Toggle navigation
Toggle navigation
Home
DCUM Forums
Nanny Forums
Events
About DCUM
Advertising
Search
Recent Topics
Hottest Topics
FAQs and Guidelines
Privacy Policy
Your current identity is: Anonymous
Login
Preview
Subject:
Forum Index
»
Political Discussion
Reply to "NYT story: Trump administration could strike abortion almost immediately using Comstock law"
Subject:
Emoticons
More smilies
Text Color:
Default
Dark Red
Red
Orange
Brown
Yellow
Green
Olive
Cyan
Blue
Dark Blue
Violet
White
Black
Font:
Very Small
Small
Normal
Big
Giant
Close Marks
[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]I don’t get why republicans are so anti abortion when ending it just makes the country less white on a proportional basis [/quote] I don't know, maybe because that is the pinnacle of evil: "Let's kill millions of babies so that our race will have proportionately more people."[/quote] I am one of the many women who has had a miscarriage. It was an incredibly sad experience. But it was not a death - there was no funeral and no death certificate. Anybody who equates an abortion and killing a baby is not arguing in good faith.[/quote] Completely disagree, and I could just as easily say that anyone who doesn't believe abortion is "killing" a human being is not arguing in bad faith. I honestly have never understood that argument. If you want to say, sure, it is a human being being killed, but I believe other interests, etc. outweigh it. But to argue that it literally is not killing a human being is simply anti-science and bad faith. It is, by definition, a human being, just in the early stages of life. If you are arguing that it is not killing a baby, then what is it? Are you saying it magically becomes a human being for "value" purposes once it just happens to exit the woman, which would mean five seconds earlier it had no value? If someone kills a baby inside a woman by punching the woman's stomach, would you say that it was not murder or even not a crime as to the baby? And if you say abortion should not be legal after a certain point, why? Why is abortion "killing a baby" at 30 weeks, but not at 10 weeks?[/quote] Because it has no consciousness. No mind. It can't miss anything because it is still nothing. [/quote] [b]Is it OK to kill someone in a coma[/b]? And by your definition, when does it become a human life with value? If you say at birth, that makes no sense because it isn't like it gained "consciousness" by simply exiting the woman. If you say viability, that makes no sense because it isn't it gained "consciousness" the moment it turned 23 weeks old (and the viability line keeps changing). Thus, the problem with arguing it is not a human life, aside from it being objective anti-science, is that you have zero scientific way to measure then when transforms into a human life -- it is completely subjective, which means it is not science.[/quote] dp... actually , yes it is legal to "kill" someone in a coma if they are on life support. The family member agrees to "pull the plug". The person cannot survive on their own. Same for a 15 week baby. My spouse's family had to make that difficult decision for their father. His brain active, but his body couldn't survive without support. He was "alive", but they decided to pull the plug because he had no qol. That decision was left to the family, not the doctors, and certainly, not any lawyers.[/quote] This! The PP conveniently ignored that fact in her dumb "but it's science" ramblings. And killing in self defense is always allowed.[/quote]
Options
Disable HTML in this message
Disable BB Code in this message
Disable smilies in this message
Review message
Search
Recent Topics
Hottest Topics