Abortion...

Legal up until 13 weeks, then exceptions for the life of the mother.
 
Also, can someone correct me if I'm wrong, but isnt fetus Latin for child?
 
No. Sperm is not people. Neither are eggs. Thanks for desperately trying and revealing you don't know what conception requires. Probably these same people lambast evolution skeptics for not understanding basic biology.
hqdefault.jpg
 
Tough argument but seeing poor, drug addicted people shitting out babies is annoying.
 
It comes down to what you consider to be a child / living being. A child prematurely born can survive from about 26 weeks. I'm pretty hard line when it comes to abortion; i feel that it's essentially murder regardless of stage and should only be pursued in instances of rape / incest / the mothers life. If you just find it an inconvenience, then give it up for adoption.

It's fucking hilarious people talk about sperm, fried eggs and periods. Pay attention in grade school biology you dumb fucks.
 
I've been coming around on the argument that a fetus doesn't have a right to force its mother to house it. It's ugly but it's a perfect argument.
I think that was Ayn rands stance. Although I believe she elegantly referred to a fetus as a no-right having, parasitic, blood sucking, illegal, trespassing leech, or something like that.
 
Last edited:
In debates like this one, you can tell a lot by which side has to use euphemisms and try to be vague and avoid details on what they want. Having to say "women's healthcare", "reproductive rights" and referring to snuffing out a baby as "family planning" is pretty telling imo. They also sure as hell want to avoid any details about how exactly they "terminate a pregnancy".
 
Legal as long as you have SPAM/

Spam-Can.jpg
 
human consortion
pro life or pro abortion?
social distortion

#haikubattlestyle
 
If a mother finds out beforehand that her baby is going to be born a vegetable, severely retarded or have downs, then an abortion is totally justifiable. If the baby is going to be completely healthy with no severe problems then abortion should not be used in my opinion, adoption or other options are available.
 
You twats start a new thread on this topic starting with the same bullshit pretense:

That a cluster of cells less complicated than the eye of a fly amounts to a human being. It doesn't under science. It doesn't under law.

And if you're gonna come back with "but the potential for life," then we'll all care the moment you decry the countless loads ripskaters blown jerking to his own troll posts.

Look forward to this shite again next week.
 
All this talk about rights is nauseating.

Children talk about their rights. Adults talk about their obligations.
 
What are people who are so strongly opposed to early term abortions views on the commercial killing of animals?

Morally speaking the right of a mother to abort a fetus which has no awareness, consciousness or ability to even have thoughts or experience suffering or awareness of any kind is more humane than having animals tortured through an assembly line on factory farms for their whole life. There's no doubt about their ability to experience fear, pain and suffering their whole life. Especially relatively intelligent animals like cows and pigs.
 
Abortions will happen if it's illegal or not. So why not make it safe eh.
 
So... Does one humans right to convenience really outweigh another human beings actual right to live?

Well you started your thread with a bullshit premise, you are not really looking for discussion are you... Not every abortion is out of convenience..

Proceed with the circlejerk you were looking for.
 
Abortion doesnt really bother me. There are already too many people as it is. Why bring unwanted children into the world? Besides I dont believe you are a person until born. So i am ok with women deciding what they want to do with their bodies rather than letting Christian whackos decide.

I see it more of a way to try to control minorities and poor than anything else
 
Technically, there is no doubt as to whether an unborn is a human being and alive. The idea that we are still guessing is a myth.

SADLER, LANGMAN’S MEDICAL EMBRYOLOGY (John N. Gardner ed., 6th ed. 1990); noting that the proposition that an unborn child is a human being from conception is “supported by standard textbooks on embryology or human biology”

(“Contemporary scientific precepts accept as a given that human life begins at conception.” (citing KEITH L. MOORE & T.V.N. PERSAUD, THE DEVELOPING HUMAN 14 (5th ed. 1993); SUSAN TUCKER BLACKBURN & DONNA LEE LOPER, MATERNAL, FETAL AND NEONATAL PHYSIOLOGY: A CLINICAL PERSPECTIVE 49 (1992); MICHAEL R. HARRISON ET AL., THE UNBORN PATIENT: PRENATAL DIAGNOSIS AND TREATMENT 14 (1984); DALE RUSSELL DUNNIHOO, M.D., PH.D., FUNDAMENTALS OF GYNECOLOGY AND OBSTETRICS 286–99 (1990);

Not only is it a life, but, “by its intrinsic biological nature,” it is a human life from the moment of conception, for “it can be nothing else.”Klasing, supra note 39, at 974 (quoting E. BLECHSCHMIDT, THE BEGINNING OF HUMAN LIFE 16–17 (1977)).

Geneticist Dr. Jerome L. LeJeune testified before a United States Senate subcommittee in 1981: “To accept the fact that after fertilization has taken place a new human being has come into being is no longer a matter of taste or opinion. The human nature of the human being from conception to old age is not a metaphysical contention, it is plain experimental evidence.”

Bradley M. Patten, (New York: McGraw Hill, 1968), 43 Human Embryology, 3rd ed."It is the penetration of the ovum by a spermatozoan and resultant mingling of the nuclear material each brings to the union that constitues the culmination of the process of fertilization and marks the initiation of the life of a new individual."

E.L. Potter and J.M. Craig, (Chicago: Year Book Medical Publishers, 1975), vii.Pathology of the Fetus and the Infant, 3d ed. "Every time a sperm cell and ovum unite a new being is created which is alive and will continue to live unless its death is brought about by some specific condition."

Dr. Alfred M. Bongioanni
Professor of Pediatrics and Obstetrics, University of Pennsylvania
"I have learned from my earliest medical education that human life begins at the time of conception."

Dr. Jerome LeJeune
Professor of Genetics, University of Descartes
"After fertilization has taken place a new human being has come into being. [It] is no longer a matter of taste or opinion...it is plain experimental evidence. Each individual has a very neat beginning, at conception."

Dr. Watson A. Bowes
University of Colorado Medical School
"The beginning of a single human life is from a biological point of view a simple and straightforward matter – the beginning is conception."

The official Senate report reached this conclusion:
Physicians, biologists, and other scientists agree that conception marks the beginning of the life of a human being - a being that is alive and is a member of the human species. There is overwhelming agreement on this point in countless medical, biological, and scientific writings

I never enter a debate unprepared.

You see, the statement that an unborn is "technically" not alive and not "proven" to be a human being is a story propogated by pro choicers in an effort to give themselves some comforting sense of plausible deniability. The statement in and of itself is an untruth, a fabrication, a terminological inexactitude.

These, for the most part are medical text books, or authors of medical textbooks. There is no doubt among the scientific community that unborns are alive, and human beings from the moment that they are concieved. Not that one should require so much evidence. After all, what else could the offspring of two human beings be but a human being?

Sources from only one side of the isle? Not biased in the least are you..
 
Democrats...the party of open borders, open bathrooms, butt sex, and dead babies. Great job guys. You should win the white house back in no time.
 
Last edited:
You twats start a new thread on this topic starting with the same bullshit pretense:

That a cluster of cells less complicated than the eye of a fly amounts to a human being. It doesn't under science.
Wrong. It is alive, has its own DNA and that DNA happens to be of the homo sapiens sapiens genus, ergo the fetus is, scientifically, undeniably a new human life from the moment of conception forth.
It doesn't under law.
There have been and are many unjust laws that try and justify evil. Abortion law is one of those things.

See? Absolutely no need to resort to "potential" or religion, all one needs to demolish your bullshit is basic but actual actual scientific understanding.
 
Back
Top