Abortion, the Elephant in the Room

a reply to: JimmyNeutr0n

“ Only about 2% of the global population lives in polygamous households, and in the vast majority of countries, that share is under 0.5%.”

From:

www.pewresearch.org...

originally posted by: Bluntone22
Round and round we go again.

I personally don’t care if abortion clinics give out buy two get the third free coupons.

But let’s be honest here, until both sides are willing to compromise on the issue it will never be put to rest.

Roe v Wade IS the compromise.

One extreme wants abortion on demand without any conditions. The other extreme wants no abortions at all. Roe v Wade says abortions are OK until the fetus is viable without the mother.

Address this one question:

When does a unique, complex homo Sapien cell structure contain life? When is it a kinetic life form that has human DNA structure, known as life... alive?

a reply to: 1947boomer

Roe v Wade IS the compromise.

There should be no compromise on the constitution, and the constitution doesnt allow for murder without being in danger

If youre pro abortion then you should be pro Murder of whoever a person wants free of consequence

Ill state again this decision does nothing but take the federal gov out of Abortion

LITERALLY the people on the left has screamed for decades "Stay out of my body"

Well now yall got it and youre losing your SH!T

originally posted by: tkwasny
Address this one question:

When does a unique, complex homo Sapien cell structure contain life? When is it a kinetic life form that has human DNA structure, known as life... alive?

To these leftist heres the answer:

If its on a dif planet, then its life from conception

If its a human baby thats vulnerable its not life until they decide its life , sometime after birth

No one will say it but this is the absolute truth

originally posted by: Annee
Why is it anyone else's business besides the woman making a choice.

It isn't.

I think the choice lies in the female choosing to engage in consensual sex without taking responsibility for those actions.

Once the choice of having consensual sex is the first and last line. The act of pregnancy is the repercussion of that choice.

originally posted by: HODOSKE
because it is a matter of want or unwanted. if it is wanted it is murder if unwanted it is not. a reply to: JimmyNeutr0n

I imagined someone would argue this point. I think we have an answer to why pro-abortion people are set in their ways. They value some lives over others. "unwanted" and "wanted", that's quite the descriptions of the same fetal tissue... Lets cut past the shenanigans. You cannot have conflicting issues at hand, it's either a life or not and worthy of double homicide and protected or not. Your moral argument for double homicide lies in the fact that you adhere that the fetus is infact a life with potential at "that point" but not in abortion..I'm not sure why a womans choice determines whether the same exact fetus is worth a homicide or not. Are woman the arbiters of law, are women God who can choose who lives and dies? Here lies the conundrum...

originally posted by: TzarChasm
Should children across the nation be appropriated and cultivated in administrative programs to guarantee their quality of life? What rights do parents actually have?

If you have a problem with the system, you need to look in a mirror, along with 350million other people.

I'm sure the nihilistic approach to life doesn't help contribute to a positive society.

originally posted by: Snarl

A world where courts decide the fate of life ... is not usually the most desirable place to live.

So a court should not step in if someone murdered your family member? That wouldn't be a society I'd want to live in...lawlessness...

originally posted by: Hecate666
That out of the way I want to make absolutely sure to say that males must stay out of this discussion completely. Yes they may have deposited some DNA into a woman, but just because the one time it didn't go into a sock doesn't make them in any way experts in being pregnant or masters of someone else's body.

It takes two consensual people to make a baby.

originally posted by: Hecate666
Throughout Nature and all over this world, the person who has to carry a foetus for 9 months and may die during birth [pre eclampsia is a thing a weak heart is another, complications during birth yet another] is the woman.

Men die in significantly higher rates in war times than women to protect societies that include women and children.

originally posted by: Hecate666
No male knows what it feels like to be pregnant. If it is a wanted and planned child, the risk of complications is gladly taken by the woman, even if she dies at birth.

No female knows what its like to not have a choice in having a doctor take a pair of scissors to a child you desperately want.

originally posted by: Hecate666
But as soon as you force a woman who does not want the pregnancy for whatever reason, to go through this against her will, you become a sadistic torturer and a bully of the worst kind.

Again, we fall back to taking responsibility for your actions the same way a heroin addict would be responsible for his actions. Yes, I'm comparing sexual promiscuity to heroin.

originally posted by: Hecate666
Just like I am against injecting people against their will with a potentially harmful or deadly experimental mRNA therapy. If I think the risk is too high for myself, I will say NO.

I'd personally not want to get into a experimental drug that's not mandated under established law for anyone to take against their will (ie everyone is being coerced). Just to stay on topic..

In closing, most of the rest of your post, I'd only argue in part that there are actions and there are consequences responsibilities to those actions.

It's as simple as saying "throw ball up, ball fall down, I catch ball". Throwing the ball in the air is the action, the ball falling down is the consequence, you catching it is the responsibility.

*Okay ladies and germs, I'm ghosting this thread. Have fun and debate safely!

a reply to: Annee

The choice ends at conception, the moment you start carrying a helpless baby.

Don't want kids, then keep your legs shut or use contraception.

a reply to: Annee

That's total bull#, i raised my first kid on my own without any input from her mother.

You support living children? In what fantasy land is a healthy unborn child not living?

you cannot ban abortions, you can only ban safe abortions.

originally posted by: continuousThunder
you cannot ban abortions, you can only ban safe abortions.

Here is the real issue on this. People haven't a clue what its about. Its not banning abortions, its taking the federal government out of the decision and giving it back to the states. With confusion like this, we will be arguing over nothing.

originally posted by: network dude
it's taking the federal government out of the decision and giving it back to the states

The Feds hate losing power ... don't they?

originally posted by: olaru12

originally posted by: carewemust
a reply to: JimmyNeutr0n


All the Supreme Court is saying is that each state will determine the rules for killing human babies.

Should a woman that has an abortion in a state that allows it, be tried for murder when she returns home. If so what do you think is a reasonable punishment?

where is that law? Or are you just confused yet again?

originally posted by: network dude
where is that law? Or are you just confused yet again?

I would say it could become the law very quickly in certain states; like they tried in Georgia.

Even women who seek lawful abortions out of state may not escape punishment. If a Georgia resident plans to travel elsewhere to obtain an abortion, she may be charged with conspiracy to commit murder, punishable by 10 years’ imprisonment. An individual who helps a woman plan her trip to get an out-of-state abortion, or transports her to the clinic, may also be charged with conspiracy. These individuals, after all, are “conspiring” to end of the life of a “person” with “full legal recognition” under Georgia law.

slate.com...

a reply to: Grenade

In IVF, a doctor will feryilize multiple eggs but only end up implanting the one that has the best chance of success. Do you believe that IVF should be outlawed since numerous fertilized eggs aren't used?

What about IUD's? The way certain IUD's work is by making the uterus an inhospitable environment for a fertilized egg to attach.

originally posted by: MissVocalcord

originally posted by: network dude
where is that law? Or are you just confused yet again?

I would say it could become the law very quickly in certain states; like they tried in Georgia.

Even women who seek lawful abortions out of state may not escape punishment. If a Georgia resident plans to travel elsewhere to obtain an abortion, she may be charged with conspiracy to commit murder, punishable by 10 years’ imprisonment. An individual who helps a woman plan her trip to get an out-of-state abortion, or transports her to the clinic, may also be charged with conspiracy. These individuals, after all, are “conspiring” to end of the life of a “person” with “full legal recognition” under Georgia law.

slate.com...

good to know. If the SCOTUS kicks this back to the states, then those who want to kill babies would do best to move to a baby killing friendly state.

originally posted by: network dude

originally posted by: olaru12

originally posted by: carewemust
a reply to: JimmyNeutr0n


All the Supreme Court is saying is that each state will determine the rules for killing human babies.

Should a woman that has an abortion in a state that allows it, be tried for murder when she returns home. If so what do you think is a reasonable punishment?

where is that law? Or are you just confused yet again?

It was a question. I didn't say it was a law; try and keep up!

I think the assumption that only folks on the left are ones that might be open to the idea of an abortion is a little telling. The politicization of aspects of society is what's going to do us all in at the end of the day.

a reply to: Xcalibur254

Completely different, IVF is a process designed to help people have children, the exact opposite of abortion. I have no problem with contraceptives.

a reply to: JimmyNeutr0n

Abortion, the Elephant in the Room

Another Elephant for your Room...