Probably true. We like to focus on the rosy outcomes. But, there is no real way to look at a fetus and decide the future of the pregnancy. Late term problems do arise. The analytic capabilities of doctors aren't perfect. Decisions on what viable means are far from black and white. Plus, it ignores all the health requirements of the woman who is pregnant, as if her life and health is of little concern.
Plus aftercare. Have republicans put forth any of the following Paid maternity leave Free maternity care including post natal care Child support Subsidised child care Free medical coverage for say under five year olds
Especially in the cases of non viable foetus it is very much about what the individual woman can deal with. Some women will want the pregnancy ended soon after definitive diagnosis some will carry to term.
This is ABSOLUTLEY the case. When pregnant women get cancer (or other serious issue), many will chose to forgo treatment even if it means they are unlikely to survive. Others will choose treatment, thus allowing for building a family later. These are ALL incredibly personal decisions that government has NO BUSINESS deciding by a bunch of old white males who claim to be Christian when they don't even have ANY idea of the specific cases. Plus, these laws open the way for aggressive prosecutors to go after the licenses of doctors.
Unfortunately very oftentimes in these situations where young girls have had something done to them, the problem is not discovered by adults until after the girl is well along into the pregnancy. By that point, the fetus definitely has a mind.
So does the girl...and she has a body..... both of which need protection and care. The fetus has a lot of things but that doesn't include rights.
So, now we have "mind" as your personal name for "ensoulment"? "Something done to them"??? Over and over, your statements totally ignore the health of the woman - or young girl in this case.
Something strikes me as wrong about castration, how about we compromise on the death penalty? I'm even prepared to let the convicted pick the method.
I find it very ironic that we're talking about the death penalty to people who do bad things to the very young, when we're in a thread about abortion! So if you do something bad to a young human being outside the womb, for the sake of sex, it's indisputably horrendous and no one disagrees with that. But if you do something bad to a young human being inside the womb, for the sake of exercising your 'sexual freedom', then it's seen as totally acceptable and defended. Sure a man did something horrible to that little girl, but what about what they're doing to the fetus inside her? Do two wrongs make a right? Are we as a society any better than that man if we do not stand up for the rights of the young and innocent? I know that pregnancy in a young girl can be unimaginable, but oftentimes these pregnancies are not discovered until LATE into the pregnancy. By that time it's not just a little fetus in there. Sometimes in these cases doctors (at least the ones who err a little more on the pro-life side) will let the baby gestate just a little longer to give it a fighting chance for survival, and will induce the pregnancy earlier, so the young mother doesn't have to go through with the pregnancy to full term. The baby gets born very premature, but is taken out before there is more strain on the mother's body.
Oh! Where do I start? Mind you I might link to this post on the other thread as I am sure the other members who have been astonished at the “ethical standards” posted will be similarly impressed by this. This is so far from the truth and as near as I can tell based on one case in Argentina
WHAT TF! What are you talking about? Aborting a fetus has nothing to do with "sexual freedom".... The fetus is not A human being...it is human but has NO rights, is not a legal person. YES, the woman has rights....even if that doesn't please you AND Some of your fellow Anti-Choicers believe killing a fetus due to rape is totally acceptable.. Sure the man did something to that little girl so why should SHE be punished???? ANSWER THAT....why should a rape victim be punished?? Are you FOR "two wrongs making a right " in that case? We do....we punish pedophiles severly....for harming the young and innocent...which SOME want to do by forcing the young and innocent to gestate and have a baby!!!!! YES, it is STILL a fetus... Give examples....and NOT from LIENEWS...your favorite anti-woman site and if a doctor's political leanings enter into his standard of care he/she is a quack and should lose their license.
Oh god, I feel like this post is going some crazy places. Sorry, but I just have to stop you there... No, no, no, no. A ZEF is not a "young human". Stop it. We are talking about a 10 year old (!!!!) here. Come on! What is the second wrong? You are an absolute monster. Do you even realise what it is that you are saying here? Are you insane? Who is the real "young and innocent" in this context, you monster? Again, a 10 year old. A 10 year old! You are not this crazy, no way. Please, tell me you are just trying to be edgy. I have to cut you there. One cannot add a "but" after that. Don't do it! "In there".. Dude.... Think of in where we are talking about. Do you even understand what a 10 year old is? This is a serious question because you seem to be unable to tell the difference between zygote and newborn, so I have to ask you this. I am genuinely disgusted by your position on abortion now. I mean, it was always bad, but this bad? Wow. Speechless.
Not only does he hate women, he also hates girls. Dude has some seeerious issues with the opposite sex. My God. His misogyny levels are taliban tier.
Oh, well, if there is no connection then a woman has no excuse when she chose to get pregnant, now does she? Want to backtrack on your argument now?
Pro-life jurisdictions will take her needs into account. You want abortion doctors to be required to report abortions done on little girls, correct? You know, to set off alarm bells in case she's being sexually abused.
Lmao, no they won't. The very implication of their stance is one that denies she has needs to be concerned about.
FoxHastings said: ↑ Aborting a fetus has nothing to do with "sexual freedom".. An "excuse" for what ????? Funny coming from one with no argument at all unless it has to do with Sci-fi or uh, birds...
What a TOTALLY BS assumption. Pro-life jurisdictions show NO concern for the healthcare of the woman. The lack of concern means that OB/GYN doctors can not do their jobs. We've seen cases where doctors can't risk aborting a DEAD fetus - because, it is an abortion. In fact, we're seeing promotion of vigilantism - giving the general public the right to search and sue doctors for profit - regardless of whether they have standing.
But they aren’t. This is why there are court cases now challenging these laws from women whose lives were put in danger because these laws delayed necessary care.
What about the men? You keep blaming women for pregnancy but giving men a free pass - takes two to tango
