Texas 6-week abortion ban takes effect after Supreme Court inaction

Just be yourself..

 

If God wanted no dead babies, he wouldn't have "intelligently designed" a biosystem where two-thirds of conceived babies die before they attach themselves to the uterus. Nor the ones that die after attaching. Nor would God command abortion in cases of adultery, as he does in Numbers, nor any of the other Old Testament verses where God doesn't really seem to value the unborn very much.

The Bible doesn’t condemn abortion. Indeed, God ordered it himself. | Rick Snedeker (patheos.com)

The religious argument is illusory. The actual adherents of the Old Testament, the Jewish religion, see things much differently than modern Christians. Opinions vary, but the traditional view of Jewish law permits abortion in certain circumstances, but opposes it as an indiscriminate form of birth control. Where Jews differ from Christians widely is their view of the unborn from conception to birth. Jews believe the soul enters the body at birth, not conception. I'd give some links but there are many, easy to find.

Abortion is politics in the US, and I'm hoping the SCOTUS hasn't jumped on the political bandwagon. I have no hope for Thomas, but oddly enough, I have hope for Barrett.

 

Does that mean I'm pouring veal on my cereal?

 

And some are trying to return to that state. But they are mostly home schooled so they don't know woolly mammoths are long gone

 

They are living and will continue to live as long as they receive nourishment and NO 50 percent of babies at 24 are not going to die. Viable is another false arbitrary argument and pseudoscience . My thoughts are quite focused. Those are facts.

The Strange Pseudoscience of the Abortion-Rights Movement

....The argument for legal abortion prior to “viability,” for instance, rationalizes abortion before about 20 weeks’ gestation on the grounds that the unborn child’s lungs are insufficiently developed to allow for survival outside the womb. Therefore, on this view, that child can be killed prior to such development because it remains dependent on its mother. (Why this logic doesn’t allow for the killing of newborns or adults who are on ventilators typically remains unexplained.)

Philosophical justifications for abortion follow a similar pattern. In her famous 1973 essay arguing that abortion is morally acceptable, philosopher Mary Anne Warren asserted that it is wrong to kill persons, but that not all human beings count as persons. Under her criteria for personhood — consciousness and capacity to feel pain, an ability to reason, self-motivated activity, capacity to communicate, and self-awareness — unborn human beings do not count and therefore can be killed. (Critics have noted that Warren’s criteria exclude additional categories of human beings, too, not just the unborn.)

Many rationalizations for abortion are far less sophisticated. Take one, for example, that suggests that a fetus isn’t human until it is born — as if the birth canal magically confers humanity on an organism that, mere seconds earlier, possessed the exact same qualities as the crying newborn. This is the case for abortion at its most illogical..
https://www.nationalreview.com/2021...ent=featured-content-trending&utm_term=second

So stick with the science, the human life, the human being begins at birth, the baby. You are merely twisting in the wind trying to find some unscientific justification to kill it because the mother doesn't want to be pregnant for the next 9 months and give birth to it. And under any reasonable examination the shifting sands on which your position is based is exposed.

 

Saturday mornings are entertaining. Lol.

 

And an egg is a chicken.

Just last night the eggs in my fridge were clucking all night and keeping me awake.

 

RESULTS: Nearly 14% of adolescents reported a previous suicide attempt; disparities by gender identity in suicide attempts were found. Female to male adolescents reported the highest rate of attempted suicide (50.8%), followed by adolescents who identified as not exclusively male or female (41.8%), male to female adolescents (29.9%), questioning adolescents (27.9%), female adolescents (17.6%), and male adolescents (9.8%). Identifying as nonheterosexual exacerbated the risk for all adolescents except for those who did not exclusively identify as male or female (ie, nonbinary). For transgender adolescents, no other sociodemographic characteristic was associated with suicide attempts.

https://pediatrics.aappublications.org/content/142/4/e20174218

Specifically, the new factsheet shows that over half (54%) of multiracial respondents reported having attempted suicide, compared to 41% of all study respondents and 1.6% of the general U.S. population. Multiracial transgender and gender non-conforming people often live in extreme poverty, with 23% reporting a household income of less than $10,000/year. This is higher than the rate for transgender people of all races (15%), the general U.S. multiracial population rate (15%), and almost six times the general U.S. population rate (4%).

https://www.thetaskforce.org/attemp...y-three-times-higher-than-general-population/

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/27380151/

You're welcome.

 

Your tagline is fake news. CA's death rate is about 7/9ths of Florida, not 1/4th as your fake news tagline falsely asserts.

This despite Florida's aged 65 and older percentage of population being 50% higher than CA's. Normalized for age, Florida has the far superior record, which is why DeSantis in't being recalled, while Gov Hairgrease, who thanked his campaign manager and best friend by screwing his wife, is in a recall election.

 

Save the calf and use coconut milk.

 

If you have no idea what you are arguing about than the isn't much point.

 

She should have thought about that before she got pregnant.

 

you told me that viability isn't the subject to things like where you live and yes it is. That's the point

the point was that it can't be general because it's subject to things like where you live.

I wasn't cherry picking points I was making one.

 

I am not arguing. You keep telling me there is some disagreement, but when I ask you what the disagreement is about, you cannot explain it.

You are arguing for the sake of arguing.......

 

no they don't. If it was against the law for hospital to let someone die of cancer that wouldn't suddenly make it impossible for someone to die from cancer.

children up to a certain age can't live on their own thats not justification for killing them. And the man can make the choice of not to be put on a respirator.

 

No it can't

The baby has its own unique DNA.

 

funny how you brought that analogy up
do you know the endangered species act also protects egg laying endangered species eggs

 

So what's the point of making a post in the first place what's the point of any of your posts?

 

do those eggs have a heart beat?
most if not all eggs from the grocery store aren't fertilized

 

No a chicken egg is a chicken egg, the shell and the fluids and the nutrients in which there is a chicken ovum which for your store bought eggs is not fertile. You eat what was there to protect and allow a chicken to grow inside of it. A human ovum is a human ovum just as human sperm is a human sperm, both haploid cells. YOU started as a diploid cell and all the cells that make you up are diploid cells. Perhaps you will be curious enough to go look up the difference.

 

You might be able to buy some eggs that MAY have been fertilized by a rooster at a farmers market. Commercial egg producing hens never see a rooster.

Ever eat caviar? It's not fertile either. It ruins the flavor and texture.

Amazing these specious arguments the pro-abortion side comes up with.

 

I posted to share my take on the issue. My opinion is that government enforced bans & policing is not the solution to every problem. Texas disagrees with my view.

You started going on about some disagreement, which you have not been able to explain.

I have seen enough of your chicken dance, so I really don't give a flying rats ass about your claims, so forget about it.

 

So you say stick with science and then hang your hat on an opinion article written by a deeply Catholic writer that writes for a hard right conservative magazine. What's really funny/ironic is she writes about the same arguments that are put forth in this forum. The whole jist of her argument is the "twisting" of language and nothing to do with science. She can have her opinion but I could get probably hundreds of articles written by doctors and scientists that will disagree. Given that, you will simply dismiss the science and go with the MSM writer.
All your post proves is that there is no science, logic or anything that will change your mind.

 

Sorry, but I'm pretty sure you brought up that point. I pointed out that, sure, the medical care is different in the examples but the science of viability is the same. To show the flaw in your logic, you don't see "viability" rates between........let's say the Kentucky and third world countries. You have different mortality rates (which is the point you made) but not viability.

 

Nope
How do you think they can tell it's yours.