That elephant is still hidden from you isn't it? Pro-lifers want to introduce laws that remove a right from pregnant women, a right enjoyed by all other people, they are therefore by definition reducing a pregnant woman to something less than a non-pregnant one which is exactly what the Nuremberg Race Laws in 1935 did to Jews .. add to this that they want to give a fetus super-rights above and beyond those enjoyed by all other people and you have the same comparison of what Nazi German did .. It rendered Jews less than a person and gave Germans Super-rights above others. So how does it feel to be in the same class as Nazi's?
Can't be bothered, and to be honest its a silly comparison for either side to make and my posts are nothing more than showing that the 'logic' used works both ways.
9 months is not THAT long of a time. also, pregnant women, even if abortion was 100% illegal, could pretty much live normal everyday lives, with the exception of not having the "sacred precious" right to abort an innocent child. - - - Updated - - - Because pregnant women have a certain role/responsibility that nobody else has. - - - Updated - - - Not ALL trap laws take away the woman's "right" to an abortion.
No, they just make it harder on poor women.....I have a few words for people who deliberately want to make other's lives harder and christian is just one of the nicer ones....the others I can't post.
Well here is hoping that if you should get cancer or need dialysis that the doctors tell you that you have to wait nine months, after all nine months "is not THAT long of a time" is it, and after all you could also "pretty much live normal everyday lives" So you are advocating for the removal of rights that other people have .. good of you to admit it .. and you still maintain that pro-life policies have no comparison to Nazi policies. and please do show me where I say they do?
1-If I have cancer (which I dont), treatment as soon as possible would be needed to save my life. If a pregnant women stays pregnant for nine months and gives birth, is her life in serious danger? Her convenience probably would be, but convenience is not a medical condition like cancer is. Comparing cancer with a woman's desire to not raise a child. LMAO. 2-You advocate removing the fetus's right to life. 3-you implied that TRAP laws override women's rights, which they DONT.
You of course know that not all cancers kill, and neither are you going to die if you require dialysis (yes I did note that you ignored that one) Which is completely irrelevant to the fact that all people are given medical treatment to remove the medical condition as soon as possible. Prove a fetus has a right to life .. in fact prove there is a right to life for anyone. Why do you consistently have to lie about my comments, there is nothing in my comments that even remotely implies what you are trying to erroneously claim. My comment - "Pure and utter BS, there have been numerous constitutional challenges to the Roe decision all have failed, since then pro-lifers have gone out of their way to introduce laws (TRAP laws) to undermine the constitutional right for a woman to have an abortion found under the privacy item of the 14th amendment." Undermine - To weaken by wearing away a base or foundation Override - to set aside or disregard with superior authority or power - to supersede or annul Quit lying about my comments please.
The majority of pregnancies happen not because of the health effects of pregnancy itself, but because women want to avoid raising a child. Not wanting to raise a child is not a medical condition. Murder is illegal. Explain how TRAP laws undermine the right to an abortion.
Hasty generalization. You know nothing of pregnancy. http://www.livescience.com/24127-fact-check-walsh-pregnancy-can-kill.html When you masterbate, are you removing your sperm's right to life? BS. TRAP laws create standards that may be arbitrary or difficult to implement and are aimed at closing abortion clinics. Examples include "ambulatory surgical center" requirements, which impose costly renovations to the facilities, or the requirement that doctors performing abortions have admitting privileges at a nearby hospital. Some hospitals refuse admitting privileges to any doctor who performs abortions. By making abortion unavailable, you are denying the woman the right to make her own decision regarding abortion - in the same way that shutting down all gun dealers would infringe on the ability of the law-abiding citizen to make their own decision about gun ownership.
You missed the part where the Nazi's outlawed abortion, on the theory that a woman's womb was property of the state, a factory for making German soldiers....
Which of course is wholly irrelevant in the discussion we are having .. changing the topic really is just a childish dodge You really should think before you answer .. not all 'murder' is illegal, they just don't call it murder. By imposing restrictions onto clinics not expected from other medical facilities, such as admitting privileges at a nearby hospital, a requirement not required for say a dental surgery
its not irrelevant> explain why a pregnant women who doesn"t want to raise a child<needs to have an abortion as soon as possible<and not just wait a few months and give the baby up for adoption> you argued that not wanting to raise a child is a medical condition
It's been explained to you repeatedly why a woman would want an abortion as opposed to "waiting a few months" and giving it up for adoption. Can't you remember? I'll explain again (but of course you'll ignore a response you don't like). Since you obviously have no idea what pregnancy entails here it is and it entails a LOT more than "waiting a few months": 9 months of Pain Discomfort All the possible complications of pregnancy... YOU have seen the list, it's been shown to you many many times. Time loss off work which may cause job loss. See, Sam, ADULTS need jobs because having a job pays the bills ...many of these woman don't have Mommy and Daddy still paying their bills... Medical attention which costs MONEY , HER money NOT YOUR money. Then there's that hospital visit, (she's lucky if there's just the one) to expensively deliver the baby. More pain....having a baby, Sam, is NOT merely "waiting a few months", there's lots of pain involved whether YOU care or not. Then there's recuperation the length of which depends on whether there were complications or not....and no woman ever recuperates completely , EVERY pregnancy and delivery leaves permanent damage.
Really, then please quote my comment saying that I "argued that not wanting to raise a child is a medical condition"
When I said that a pregnant women has the option of adoption, just like a non pregnant woman does, you said that a non pregnant women can remove the unwanted child as quick as possible with an adoption, but the pregnant women can't do that if she gives birth to that unwanted child; therefore abortion is justified. An unwanted child is not a medical condition, especially since you compared it to a non pregnant woman who has an unwanted child.
and again where is the quote where I say that an unwanted child is a medical condition, what I said, and you are trying to misrepresent, is that pregnancy is a medical condition. I want you to actually produce my words that state that adoption is a medical condition.
You implied that abortion is a nessecary procedure if a woman wants to avoid raising a child. Where did you imply that? You said that adoption doesnt solve the problem as quickly as possible.
So I didn't actually say what you are stating I said, so yet again you try to put words into my mouth, its becoming a common theme with you, and neither did I imply "that abortion is a nessecary procedure if a woman wants to avoid raising a child", that is your misrepresentation. you can't quite seem to get it into your head that all pregnancies are a medical condition and as such any relief from that medical condition should be administered as quickly as possible .. just like it is for any other medical condition.
Except that Jewish people can be scientifically defined as alive, breathing, and having coherent thoughts. An unborn person, however, cannot be defined as having any of these characteristics save from when it's about to be born.
Can a person's right to life be overriden just so a medical condition can be administered as quickly as possible? No.
Begs the questions .. prove that a fetus has a right to life and prove that a fetus is a person. and yes a 'right to life' can be overridden so a medical condition can be treated, happens all the time when a pregnancy is a threat to a woman's life.
