IVF Kills Twice As Many Unborn Babies Then Abortion

a reply to: Boogerpicker

I don't think Jesus supported the death penalty for criminals. He was all about forgiveness. Jesus didn't say anything about abortion, which was a quite popular remedy in those days.

And, talking about those day, the number one cause of death among women before modern medicine was pregnancy and childbirth.

a reply to: FlyersFan

We are doing it all wrong.

originally posted by: AlexandrosOMegas
I'm sorry but people are just idiots who claim there is no difference between killing a growing baby and killing some cells. And anyways we aren't talking about killing here. We are talking about killing something vs. something dying in the hands of God which had a CHANCE to grow. If I were dictator of the US, I would allow abortions (if I had to make the compromise and allow ANY AT ALL that is) to the point the baby was grown enough that is had developed a brain which was able to send and receive signals. But there will never be a perfect answer because there are no lines outlining life vs. no life. That's why they LOVE it and make it a HUGE DEAL amongst people, 90% of whom wouldnt even PROBABLY HAVE an opinion if it weren't used as a political weapon.

How is someone who tells the truth an idiot? No explanation either.
Nature aborts fetuses all the time. Mostly in the first three months. Nature can afford this. It produces a lot of life or proto life in excess so that when a lot die or are unviable there are going to be plenty more.

Some animals produce hundreds of offspring only for a few to make it into adulthood.

A few easily replaceable cells are not of the same worth as an adult woman who might not be able to cope.

Some animals abort by eating certain plants when a harsh winter is looming.

I find IVF stupid but I will stand up for a female to have the right to abort her own early fetus if her health or sanity is at stake.
She might make a good mum at a later point.

I don't believe in this micro managing god who loves every cell a human produces but doesn't care when animals or rheir offspring get killed by human apes.

It reeks of a human made entity.

Nature is not bothered. I believe in Nature, it is all around me and doesn't preach.

Textor a person who found themselves in the wrong place at the wrong time isn't,

Not trying to debate ... just don't agree with this part... a fertilized egg can be placed in the above statement.

I don't think someone who found themselves in the wrong place at the wrong time is always not innocent.

originally posted by: Sookiechacha
What I wanna know is, since frozen embryos are children in Alabama now, will they start opening frozen day care centers and long term care centers for parents who work or want to take a cruise or something, without the children? People should be able to just drop off and deep freeze their children while they take some time for themselves, or work.

I heard industrial freezer sales are skyrocketing there.

But what do I know?

The difference is the IVF doesn't necessarily result in a successful pregnancy. My wife had a few rounds of IVF and they weren't successful. I'd hardly call it an abortion. The doctors have to create several embryos as there is a high failure rate. So for every 1 that gets implanted, there may be say 10 fertilized.

I am generally against abortion, but to compare it to IVF is absurd imho. It is extreme positions like this that make it difficult for people to take conservatives seriously sometimes.

a reply to: Edumakated

It’s a bad comparison because anyone partaking in IVF are people who passionately want to be parents.

Why on earth would I want to deny them that chance?

If we all agree the future population is at risk, why would we go after those who are trying the hardest to curb that?

A fertilized embryo is a person, yet a 9 month fertus is not. Now THAT'S hypocricsy.

a reply to: CriticalStinker

If we all agree the future population is at risk

Do we?

How is the future population at risk? Climate change? Replacement theory? Abortion and contraception? War and the politics of war, the Apocalypse?

originally posted by: Sookiechacha
a reply to: CriticalStinker

If we all agree the future population is at risk

Do we?

How is the future population at risk? Climate change? Replacement theory? Abortion and contraception? War and the politics of war, the Apocalypse?

I guess that depends on which camp you ask.

Take your pick.

My point was more no matter where you stand, people who really want to be parents are probably good candidates.

originally posted by: nugget1
A fertilized embryo is a person, yet a 9 month fertus is not. Now THAT'S hypocricsy.

9 month fetus?

That's murder. Plain & simple.

And I'm pro abortion...up to a point.

originally posted by: SchrodingersRat

originally posted by: nugget1
A fertilized embryo is a person, yet a 9 month fertus is not. Now THAT'S hypocricsy.

9 month fetus?

That's murder. Plain & simple.

And I'm pro abortion...up to a point.

This is the problem with this debate. The extremes on both sides. On the right, you got folks wanting to prevent any abortion saying life starts immediately with a fertilized egg whilst on the left they want abortions of healthy 9 month olds to be legal out of convenience to the mother.

I think most of us in the middle don't think abortion is good and would like to see far less of it, but don't want to make it totally illegally for a variety of reasons.

originally posted by: Edumakated

originally posted by: SchrodingersRat

originally posted by: nugget1
A fertilized embryo is a person, yet a 9 month fertus is not. Now THAT'S hypocricsy.

9 month fetus?

That's murder. Plain & simple.

And I'm pro abortion...up to a point.

This is the problem with this debate. The extremes on both sides. On the right, you got folks wanting to prevent any abortion saying life starts immediately with a fertilized egg whilst on the left they want abortions of healthy 9 month olds to be legal out of convenience to the mother.

I think most of us in the middle don't think abortion is good and would like to see far less of it, but don't want to make it totally illegally for a variety of reasons.

You've helped state my position quite eloquently.

Well done, sir.

Seems you received a pretty good "Edumakation" after all.

a reply to: Edumakated

whilst on the left they want abortions of healthy 9 month olds to be legal out of convenience to the mother.

This is a bald-faced lie. Wherever you heard that, they were lying to you. Nobody is advocating for the right to abort a 9 month, healthy fetus.

What is true, is folks are advocating for a "viability" limit on abortions on demand. However, some fetuses will never achieve viability, not at 24 weeks, not at 40 weeks. Some would-be parents would rather allow their child to die in the womb, rather give birth and have it linger, only to die an excruciation death for days, maybe weeks. This needs to be a personal choice. Not a choice decided by the likes of Jim Jordon and Matt Gaetz.

originally posted by: Sookiechacha
a reply to: Edumakated

whilst on the left they want abortions of healthy 9 month olds to be legal out of convenience to the mother.

This is a bald-faced lie. Wherever you heard that, they were lying to you. Nobody is advocating for the right to abort a 9 month, healthy fetus.

What is true, is folks are advocating for a "viability" limit on abortions on demand. However, some fetuses will never achieve viability, not at 24 weeks, not at 40 weeks. Some would-be parents would rather allow their child to die in the womb, rather give birth and have it linger, only to die an excruciation death for days, maybe weeks. This needs to be a personal choice. Not a choice decided by the likes of Jim Jordon and Matt Gaetz.

Nope, there are radicals on the left who want abortion for ANY REASON until child is born.

I have no problem if a woman decides she wants to abort late term due to severe disability of child or high health risk to mother. I think most reasonable people are ok with that... However, to just say I don't want a child in a 7th or 8th month of pregnancy out of pure convenience is asinine imho.

I also think it is crazy outlawing abortion entirely and equating IVF to abortions.

Crazy loonies on both left and right.

a reply to: Edumakated

Nope, there are radicals on the left who want abortion for ANY REASON until child is born.

There are all kinds of people. There are people advocating for killing gays and trans folks.

But there are no bills, or proposals by any lawmakers, legitimate lobbying group or advocate group pushing for any such thing.

However, to just say I don't want a child in a 7th or 8th month of pregnancy out of pure convenience is asinine imho.

"Nobody" is advocating for that. And that wasn't legal under Roe

originally posted by: SchrodingersRat

originally posted by: nugget1
A fertilized embryo is a person, yet a 9 month fertus is not. Now THAT'S hypocricsy.

9 month fetus?

That's murder. Plain & simple.

And I'm pro abortion...up to a point.

7 states now allow full term abortion-up to and after the moment of birth-with more states fighting for that 'right'.
A thriving fetus is not a child in the eys of the law, yet an embryo is.

It's no wndor mental health has become a major problem; our leaders are insane, and we all know sh!te runs downhill.

a reply to: nugget1

7 states now allow full term abortion-up to and after the moment of birth-with more states fighting for that 'right'.

These states' laws don't allow the state to interfere in reproductive medical decisions. Late term abortions are high risk, and require a sign off from the patient, medical professionals, hospitals and their lawyers before they can happen. So, I'm really not seeing some crazy lady at 8 months, marching into a doctor's office, a clinic or hospital and demanding an abortion because her baby daddy pissed her off and getting one.

Hi. I'm usually just a watcher. But this really ground my gears as Peter Griffin would say.

As a father who has a terminally ill daughter. Caused by a one in a billion genetic defect. Mitrocondrial disease to be exact, IVF allowed us to have another child. Yes I was brought up as Catholic, and said any viable embryos we would have. Unfortunately 4 out of the 5 had my daughters disease.

Having witnessed the sheer pain and agony that it causes I would not wish it on ANYONE. If they had even survived growing in the womb. I'm not political, I believe in God. But unless Jesus want to appear and cure my dying daughter I'm PRO IVF.

NO ONE SHOULD SUFFER. ESPECIALLY NOT CHILDREN.

a reply to: Sookiechacha

Late term abortions are high risk, and require a sign off from the patient, medical professionals, hospitals and their lawyers before they can happen.

No, they are not 'high risk' and do not require a lawyer to sign off. Do your homework, sookecha. All that's needed is a statement from the 'birthing person' that the burden of being a mother would be too much to deal with, and if the doctor agrres a healthy, full-term delivered 'fetus' is kept comfortable-until it id dead.

I did my homework; now do yours.