FoxHastings said: ↑ If a baby is born simply "ugly" why would it need resuscitating? You've never known what I meant Might be because you can't answer a simple question....like now. I said and MEANT, ""If a baby is born simply "ugly" why would it need resuscitating?"" I neither support anything nor oppose anything based on YOUR weird imaginary scenarios...… Sad that I have to remind you that YOU are not present in any of these situations, are NOT a participant, have NO knowledge of the medical details and have no way of diagnosing anything and have NO authority to judge what is done or not done......
Ya, I am sure facts sound like deflection to you...… And it's odd that you fault something for being a "deflect"...….should we address your many unanswered questions and cherry picked posts?? Oh, and try to make up your mind.....is the fetus just ugly or is it ugly WITH BREATHING "PROBLEMS" ? What do you mean by ugly? What do you mean by "breathing problems"? See, one has to be as specific as the doctors who are making the diagnosis …..and you aren't...
What, you're comparing an ugly baby to a seriously deformed one? DUH! New-born babies are 'ugly' but they don't stay ugly ffs!
More proof that there's a lot in common between the arguments of "Pro-Choicers" and the arguments behind the eugenics movement?
FoxHastings said: ↑ If a baby is born simply "ugly" why would it need resuscitating? Hardly, why would I say that? Answer: I wouldn't and YOU are trying to make it look like I would... NO, YOU added "needed resuscitating" to "ugly" so the whole statement wouldn't look so STUPID
FoxHastings said: ↑ If a baby is born simply "ugly" why would it need resuscitating? You've never known what I meant Might be because you can't answer a simple question....like now. I said and MEANT, ""If a baby is born simply "ugly" why would it need resuscitating?"" I neither support anything nor oppose anything based on YOUR weird imaginary scenarios...… Sad that I have to remind you that YOU are not present in any of these situations, are NOT a participant, have NO knowledge of the medical details and have no way of diagnosing anything and have NO authority to judge what is done or not done...... DUH, THIS poster did that POST 97: kazenatsuWell-Known MemberDonor What if the baby is healthy but just ugly? What if the defect is that the baby is ugly? Is it okay to get a late-term abortion then? How about if they do not realize it until after the baby comes out? Is it okay to not resuscitate? If it's not one of those nice beautiful babies can the woman smother it with a pillow? There are plenty of medical conditions where the individual can still lead a fairly normal life but will just have an ugly or disfigured outward physical appearance. Is it the woman's choice? At what point does her choice run out in that type of situation? Where do we draw the line? (i.e. can the woman just get an abortion or choose to leave the baby to die with any defect?) """""""""""""""" No answers to post 90???
BRILLIANT answer! Wow! Such a good reason to give your posts credibility (not) NO, that was the post where you claimed women were to emotional to be responsible for themselves ( hardly true, BTW.) Here's the questions you did not answer: """"So you think women are really stupid ? So maybe what? We keep them in pens to control their breeding? Mothers mental abilities are impaired ? !!!!!!!!!!! Or you think motherhood is stupid? Women become irrational when pregnant and become mothers ??? Or you think women are irrational because they have maternal instincts when pregnant and that's bad? Should the right to their own bodies be taken away because YOU don't think they can reason? Please note the question marks indicating those are questions...""""""""""" Now remember, when you haven't a good logical answer for anything just say "whatever" like a teenager with no good logical answer …
FoxHastings, I don't know if you're aware of this but you seem to be playing twisted semantics games with your arguments. Maybe you're just having trouble understanding the meaning of words in their proper context. It would be obvious to most people the meaning that was trying to be conveyed. It's almost like you have purposefully tried to become a master of semantics arguments. Then you give vague answers that obviously seem to have implied meanings, but then you deny that those meanings are what you communicated. I had simply asked if you thought it was okay for babies or late term fetuses to die because they were ugly. You gave an elusive deflective answer that seemed to imply that you were okay with that, and that the law should still let women make that choice. Thus it was entirely appropriate that Cerberus asked why you seemed to be comparing an ugly baby to a seriously deformed one, since you did seem to be just casually lumping them all in the same category. Then you decided to play another semantics argument, accusing me of being the one who compared the two, even though I was actually comparing the two to accuse some pro-choicers of not delineating a clear enough difference. Thus you turned "compare" into a semantics argument. Which was obviously meaningless on your part and illogical.
I dismissed your neurotic questioning out of hand with that word simply because I hadn't made the claims in them; I didn't say the women were stupid, nor suggest 'we keep them in pens to control their breeding', nor suggest 'the right to their own bodies be taken away'. But I did make reference to the commonly-experienced hormonal imbalances associated with pregnancy, and the temporary emotional instability they may or may not undergo which could affect their good judgement, and backed it up with an appropriate link which substantiated that fact.
Kaz, I'm sure you're aware of THIS......when you have no good answers you make stuff up …. And are aware your twisted scenarios focused on the inside of women are quite "odd". When Anti-Choicers get stumped, which is all the time, they start yelling , "Semantics, Semantics".....as if that let's them off the hook for not answering those INCONVENIENT questions about their weird scenarios..
NONE of which means they are so emotionally unstable they can't make their own decisions as YOU implied...... I didn't dismiss neurotic attitudes towards women because I think it's dangerous for women...
Now if that only had something to do with 2019...….and women's right to their own bodies...but it doesn't....
Parents sue doctor over 'wrongful abortion' A test told the couple their child might be intersex and have a genetic disorder, the test was wrong. (Yeah, I wonder how the transsexual rights community feels about this)