It's obvious Abortion is wrong

In other words you, like all people, realise that human life only has as much value as another person places upon it ie there is no right to life and by your own words you attribute various levels to people .. no different to what a female seeking an abortion does, the difference is you choose to attempt to force your 'values' onto all others by legal means.

Again you are showing that you do not actually follow the 'right to life' dogma, you again openly admit that you place different values onto different people ... Would you be glad if I enforced justice against religious / homophobic / anti-abortion people because in my opinion the US laws are inadequate?

Absolute rubbish, this harks to the myth of PP being a racist organisation .. which is pure BS. When you can show that there is an effort to push abortion onto ethnic people above and beyond that of white people then you might have a point, until then your assertion is pure fantasy.

Actually vigilante suits pro-lifers very well - "a self-appointed doer of justice" - usually based on their unproven worship of one of the many 'gods'

- - - Updated - - -

Any fool should be able to see that, by the most, pro-lifers are ignorant of law, biology and many other things ... tell me are you lower than a fool?

 

Well, you ran away again ...but will you come back in a few weeks and burble something about Mexicans to prove that abortion is bad or will you address those posters who have proved you wrong???

 

Anyone who falls under the jurisdiction of the Law of the Land is entitled to individual rights with the only exceptions being those rights that belong exclusively to citizens such as voting and jury duty.

So no, you cannot treat anyone "like dirt" in this nation even if they are an illegal alien.

 

It is you who has no argument evidenced by the fact that you turn yellow and run away from debating me.

You keep repeating the same old things that have been blown apart before, it is like an obsession you have that if you keep repeating the same BS it will somehow become reality.

 

You claim to have a position regarding the person-hood of the zygote/embryo/fetus and I invited you earlier to provide links to those posts that explain your argument, but you spent more time claiming I am misrepresenting your position than you spent actually supporting your position.

Here are the posts I found that appear to represent your position on the issue. If I have missed one that you believe to be more significant, by all means link it along with your response.

I point out (again) that other entities (without person-hood) may have homo sapiens DNA (e.g. a living body with no functional brain tissue and an egg which has not yet been fertilized). I specifically gave the example of Terri Schaivo whose living body could not have been starved to death legally if it had still been considered a person.
I point out (again) that other entities (who might reasonably be considered to have person-hood) may NOT have exact homo sapiens DNA (e.g. homo habilis and relatives, persons with mutated DNA, aliens from another planet, gorillas).

I point out (again) that this argument is based on the false premise that potential==actual. You are, in effect, claiming that a zygote may eventually BECOME a person so we must treat it as if it is ALREADY a person. That is a false premise. Otherwise, pro-choice advocates could legitimately point out a zygote will certainly BECOME dead at some point, so we can treat it as if it is ALREADY dead (so there is no reason to restrict abortion).

You can certainly not prove person-hood begins at fertilization, but science can tell us when a human body has the first opportunity to operate as an actual person (and that is at birth).

It is possible that I missed your most significant post, so I invite you (again) to respond with a link to a more complete explanation and defend your position.

 

. . . . This ignores the Fetus being a completed human and science told us long ago the birth variable can be as short as 24-weeks after conception and recently occurred at 19/20-weeks. The "birthday" is a moving target. BORN is a figure of speech encouraged used by Eleanor Roosevelt in 1948.

. . . . Science tells us when the human Fetus is complete and this fact can be tested for but not conclusively in a noninvasive way. This occurs from 8 to 14-weeks and can be inconclusively tested for requiring only a stethoscope. Humans can be assumed to "consent" to continue living or continue producing heartbeats even if unconscious. Humans generally continue to "consent" to living until very near the end of life. Terminal Humans often desire to die with dignity. Still; There is little dignity in death unless all close loved ones agree.

. . . . Rushing to the hospital when labor starts for an abortion of gestation could be done according to the Democratic Platform today as long as this was done safely. Wrapping the newborn baby in cling wrap before cutting the umbilical cord is the easiest and safest way to abort gestation and avoid the breath of life. It could still be done like being done now with a fatal injection to the beating heart before birth.

. . . .The female right to abort gestation is equivalent to the right to abandon an infant without consequence. This is allowed in every U.S. State today. PP avoids the 20-44 week fetal livability fact today by injecting the Fetus with poison in case the Fetus survives an abortion of gestation.

 

The fetus is not a completed human until gestation is complete. The external aspects of the body may appear to be complete at 21 weeks, and in a few cases the lungs and heart of a premature newborn at that stage have been adequately formed to allow survival (with external assistance). That speaks to POTENTIAL viability, but does not guarantee that every fetus (at 21 weeks after pregnancy) is viable, nor does it prove that any fetus at 21 weeks has become a person.

The process of birth inflicts profound changes on the fetus. Natural sedatives are eliminated from the blood and oxygen level increases with the first "breath of life." This activates the brain which (after a normal gestation period) should be sufficiently developed to begin incorporating and processing experience (a vital part of person-hood). In cases of premature delivery (e.g. the premature newborn at 21 weeks) the brain is activated while the brain is still incomplete (neuronal integration may not even be started yet). However, in the case of a premature birth of a viable human body, the circumstances are different from those of a fetus:
(1) the brain of the premature newborn is activated by birth (even if it is not yet able to process its experiences).
(2) the premature newborn is no longer trespassing on a potentially unwilling host.
I would argue that we should give the premature newborn the benefit of the doubt (since we do not know exactly when its brain will begin incorporating and processing experience).

The problem with having lawmakers set restrictions on abortion is that they place those restrictions on the women who are most likely to need an abortion to deal with a medical emergency. If a woman has an unwanted pregnancy, she will try to get an abortion as early as possible. Certainly if she is as selfish as the right-wing would like to portray her, she is not going to wait until the last few weeks of gestation to get an abortion. Those are women who want a child, but discover that there is a problem with her health or the health of the fetus. Ireland imposed strict limits on abortion and killed Savita Halappanavar with them because it enabled the hospital staff to ignore her infection to protect the life of the fetus. Perhaps you would like to pretend Savita Halappanavar was some liberal girl who just wanted an abortion for convenience, but she (like most women who carry a pregnancy to the final months) wanted a baby until she found herself in severe pain with a fever. She and her husband knew that the wisest course of action was to get an abortion and try again when she was in better health. The anti-abortion, anti-choice, hospital staff ignored her condition so they would not have to authorize an abortion and that killed both the mother (an actual person) and the fetus (a potential person).

If a human fetus was complete at 21 weeks, human gestation would automatically terminate at 21 weeks (for a normal birth). The fact that normal human gestation terminates at 9 months is evidence that the human body and brain are incomplete prior to the typical gestation period.

 

When ya start out with Eleanor Roosevelt deciding what born means ya know it's all down hill after that and it was...what utter blarney.......what a ridiculous post.....""a fetus is complete at 8 weeks" Ya, it's a complete FETUS.....but it's not viable outside the woman...




Do please show some FACTS for a BIG CHANGE and prove the following happens:


"" Rushing to the hospital when labor starts for an abortion of gestation could be done according to the Democratic Platform today as long as this was done safely."""""

( WHY would a normal mentally healthy woman do that, answer the question, WHY?)

""" Wrapping the newborn baby in cling wrap before cutting the umbilical cord is the easiest and safest way to abort gestation and avoid the breath of life. It could still be done like being done now with a fatal injection to the beating heart before birth. """

- - - Updated - - -

Good post but can YOU explain what Eleanor Roosevelt has to do with it ??

 

All completely irrelevant until the right to self-defence and the equal protection clause are over turned and struck from law, because nothing you have written above explains how to over come those constitutional rights.

 

This is just a guess, but it might be a reference to Eleanor Roosevelt's participation in developing the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. Article 1 says "All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights. They are endowed with reason and conscience and should act towards one another in a spirit of brotherhood"
(making it clear that we attain these rights at birth).

The fact that so many people from so many different nations agree with this statement (without objecting to the "born free and equal" terminology) suggests that those who want to assign these rights to the fetus are in the extreme minority.

 

Show facts/stats/proof that the following would happen and why you think it would:

""" Rushing to the hospital when labor starts for an abortion of gestation could be done according to the Democratic Platform today as long as this was done safely. Wrapping the newborn baby in cling wrap before cutting the umbilical cord is the easiest and safest way to abort gestation and avoid the breath of life."""""

 

"" Rushing to the hospital when labor starts for an abortion of gestation could be done according to the Democratic Platform today as long as this was done safely."""""

WHY would a normal mentally healthy woman abort gestation?

When a person is defined as an entire Fetal human nourished by a placenta and detectable heartbeat; The Fetus has the same right to self-defence and equal protection as the host female.

No; This clearly reveals people reading the UDHR did and still do not consider gestation when using the word born in the least. "Born-again" Christians understand figurative use of the verb "born". I have not yet come across any specific reference to gestation or abortion of it in the UDHR drafting notes. (thousands of missing pages) I will read them all but this may take days.

To the common human Article #1 means human rights are only recognized and are not granted by anyone or depend on anything. These human rights apply not only after humans are physically born but exist when a complete Fetus exists.



http://research.un.org/en/undhr/draftingcommittee/1
http://research.un.org/en/undhr/draftingcommittee/2

 

Normal mentally healthy women do NOT "enjoy" 8-9 months of pregnancy just to have the "fun " of an abortion..AND YOU HAVENEVER PROVEN THEY DO.

Yes, normal mentally healthy women have abortions as they have done for thousands of years....and will continue to do so despite the hysterical ravings of those bent on destroying women's rights.



YOU: """The Fetus has the same right to self-defence and equal protection as the host female.""

Not according to YOU. According to you the fetus has MORE rights than women with NONE of the restrictions everyone else has....

The fetus is the attacker, therefore the person it's attacking has the right to defend themselves. But since reason and logic and common sense prevail over lunatic rantings, the fetus is NOT a person so self defense does not enter into the equation...

 

The desire to preserve the wholly ignorant claim of absolute "free-will" and absolute "consent" after 12-weeks all the way till 43-weeks pass is not proper.

. . . . .Having an elective abortion of gestation is proof of mental defects or mental deficits like depression, or addictions. I respect women's fundamental right to elective abortions of gestation for ANY reason at all or no reason at all;- FOR A TIME. The absolutely fundamental right to elective abortions of gestation should exist for 11weeks in my opinion.

EXACTLY AS I STATED!!!

See above.

. . . . The Fetus is the FIRST point in gestation where the spermatozoa and Ovum have joined and become a zygote, blastocyst and then an embryo and have finished being parasitic.

. . . . The Fetus has become a complete new person. This new person is the result of a man and woman agreeing to potentially procreate. This speculative agreement has matured and is now a waiver of "consent" by the female to the Fetus to continue life-support till birth.

. . . . This waiver of "consent" should remain, but be weighed against the health of the female where the health of the female and Fetus on life-support are considered individually. The Fetus is not an attacker like the zygote, blastocyst and embryo were but is a new human on umbilical life-support the female has authorized over 11-weeks.

. . . . The prior "consent" may still be withdrawn per Clinton and the Democratic Platform pp(26,36,46) but this should require consideration by the State. The Statute Arkansas Act 301 required only this and will be U.S. law by 2024.

 

Your position is based on the flimsy premise that all of these intelligent people who contributed, reviewed, and approved the UDHR were wrong about human rights being conferred at birth. Let's not forget that even in 1868 the Fourteenth Amendment was written, reviewed, and approved with the assertion that "All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside." This concept of rights beginning at birth did not start with Eleanor Roosevelt.

Furthermore, I believe nature disputes your analysis that the human fetus is complete at 10 or 20 weeks. If the human fetus is complete at 20 weeks, why does normal human gestation require approximately 9 months?

Finally, we all have opinions on this subject but a lot of very intelligent people participated in the Fourteenth Amendment and the UDHR (which provides an authoritative position statement). By what authority do you claim that human rights apply to the human body before it is physically born?

 

Because they don;t want to raise a child. Will you offer to raise the child for them? And how many would you like?

 

A woman's choice to abort is protected by the Constitutional right to privacy. Put another way, it is none of your business why she chooses as she does.

 

I completely agree until the twelfth week of gestation. After 12-weeks in AR; the Fetus is protected by the State. There is a void injunction in Eastern District of AR, which will be ignored as if this FIAT had never been done. There is a fundamental right to control gestation for 11-weeks but then the dignity of the Fetus must be weighed against the dignity of the host female.

 

This is still an arbitrary time restriction, as gestation is far from complete at 11 weeks.

 

I would not desire to raise another child. The State of AR will gladly take custody of any unwanted child.
The same is available in every other State. The personal privacy right continues till the 12th week and then is subject to being balanced against the dignity of the Fetus.

 

Normal mentally healthy women do NOT "enjoy" 8-9 months of pregnancy just to have the "fun " of an abortion..AND YOU HAVE NEVER PROVEN THEY DO.


Yes, normal mentally healthy women have abortions as they have done for thousands of years....and will continue to do so despite the hysterical ravings and mental instability of those bent on destroying women's rights.


Every word I posted holds true and you have never given any proof that anything you posted is true.


Women have every right to withdraw consent ( JUST AS YOU DO) to another causing her harm. YOU wish to take that right away from women.

 

- result of rape or incest
- fetal defect
- none of your damned business
- etc.

 

http://www.arkleg.state.ar.us/assembly/2013/2013R/Acts/Act301.pdf
After 11-weeks organ genesis is complete and the placenta has begun production of progesterone.

 

Fine then have it surgically removed if the woman doesn't want it and it should be just fine...right? You just said it's complete ....