How To Finally Resolve the Abortion Debate

I think a unborn child is a child no matter what stage of life it is in. And it is murder if it is killed.
I also think it is not on the young of this world but the blame is on the generations past. I feel for our mixed up youth.

 

So if it's 19 it's still a "child? If it's 65 it's still a child? At conception it's a child?

How bizarre...

How do "generations past" force others to have abortions???

 

Now as bizarre as you thinking he meant unborn 19/65 year-olds! Talk about a difficult pregnancy!

 

How do pregnancy tests render abortion laws unenforceable?

 

You are against abortion once the fetus is living, right?

 

People like me force women to have sex? Surely you can't be serious.

 

But a slave IS?

In response to me asking, "Is a slave forced to use their body to sustain the life of another", you responded by saying, "not in the way a pregnant woman..." NOW you are saying that salves and women are in "the identical position." How is this consistent?

Because we don't believe that the law applies to them in the same way that you don't! Nor do we (nor you) believe that the law applies to minors prior to them reaching juvenile age! This is a LUDICROUS and LAUGHABLE argument! :rofl:

In all other circumstances, that is correct, but I would make an exception for abortion.

 

@FoxHastings, how late in the term do you think women should have the right to choose?

 

Greatest risk of serious permanent injury or death? Surely you can't be serious.

No I'm not under the impression that this is the normal anti-choicer stance. Are you? Can you not answer the question?

 

Wow....you really are that ignorant aren't you?

 

WTF!

What do you mean by "once the fetus is living" ?


OH, that's right , you can NEVER answer questions only ask ….must not have any answers

 

The inconsistency is only in your mind.


Slaves had the right to their own bodies taken away, in other words they were owned and used like animals.
That is what will happen to women if abortion is banned, the right to their own bodies will be taken away, in other words they will be owned by the state and used like animals.
In that way they are alike.



Using another's physical body parts to sustain life is a separate issue that does seem too deep for some.

A fetus actually lives off the woman's body , is connected to it and needs the physical connection to sustain it's life.

Your "baker" is NOT asked to do that. HE is NOT being forced to give his circulatory system, his immune system or any part of his body to sustain the life of another.

NO one has the right to USE another's body to sustain their life.

Anti-Choicers want fetuses to have more rights than the woman they are in. Women can't force someone to give them a kidney if they need one to sustain their life...why should a fetus have that right?.

Speak for yourself.

Oh, I agree....you want the fetus to have more rights than anyone!!

Irrelevant to this issue.

Well "we" don't get to decide who gets punished for committing a crime and who doesn't.

There is NO reason to allow women to commit murder without being charged like every other murderer or aider and abetter…


It's ASSinine to call something murder but then say "Heck, it's OK, I don't care"

What would be the POINT of making abortion murder if there is no punishment....just want to spend more taxpayer money to make a law that won't be enforced? That would be a stupid waste of money.

 

I was referring to the fact that he thinks any human at any stage of life is a "baby"....actually making fun of that asinine idea..

 

You are free to show your proof that no women have ever been injured permanently nor died from pregnancy.....

 

FoxHastings said: ↑
What YOU are doing is what Anti-Choicers try to do...make themselves not look like they don't really hate women enough to take away their rights.

Make it look like they really care about the woman and don't want to punish them.

They want women to be able to commit murder without being punished so THEY look good....there is NO LOGIC nor REASON in that stance.

Anti-Choicers do not have a "normal" stance.

But that is their stance IF they claim women shouldn't be punished for breaking the law.

 

How does law enforcement know who is pregnant?

 

That's not what he said. He specifically referred to the "unborn"

I do enjoy our exchanges. If it makes you feel better, I also oppose unborn 65 year-olds!

 

His exact words: ""Guess Who said: ↑
I think a unborn child is a child no matter what stage of life it is in.""

 

Even if pregnancy tests didn't exist, wouldn't you still ask this question?

 

What does that mean?

And are you under the impression that MOST of them think that women shouldn't be punished for having an abortion if it was illegal?

 

When did I say that "no women have ever been injured permanently nor died from pregnancy?" Gee, talk about a straw man argument!

 

Absolutely!

But a slave IS "being forced to give his circulatory system, his immune system or any part of his body to sustain the life of another?"

Unborn lives do not require such a right in order to not deserve to be terminated.

Did I not talk about punishment for the illegal abortionist?

 

I mean the point at which Giftedone considers the fetus to have, what he refers to as, "significant brain function." "Living" was probably the wrong word to use.

What question of yours have I failed to answer exactly?

 

Well what the HELL were you trying to say exactly?

 

@FoxHastings, how late in the term do you think women should have the right to choose?