortion access, and more than nine in ten expressed concern about abortion restrictions. We are sharing these findings in the research brief “Physician Support of Unrestricted Abortion Services in Wisconsin.”
The new research is part of a larger project that assessed abortion-related attitudes, practices, and perceptions among physicians of all specialties within a Wisconsin-based teaching hospital. The researchers surveyed 913 physicians who represent more than 20 medical specialties. The survey results showed:
* More than three-quarters of physicians surveyed reported at least some degree of support for unrestricted access to abortion (78% said they support unrestricted abortion access somewhat or a lot).
* 99% were at least a little concerned about legislation interfering in the doctor-patient relationship, and nearly half (48%) were extremely concerned.
* Most doctors expressed at least some level of concern that abortion laws will make it difficult for physicians to offer timely and appropriate care (93%) and for patients to receive the care they need (91%).
* Nine in ten doctors (90%) surveyed indicated that women’s health in Wisconsin would get worse if Roe v. Wade is overturned.

https://core.wisc.edu/2021/12/06/cores-survey-of-doctors-highlights-widespread-support-for-abortion-access/



A challenge for antiabortion states: Doctors reluctant to work there
Recruiters say OB/GYNs are turning down offers, a warning for conservative-dominated states already experiencing shortages

One large medical recruiting firm said it recently had 20 obstetrician-gynecologists turn down positions in red states because of abortion laws. The reluctance extends beyond those interested in providing abortion care, as laws meant to protect a fetus could open doctors up to new liabilities or limit their ability to practice.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2022/08/06/abortion-maternity-health-obgyn/



'We are drowning in despair': How 3 doctors are navigating the chaos of a post-Roe America
Published Wed, Sep 14 2022 11:24 AM EDT

Morgan Smith

Dr. Katie McHugh doesn't sleep much these days. 
After working 12-hour shifts at several abortion clinics in Indiana, McHugh, an OB/GYN, doesn't collapse into bed. Thoughts of her patients keep her up at night: the pregnant woman who drove 20 hours to the clinic, scared and desperate to receive an abortion; the families dodging anti-abortion protestors shouting threats at them through a bullhorn in clinic parking lots; the patients she couldn't help. 

https://www.cnbc.com/amp/2022/09/14/us-doctors-on-providing-abortion-care-post-roe-its-devastating.html

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Being alive doesn't make something a human being.

Having human DNA doesn't make something a human being.

Nevertheless, unless you're mandating that parents are forced by law to give their organs/blood/marrow to their kids (no exceptions), forcing a woman to carry a fetus to term isn't justifiable. Especially when there are so many beings on this earth that lack support and resources.

Researchers have identified three genes that appear to have been activated in humans alone, adapted from DNA that serves no function in other species.

Human DNA is specific to humans alone. An unborn babu has human DNA. An unborn baby is alive. Are you seriously trying to argue an unborn baby is not a human?

Medical textbooks and scientific reference works consistently agree that human life begins at conception.

Any civilized society restricts the individual’s freedom to choose whenever that choice would harm an innocent person.

Personhood is properly defined by membership in the human species, not by stage of development within that species.

Personhood is not a matter of size, skill, or degree of intelligence.

Once we grant that the unborn are human beings, it should settle the question of their right to live. The right to live doesn’t increase with age and size; otherwise toddlers and adolescents have less right to live than adults.

The comparison between a baby’s rights and a mother’s rights is unequal. What is at stake in abortion is the mother’s lifestyle, as opposed to the baby’s life.

It is reasonable for society to expect an adult to live temporarily with an inconvenience if the only alternative is killing a child.

Any civilized society restricts the individual’s freedom to choose whenever that choice would harm an innocent person.

No, humans are not a person until they are born alive.

Is this a person? No. It’s a potential person.


Who is the person in this photo?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If only these "pro-life" people were equally concerned about actual living human beings. Imagine the mystery they could alleviate.

Instead they spend their time and energy trying to punish women for having sex.

Exactly. Instead they just force misery.

Says the person who advocates for a baby’s limbs to be torn off while they are alive. Spare us your self-victimization.

Spare us your sanctimonious judgment against women who need abortions - the overwhelming majority of which are performed during first trimesters.

I do hope that you are as fervent about protecting life in other ways - lobbying for safe gun controls, eliminating the death penalty, advocating for universal health care and social safety nets for all these babies you wish forced into existence even though their mothers cannot care properly for them. Hope you help out at homeless shelters and support decent mental health care.

If you are not protecting existing human life, you have zero credibility..

Capital punishment is rooted in a respect for innocent human life. There is a vast difference between punishing a convicted murderer and killing an innocent child.

My alliance is with innocent childbearing women.

+1

Women are living, breathing people. Protect them.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:If you think this is the answer, you think abortion bans are about life and embryos / fetuses. Abortion bans are about controlling women - full stop. Keep the poor, poor. Keep women out of the workforce. Punish women for sexual activity and do nothing about the men. It’s an easy way to squash multiple threats to the white male patriarchy[b].

Exactly.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Being alive doesn't make something a human being.

Having human DNA doesn't make something a human being.

Nevertheless, unless you're mandating that parents are forced by law to give their organs/blood/marrow to their kids (no exceptions), forcing a woman to carry a fetus to term isn't justifiable. Especially when there are so many beings on this earth that lack support and resources.

Researchers have identified three genes that appear to have been activated in humans alone, adapted from DNA that serves no function in other species.

Human DNA is specific to humans alone. An unborn babu has human DNA. An unborn baby is alive. Are you seriously trying to argue an unborn baby is not a human?

Medical textbooks and scientific reference works consistently agree that human life begins at conception.

Any civilized society restricts the individual’s freedom to choose whenever that choice would harm an innocent person.

Personhood is properly defined by membership in the human species, not by stage of development within that species.

Personhood is not a matter of size, skill, or degree of intelligence.

Once we grant that the unborn are human beings, it should settle the question of their right to live. The right to live doesn’t increase with age and size; otherwise toddlers and adolescents have less right to live than adults.

The comparison between a baby’s rights and a mother’s rights is unequal. What is at stake in abortion is the mother’s lifestyle, as opposed to the baby’s life.

It is reasonable for society to expect an adult to live temporarily with an inconvenience if the only alternative is killing a child.

Any civilized society restricts the individual’s freedom to choose whenever that choice would harm an innocent person.

No, humans are not a person until they are born alive.

Is this a person? No. It’s a potential person.


Who is the person in this photo?

Like toddler or adolescent, the terms embryo and fetus do not refer to nonhumans, but to humans at particular stages of development.

Semantics affect perceptions, but they do not change realities; a baby is a baby no matter what we call her.

Something nonhuman does not become human by getting older and bigger; whatever is human must be human from the beginning.