Anonymous
12/07/2021 10:50
Subject: SCOTUS: oral arguments for Dobbs v. Jackson (MS abortion case)
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:This issue is too serious for these stupid semantic debates. Women should never be forced to carry unwanted pregnancies. Period.
+1
The fact is that Republicans don’t think of women as people. If you’re willing to force the use of someone else’s body for your own religious beliefs, you don’t think of the life of the person from whom you’re stealing as worthy. It’s un-American on multiple levels. It’s certainly inhuman.
Women are people. But so are babies. I never will get the way people discard babies in utero like they are enemies of the state and monsters. Especially when 99% of women seek abortion of convenience and have not been raped.
Even then, the baby isn’t the rapist. The baby is innocent. He or she had no role in any crime and is being unjustly sentenced to death for the crime of another person.
Your comment make the PPs point, exactly. You think of women as secondary or not relevant at all. It's all about "the baby." Even in the case of rape, which is unimaginable to think you would force another person to carry the result of a violent, traumatic personal invasion.
Anonymous
12/07/2021 10:33
Subject: Re:SCOTUS: oral arguments for Dobbs v. Jackson (MS abortion case)
Anonymous
12/07/2021 10:25
Subject: SCOTUS: oral arguments for Dobbs v. Jackson (MS abortion case)
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:This issue is too serious for these stupid semantic debates. Women should never be forced to carry unwanted pregnancies. Period.
+1
The fact is that Republicans don’t think of women as people. If you’re willing to force the use of someone else’s body for your own religious beliefs, you don’t think of the life of the person from whom you’re stealing as worthy. It’s un-American on multiple levels. It’s certainly inhuman.
Women are people. But so are babies. I never will get the way people discard babies in utero like they are enemies of the state and monsters. Especially when 99% of women seek abortion of convenience and have not been raped.
Even then, the baby isn’t the rapist. The baby is innocent. He or she had no role in any crime and is being unjustly sentenced to death for the crime of another person.
What have you done to expand access to health insurance? Have you gotten age appropriate comprehensive sex ed into your local schools? Do you tell your representatives that you want free and very accessible birth control options? You support gun right reform, obviously. You surely let Donald Trump know that his kidnapping migrant children was an appalling crime against humanity, didn’t you? And you must be an ardent supporter of Build Back Better since it will grant massively improved quality of life for millions, but especially for diabetics who need insulin.
Anonymous
12/07/2021 09:03
Subject: SCOTUS: oral arguments for Dobbs v. Jackson (MS abortion case)
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:This issue is too serious for these stupid semantic debates. Women should never be forced to carry unwanted pregnancies. Period.
+1
The fact is that Republicans don’t think of women as people. If you’re willing to force the use of someone else’s body for your own religious beliefs, you don’t think of the life of the person from whom you’re stealing as worthy. It’s un-American on multiple levels. It’s certainly inhuman.
Women are people. But so are babies. I never will get the way people discard babies in utero like they are enemies of the state and monsters. Especially when 99% of women seek abortion of convenience and have not been raped.
Even then, the baby isn’t the rapist. The baby is innocent. He or she had no role in any crime and is being unjustly sentenced to death for the crime of another person.
Anonymous
12/07/2021 08:59
Subject: SCOTUS: oral arguments for Dobbs v. Jackson (MS abortion case)
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:If life begins at delivery, why do we have to kill the baby to complete an abortion? You kill what is living. The baby is killed during abortion. The baby is alive; life has begun.
I don't understand what you are trying to say but a fetus is not viable outside the womb so it really isn't a separate entity from the host, more like parasite.
[…]
Who taught you a baby in utero was “parasitic?” Because they were wrong.
I deleted your unsourced Life News bull short.
And do you know how a fetus gets nutrients? Do you know the fight between the fetus and the woman’s immune system?
Placental immune […]
https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/j.1600-0897.2010.00836.x
Citation Mor G, Cardenas I. The immune system in pregnancy: a unique complexity. Am J Reprod Immunol 2010
Lol. That doesn’t even claim what you said it did, forced birther.
Anonymous
12/07/2021 08:58
Subject: SCOTUS: oral arguments for Dobbs v. Jackson (MS abortion case)
Anonymous wrote:This issue is too serious for these stupid semantic debates. Women should never be forced to carry unwanted pregnancies. Period.
+1
The fact is that Republicans don’t think of women as people. If you’re willing to force the use of someone else’s body for your own religious beliefs, you don’t think of the life of the person from whom you’re stealing as worthy. It’s un-American on multiple levels. It’s certainly inhuman.
Anonymous
12/07/2021 08:54
Subject: SCOTUS: oral arguments for Dobbs v. Jackson (MS abortion case)
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:If life begins at delivery, why do we have to kill the baby to complete an abortion? You kill what is living. The baby is killed during abortion. The baby is alive; life has begun.
I don't understand what you are trying to say but a fetus is not viable outside the womb so it really isn't a separate entity from the host, more like parasite.
+1
Yup. It’s not viable and can’t live without “its host”.
It’s not a standalone person.
No but it is a person. People who are helpless and dependent on others for life should be defended and cared for. Your toddler is dependent on you for nutrients, too.
Anonymous
12/07/2021 08:50
Subject: SCOTUS: oral arguments for Dobbs v. Jackson (MS abortion case)
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:If life begins at delivery, why do we have to kill the baby to complete an abortion? You kill what is living. The baby is killed during abortion. The baby is alive; life has begun.
I don't understand what you are trying to say but a fetus is not viable outside the womb so it really isn't a separate entity from the host, more like parasite.
[…]
Who taught you a baby in utero was “parasitic?” Because they were wrong.
I deleted your unsourced Life News bull short.
And do you know how a fetus gets nutrients? Do you know the fight between the fetus and the woman’s immune system?
Placental immune response and its tropism for specific viruses and pathogens affect the outcome of the pregnant woman’s susceptibility to and severity of certain infectious diseases. The generalization of pregnancy as a condition of immune suppression or increased risk is misleading and prevents the determination of adequate guidelines for treating pregnant women during pandemics. There is a need to evaluate the interaction of each specific pathogen with the fetal/placental unit and its responses to design the adequate prophylaxis or therapy. The complexity of the immunology of pregnancy and the focus, for many years, on the concept of immunology of pregnancy as an organ transplantation have complicated the field and delayed the development of new guidelines with clinical implications that could help to answer these and other relevant questions. Our challenge as scientists and clinicians interested in the field of reproductive immunology is to evaluate many of the ‘classical concepts’ to define new approaches for a better understanding of the immunology of pregnancy that will benefit mothers and fetuses in different clinical scenarios.
https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/j.1600-0897.2010.00836.x
Citation Mor G, Cardenas I. The immune system in pregnancy: a unique complexity. Am J Reprod Immunol 2010
Anonymous
12/07/2021 08:43
Subject: SCOTUS: oral arguments for Dobbs v. Jackson (MS abortion case)
This issue is too serious for these stupid semantic debates. Women should never be forced to carry unwanted pregnancies. Period.
Anonymous
12/07/2021 08:26
Subject: SCOTUS: oral arguments for Dobbs v. Jackson (MS abortion case)
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:If life begins at delivery, why do we have to kill the baby to complete an abortion? You kill what is living. The baby is killed during abortion. The baby is alive; life has begun.
I don't understand what you are trying to say but a fetus is not viable outside the womb so it really isn't a separate entity from the host, more like parasite.
First, the fetus is the same type of organism as the mother. Parasites are different organisms which latch on to another species, causing it harm.
Second, parasites are not where they belong, but the preborn child is precisely where it is supposed to be. The natural changes that take place in the woman’s body to make room for this new little human do not damage her body. Although there may be challenges in being pregnant, they are in no way legitimately comparable to the damage and harm a parasite does to another organism.
Fetal stem cells are known to travel to sites of damage or injury in the mother, and mothers with a weakened heart, for example, get fetal stem cells which travel to their hearts and turn into cardiac cells, helping strengthen the mother’s heart.
In contrast, the parasitic latching on to another organism does not help the host and there is no mutual sharing of benefits.
How does the fetus benefit the host?
Who taught you a baby in utero was “parasitic?” Because they were wrong.
Anonymous
12/07/2021 07:54
Subject: SCOTUS: oral arguments for Dobbs v. Jackson (MS abortion case)
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:If life begins at delivery, why do we have to kill the baby to complete an abortion? You kill what is living. The baby is killed during abortion. The baby is alive; life has begun.
I don't understand what you are trying to say but a fetus is not viable outside the womb so it really isn't a separate entity from the host, more like parasite.
[…]
Who taught you a baby in utero was “parasitic?” Because they were wrong.
I deleted your unsourced Life News bull short.
And do you know how a fetus gets nutrients? Do you know the fight between the fetus and the woman’s immune system?
Anonymous
12/07/2021 07:38
Subject: SCOTUS: oral arguments for Dobbs v. Jackson (MS abortion case)
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:
There should be a scientific study to determine when life begins, you can try fetal reaction and do things like train in the womb. That would settle it when it's woman body vs baby's body.
Scientist here...and these arguments are asinine. Unless you are proposing that at that moment when you think "science" can tell you that life begins, you are also prepared to incubate the fetus outside of a woman's body. And of course you're not, because you know that the fetus would still need the mother's body to fully gestate. Here's info from Australia: https://www.sahealth.sa.gov.au/wps/wcm/connect/d1024b0042ac3768a346b7ad100c470d/Too+small+too+soon+-+babies+born+23%E2%80%9324+weeks.pdf?MOD=AJPERES&CACHEID=ROOTWORKSPACE-d1024b0042ac3768a346b7ad100c470d-nwK1psv
Have you spent time in a NICU? Do you know what the prognosis of a baby born at 24 weeks is? It's not good, and it costs millions of dollars to keep that baby alive...usually with a lifetime of health consequences. This whole viability argument is, IMHO, a red herring. It's what we have, but I think it disrespects the doctors and scientists who work miracles to improve health outcomes for premature infants to make it the control point for women's bodily autonomy.
Yes I have and the issue is that technology has come a long way since the 70s where we can keep babies alive where we could not in the past.
At a cost of many weeks in the hospital, the emotional toll, potential lifelong medical issues, and a LOT of money and time spent by parents. Are you planning to foot that bill? Unless you are, you need to shut your damn mouth. I had a friend deliver their baby at approx. 24 weeks. It was no walk in the park, let me tell you. Until you have seen it, you do not get to require people to undertake that experience. Period.
Anonymous
12/07/2021 07:22
Subject: SCOTUS: oral arguments for Dobbs v. Jackson (MS abortion case)
Anonymous wrote:The bottom line is that once Griswold is overturned by the Federalist society on this count, combined with the "patriot act" from W Bush, there won't be any privacy left in this country, and it will all be right wingers fault, and the result can be used by an authoritarian government to control its people.
I hope the Libertarians and Conservative right wake up soon to the Evangelical nightmare that has been spawned.
That’s what this is all about. Not “life”. They just want control.
Anonymous
12/07/2021 07:21
Subject: SCOTUS: oral arguments for Dobbs v. Jackson (MS abortion case)
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:If life begins at delivery, why do we have to kill the baby to complete an abortion? You kill what is living. The baby is killed during abortion. The baby is alive; life has begun.
I don't understand what you are trying to say but a fetus is not viable outside the womb so it really isn't a separate entity from the host, more like parasite.
+1
Yup. It’s not viable and can’t live without “its host”.
It’s not a standalone person.
Anonymous
12/07/2021 06:02
Subject: SCOTUS: oral arguments for Dobbs v. Jackson (MS abortion case)
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:If life begins at delivery, why do we have to kill the baby to complete an abortion? You kill what is living. The baby is killed during abortion. The baby is alive; life has begun.
I don't understand what you are trying to say but a fetus is not viable outside the womb so it really isn't a separate entity from the host, more like parasite.
First, the fetus is the same type of organism as the mother. Parasites are different organisms which latch on to another species, causing it harm.
Second, parasites are not where they belong, but the preborn child is precisely where it is supposed to be. The natural changes that take place in the woman’s body to make room for this new little human do not damage her body. Although there may be challenges in being pregnant, they are in no way legitimately comparable to the damage and harm a parasite does to another organism.
Fetal stem cells are known to travel to sites of damage or injury in the mother, and mothers with a weakened heart, for example, get fetal stem cells which travel to their hearts and turn into cardiac cells, helping strengthen the mother’s heart.
In contrast, the parasitic latching on to another organism does not help the host and there is no mutual sharing of benefits.
Who taught you a baby in utero was “parasitic?” Because they were wrong.