Alabama’s Draconian Abortion Ban Has Women On Twitter Ready To Fight

Of course not, so what? The placenta still keeps the baby separate from the mother.

 

Separate. So nothing that occurs in the fetus' health can impact the mother. She is separate.

 

I'm stipulating the "attachment." Will you stipulate that it bears an eerie resemblance to a human baby?

That it feels pain?

 

And I'm explaining why it makes no intellectual sense. Can you defend how it DOES make intellectual sense, or do you just blindly accept the Roe v Wade decision?

 

No, she won't.

 

Thank you for this

For anyone else, see post # 4 in this thread:
http://www.politicalforum.com/index...n-instead-of-abortion.551685/#post-1070283738

 

Isn't the state involved in the abortion being made available?

 

What do you mean? The state makes nothing available.

 

Of course it does! Abortion is a medical procedure under the state's health system.

 

Too bad you don't!

 

What health system?

https://dpeaflcio.org/programs-publ...lth-care-system-an-international-perspective/

 

Of each state.

 

Medicaid is available to poor women through their state. There are many programs that will offer free or very low cost healthcare with the particular needs of women in mind. The abortion pill is generally around $400. That's expensive to the poor, but there are avenues that will pay all or some of that. At issue is all of the propaganda out there attempting to convince folks that it is not a matter of an industry created to make some wealthy with the guise of care for frightened women.

 

FoxHastings said: ↑
Well, I have. Hang around an abortion thread long enough and you would see it, too. Just because you haven't seen it doesn't mean it never happened.


NO, fetal viability is not changing, it's still 21-28 weeks.

Gestation is not getting shorter.

Yes, a fetus as young as 21 weeks survived but that was with extraordinary means ( and great expense)


Back to my point, granting rights to a fetus is not a matter of location and the fetus , contrary to what some Anti-Choicers say, is attached to the woman it's in.


Oh, DO read posts 640 and 641...

What ? You are "stipulating" the attachment ?

Uh, ya, a human fetus , at some , point , resembles a human baby...Why TF wouldn't it?????

You think that resemblance is eerie? Why would it be??? Uh, it will be a human baby eventually , why wouldn't it resemble one??



Yes, a human fetus feels pain, at some point , but NOT starting at conception...


Funny you didn't address the post of mine you quoted..

 

An unborn child with a heartbeat is more than a sperm or an egg

 

The only arguement liberals have left seems to involve sperm and eggs and zygotes

But that only seeks to avoid the scientic fact that unborn babies are human beings and liberals want to ill up to 9 months and beyond

 

Yes, I am stipulating that the fetus is attached to the mother. That's what you were demanding. Don't you know your own arguments?

And no. Eery resemblance is an ironic expression meant to defeat a ridiculous contrary assertion. It would be eerie to anyone believing that it's something different from a baby. I don't mean the 1 hour-old zygote, I mean the baby at 8 months.

Look at it:

https://images.app.goo.gl/6F87985Bse5UEmM2A

If you can't bring yourself to call that a baby, then it's due to some aversion to reality.

 

The founders could have written the 2/3 clause for new laws into the Constitution

But they chose not to

 

FoxHastings said: ↑
Well, I have. Hang around an abortion thread long enough and you would see it, too. Just because you haven't seen it doesn't mean it never happened.


NO, fetal viability is not changing, it's still 21-28 weeks.

Gestation is not getting shorter.

Yes, a fetus as young as 21 weeks survived but that was with extraordinary means ( and great expense)


Back to my point, granting rights to a fetus is not a matter of location and the fetus , contrary to what some Anti-Choicers say, is attached to the woman it's in.


Oh, DO read posts 640 and 641...

So you couldn't address my post and now have entered the meaningless world of """You have to call humans "baby" no matter what stage in life they are at/I hate science"".."""...too funny..

Did you know some ANIMAL embryos resemble human embryos....so they must be human babies???

 

I disagree

 

The scientific fact is that unborn vhildren are innocent human beings

 

Then how did it start out?

 

So?

 

Now you engage in another fallacy. Since you are not able to prove your claim - you try to put the onus on others to disprove your claim - as if someone not disproving your claim makes your claim true. This is fallacious nonsense.

The post you are responding to made the claim "experts disagree" and this claim is easily proven. If you want to claim otherwise - as you have done - it is up to you to prove your claim (that a zygote is a living human) -and you have not done so.

 

There is so such thing as an unborn child.