Roe Overturned?
-
If someone truly considers the fetus to be a human with rights then the rape and incest exception makes no sense.
wrote on 6 May 2022, 17:40 last edited by@jon-nyc said in Roe Overturned?:
If someone truly considers the fetus to be a human with rights then the rape and incest exception makes no sense.
Yes, obviously
OK, so why does this argument persist?
Because if you don't agree with the idea that abortion is OK in the case of rape or incest, then the liberal has clearance to scream and yell as much as they want.
If you do agree that abortion is OK in the case of rape or incest then a brief period of civil discourse might ensue.
At least that seems like it's practical effect to me.
-
@Jolly said in Roe Overturned?:
- The new baby does not have the same DNA as the mother. It is its own distinct person.
- If the baby can live outside of the womb, is it ethical to kill it inside of the womb? If not, the argument resolves to 23 weeks (youngest preemie to survive) for even the most ardent abortionist.
As medical science progresses, it is inevitable that the age of viability will lower. Abortionists are left with less and less ground to stand on...
The “viability” argument as presented today is problematic. If a “viable” preemie is truly “viable” then simply induce early labor or C-section any post-“viable” preemie from its unwilling (or unfit) host who is seeking an abortion then transfer the preemie’s custody to the state’s adoption agency and you’re done. But instead the anti-abortion crowd often choose to insist that the unwilling (or unfit) host of the fetuses to carry the fetuses to term. If you want to be realistic about this, if a preemie does not have a realistic alternative outside its original womb to survive, than it’s not really “viable”.
wrote on 6 May 2022, 17:43 last edited by@Axtremus said in Roe Overturned?:
@Jolly said in Roe Overturned?:
- The new baby does not have the same DNA as the mother. It is its own distinct person.
- If the baby can live outside of the womb, is it ethical to kill it inside of the womb? If not, the argument resolves to 23 weeks (youngest preemie to survive) for even the most ardent abortionist.
As medical science progresses, it is inevitable that the age of viability will lower. Abortionists are left with less and less ground to stand on...
The “viability” argument as presented today is problematic. If a “viable” preemie is truly “viable” then simply induce early labor or C-section any post-“viable” preemie from its unwilling (or unfit) host who is seeking an abortion then transfer the preemie’s custody to the state’s adoption agency and you’re done. But instead the anti-abortion crowd often choose to insist that the unwilling (or unfit) host of the fetuses to carry the fetuses to term. If you want to be realistic about this, if a preemie does not have a realistic alternative outside its original womb to survive, than it’s not really “viable”.
My body, my choice!
I laugh in your face, inducible boy!
-
wrote on 7 May 2022, 18:55 last edited by
-
wrote on 7 May 2022, 20:42 last edited by
-
wrote on 7 May 2022, 22:16 last edited by
@George-K said in Roe Overturned?:
One of the Senate's dimmest bulbs:
Best response:
Did anybody mention 20 years of child support?
-
wrote on 10 May 2022, 00:13 last edited by
On the basis of elements such as these, appellant and some amici argue that the woman’s right is absolute and that she is entitled to terminate her pregnancy at whatever time, in whatever way, and for whatever reason she alone chooses. With this we do not agree. . .
click to show -
wrote on 10 May 2022, 04:06 last edited by
Woke intersectionality.
-
wrote on 10 May 2022, 10:50 last edited by
My planet, my choice.
-
On the basis of elements such as these, appellant and some amici argue that the woman’s right is absolute and that she is entitled to terminate her pregnancy at whatever time, in whatever way, and for whatever reason she alone chooses. With this we do not agree. . .
click to show -
wrote on 10 May 2022, 11:28 last edited by
@jon-nyc said in Roe Overturned?:
@George-K I would have thought that was well known.
Somehow, it never gets mentioned in the absolutist discussion on abortion. Besides, it was just a bunch of unelected old white men, which also never gets mentioned.
-
wrote on 10 May 2022, 11:32 last edited by
TuCa & the Christians...
Link to videoWhile it's a bit over the top, there's a nugget of Truth in there...
-
wrote on 10 May 2022, 12:26 last edited by
-
wrote on 10 May 2022, 12:29 last edited by Jolly 5 Oct 2022, 12:29
Damn insurrectionist!
-
wrote on 10 May 2022, 12:35 last edited by
@Jolly said in Roe Overturned?:
Damn insurrectionist!
Nah. We have strict gun laws in Chicago. Fear not!
-
wrote on 10 May 2022, 15:02 last edited by
-
wrote on 10 May 2022, 18:10 last edited by
Nothing like balls and strikes...
-
TuCa & the Christians...
Link to videoWhile it's a bit over the top, there's a nugget of Truth in there...
wrote on 10 May 2022, 18:27 last edited by@Jolly said in Roe Overturned?:
TuCa & the Christians...
Link to videoWhile it's a bit over the top, there's a nugget of Truth in there...
To summarize; Modern Leftists hate Christianity not because it is oppressive, but because they are...
-
@Jolly said in Roe Overturned?:
TuCa & the Christians...
Link to videoWhile it's a bit over the top, there's a nugget of Truth in there...
To summarize; Modern Leftists hate Christianity not because it is oppressive, but because they are...
wrote on 10 May 2022, 19:05 last edited by@Jolly said in Roe Overturned?:
To summarize; Modern Leftists hate Christianity not because it is oppressive, but because they are...
But this is a Christian country.
-
wrote on 10 May 2022, 19:25 last edited by Copper 5 Oct 2022, 19:25
Total estimated abortions for 1965-2018
black, non-Hispanic: 18,700,000 (42% of current population)
Total US black population 2020 41.6 million
Without abortion add 50% to the black population
Don't the dems understand those are votes?
https://www.johnstonsarchive.net/policy/abortion/usa_abortion_by_race.html
-
wrote on 10 May 2022, 19:41 last edited by
The white overseers wouldn't be in charge.
