Why would you want to force someone to have a kid? The sane person asks

Where does this premise come from? Natural occurrences shouldn't be "abused." What does that even mean? Something being natural has nothing to do with morality.

Um no, they want to have a medical procedure/medication to fix the problem. This problem occurs in married people too, you know.

Why 6-8 weeks? According to what? A pump beating?

Start with proving it's a human being at 6-8 weeks. It is actually impossible for it to be a being at that point in time since the brain is not sufficiently developed for even a rudimentary mental existence.

 

kids are a HORRIFIC expense for the first 20 years and as things now are, are more likely to be welfare recipients or criminals than any sort of productive person. Why should the mother be forced to raise a kid that she doesnt want, and why should the taxpayers pick up the tab? We can import ADULT MD's, nurses, dentists, engineers,already trained, and save about a milllion $ per person. Yes, the woman was stupid to not be using birth control, but that's no reason to tax everyone else for 20+ years.

 

Good argument for abortion to stay legal.

However, women are not stupid.

Birth control can, and does, fail and women are under no obligation to use it anyway.

 

No.

That is up to her, not you or I.

There are 3 times as many births as abortions in the USA. The human race is in no danger of going extinct. Some would say that is unfortunate.

I have no problem with it in my country, since taxes also pay for women to give birth.

 

"""Why would you want to force someone to have a kid? The sane person asks ""

May I reword your title?

Why would a sane person want to force someone to have a kid? Answer: They wouldn't.

 

I would counter with "why would you want to allow the wanton homicide of a defenseless child, asks the sane person"

AT the point that abortion is an option, that person already has a child.

- - - Updated - - -

You do realize that all forms of homicide have been around that long, not just abortion homicide. Does that justify allowing people to commit them at will?

 

Persons killing other persons at will leads to chaos in society so it needs to be curbed.......abortion doesn't cause chaos especially since it isn't a "person" being killed.

 

Homicide of a child is illegal.

Only if she's given birth.

"Abortion homicide" is an oxymoron.

 

That is pure nonsense. It is a person being killed, obviously. Otherwise why would there be a federal law protecting them against violence, the UVVA??????

- - - Updated - - -

Abortion homicide is a fact!
Birth is an arbitrary threshold with no support in fact.
Even abortions at will are not legal now up to birth! There is a child in utero cutoff age.....which is also arbitrary.

 

The UVVA does NOT deem the fetus a person, it does not do that. It does not "protect" anyone from violence.

The UVVA has to do with damage to the pregnant woman.

The UVVA has a clause that SPECIFICALLY says it has no bearing on, no connection to, no ruling over, abortion.
The UVVA cannot override RvW.


IF the fetus is deemed a "person" by anyone then it may have the rights of a person but also the restrictions OF PERSONS.

It cannot use another person's body to sustain it's life. You can't , I can't, it can't, no one can..,. ...and the only way a woman can defend herself from that is to kill the fetus......YOU have the right to defend yourself from harm but insist women don't have that right......why do you think you are so much more special than women??? Why do you think fetuses and you should have more rights than women???

 

You are COMPLETELY WRONG!!!!!
Direct quote from the law itself: https://www.congress.gov/108/plaws/publ212/PLAW-108publ212.pdf

"‘‘§ 1841. Protection of unborn children
‘‘(a)(1) Whoever engages in conduct that violates any of the provisions of law listed in subsection (b) and thereby causes the death of, or bodily injury (as defined in section 1365) to, a child, who is in utero at the time the conduct takes place, is guilty of a separate offense under this section."

"(C) If the person engaging in the conduct thereby intentionally kills or attempts to kill the unborn child, that person shall instead of being punished under subparagraph (A), be punished as provided under sections 1111, 1112, and 1113 of this title for intentionally killing or attempting to kill a human being."

What part of protection of unborn children don't you understand? Furthermore, what part of "child" equals "person" don't you understand?

NO MENTION OF DAMAGING A HOST WOMAN as the root of this action. There were already laws in place to protect her.

Quit spreading misinformation!

 

This is what I find interesting. For financially capable feminists, the access to abortion is the reflection of the idea of their inherent refusal to be effected by their sex. Meaning, that child birth shouldn't impinge on their equality. As if childlessness is the point at which they feel they've attained equity.

Similarly though, for those who cannot financially support their unwillingness to adequately prevent their impregnation, abortion becomes the after the fact prophylactic that protects society from the unwanted and the uncared for. More invasively though, it's a public policy advanced by modern feminism that advocates the Eugenics perspective of it's most vocal founder, ms Sanger. Her view was protect society from a flood of non white, poor white, or essentially children of under educated serfs who she couldn't fathom could ever be successful in this country.

Think about this. The number one cause of death within the AA community is abortion. It's a shocking comparison. This is the realization of the Sanger vision. How liberals can continue to advocate this is astonishing.

 

What part of UNBORN child don't you get ? An unborn child is NOT a child because it hasn't been born.

You can't stuff and roast an UNBORN CHICKEN, can you?


AND saying a fetus is a child is NOT MAKING IT A ""PERSON""!


YOU can't address : IF the fetus is deemed a "person" by anyone then it may have the rights of a person but also the restrictions OF PERSONS.

It cannot use another person's body to sustain it's life. You can't , I can't, it can't, no one can..,. ...and the only way a woman can defend herself from that is to kill the fetus......YOU have the right to defend yourself from harm but insist women don't have that right......why do you think you are so much more special than women??? Why do you think fetuses and you should have more rights than women???

 

What part of "killing a human being" don't you understand. WOW it amazes me that you cannot see that this law clearly recognizes that a child in utero is a human being, therefore any killing of said child is a homicide.

Oh well, all sane people see it.

Children, in utero or not, should have more rights than the woman because they are defenseless voiceless powerless, and our society used to want to help such people (spare me the manure that a child is not a person, that is laughable).

 

A "child" IS a person....where have I said otherwise? NO where.


So you believe some person could force you to give them a kidney or your heart and you would have no say in it? Oh, I bet you'd have a say THEN, if it was YOU..

But you don't want women to have that right.....


You: """ and our society used to want to help such people """

YUP, and now Repubs whine and scream about their taxes going to help the poor CHIILDREN on Welfare.....which there will be more of if abortion is not an option.



So you think if a fetus is called a "kid" then when it's born it will be a goat? Or if it's called a toddler it won't be born until it's two years old ? Really? The fetus, according to you, is whatever you call it?

 

Okay, let's say that you're right and now women are forced to give birth. (Sane people know this can never be accomplished, but lets pretend women couldn't find a way to circumvent the law.)

What do we do with all these unwanted children? We don't have loving homes for the thousands we have now and you want to add millions more! What's your plan?

 

IF the fetus was a PERSON with rights they wouldn't NEED the UVVA...... You're welcome.

 

Prove it.

Prove it.

They are legal at any stage in my country. And even in some of your states.

 

Sanger was ANTI ABORTION. She was on YOUR side of the issue.

I am conservative and pro choice.

Not sure what Alcoholics Anonymous has to do with abortion.

 

Many women feel it is far less trouble to abort than to maintain a forced pregnancy and give birth, facing all sorts of medical complications.

 

Yes. An unborn has some rights just not the rights of a person. That said, the mother can abort (KILL) the fetus if she wants to and it is not murder. IT is homicide... but so what? So is self defense.

 

I don't want to force anyone to have a kid. Maybe promiscuous women should learn to hold a penny between their knees if they don't want one.

 

Abortion controls birth. It is birth control.

There is also this thing called the word "yes!... YES! YES! YES!" and if a pregnancy occurs the woman simply goes to the doctor and has an abortion, goes and meets her friends for a steak dinner and goes on with her life.

- - - Updated - - -

What do promiscuous men do when they don't want one? Any clever analogies?

- - - Updated - - -

1. Irrelevant.

2. Relevance?

- - - Updated - - -

You are pro-choice... you just choose life.

 

No offense... but that is one of the most stupid things I have heard on this subject.

Abortion deletes a work unit that creates a loss for the nation.

 

Back up your statement and prove only promiscuous women have abortions.

Did you know it only takes one act of intercourse to get pregnant? You didn't know that!!!??

You didn't know holding a penny between her knees can't stop penetration? You didn't know that?!


You didn't know that telling women to hold a penny between their knees ( or an aspirin like some yokel Repub once said) hasn't worked for the thousands of years abortion has been around? You didn't know that !!??


What's your advice for MEN who get women pregnant when they don't want to be ?