20 week Abortion act Passes House of Reps.

[Chuz Life]

Nice to hear from compassionate fascists.

Yeah, you're the ones wanting to control every aspect of women's reproductive health, but we're the fascists. LOL.

Another lie. All I want people to do is stop killing babies for no reason other than they were irresponsible.

A zygote is not a baby .

And spare us the moral lecture from the pro death penalty crowd .

If you want to claim that a person, human being, child or baby in the zygote stage of their life is anything other than what they are?

The ignorance is on you.

Furthermore, your ignorance has already been defeated by the more than 30 fetal homicide laws already on the books which legally DEFINE a "child in the womb" AS a child and as a human being in ANY stage of development.

I may have erred in including you with the name callers, and if I did, I'm sorry.

But the homicide laws do not have anything to do with abortion, with must balance competing interests of women and potential life. Abortion is an issue without a definitive answer. It is unfortunate that those on the extreme right oppose using non-invasive early term interventions that do not do any violence to anything remotely resembling a human being.

Biologists see with more than only their eyes.

There is not doubt that a child's life begins at conception and there is no doubt that it is the child / offspring of the parents who created it. . . Even in the zygote stage of their development.

 

[Borillar]

And they need to give birth quietly and without medical care paid for by others.

Nice to hear from compassionate fascists.

Yeah, you're the ones wanting to control every aspect of women's reproductive health, but we're the fascists. LOL.

Another lie. All I want people to do is stop killing babies for no reason other than they were irresponsible.

Nobody is killing "babies". They are terminating pregnancies, at which point, it is a fetus. As for responsibility, they ARE taking responsibility in not bringing another unwanted person into being. They may be unable to care for it or unfit to care for it. The fetus may have serious birth defects that the prospective parents are unequipped to deal with. We just want the choice to be left to the prospective parents and their doctor. You apparently think that children belong to the state, or at least think the state should be the final arbiter of human reproduction.

Again, your denials have already been defeated. Your side lost. Our fetal homicide laws already define and recognize "children in the womb" in ANY STAGE of development as human beings.

Now, you can gripe, complain, both and moan about it all you might want to. ... but unless and until you convince lawmakers to change that definition, you can rest assured that prolifers and antiaborts like me are going to USE that definition to further challenge Roe.

Rotsa ruck. All these fetal homicide laws exclude abortion. What is your end game anyway? Are you going to put women in jail for getting an abortion? Death penalty? If a woman travels to another state where abortion is legal, will she be persecuted when she comes home? If a woman has a miscarriage, will she have to prove somehow that she isn't to blame? Will you demand that employers provide maternity leave? Will you ensure that poor women have access to prenatal treatment? Would you force a prepubescent girl to go through a full term pregnancy? Jail for smoking a cigarette while pregnant? For having an alcoholic beverage? Maternity police going around making sure pregnant women are in compliance? And what are you going to do once the precious, wonderful fetuses are born and turn into societal leeches and parasites?

 

[Coyote]

Aren't you pro death penalty .

Yes, as some crimes are so heinous that death is the only suitable just response.

It is because human life is so sacred that murder must be balanced with the execution of the murderer.

Yet many innocent people end up on death row.

While we would like to think that we can punish people with 100% accuracy, we truly cannot.

Punishing the innocent along with the guilty is a trade off that societies have accepted to varying degrees for millenia.

Is he trade off worth it though? All I can do is imagine, what it must e like for an innocent person to know they are going to die for a crime they did not commit

 

[JimBowie1958]

Punishing the innocent along with the guilty is a trade off that societies have accepted to varying degrees for millenia.

Is he trade off worth it though? All I can do is imagine, what it must e like for an innocent person to know they are going to die for a crime they did not commit

One would think that if it is generally thought that a convicted person is innocent that the authorities would move heaven and earth to get them out of prison, but doesnt really work that way.

That troubles me more than anything else, when the authorities are pretty damned sure that they are sending an innocent person to prison and they do it anyway.

 

[Coyote]

I cannot accept the killing of an innocent sentient person for any reason. I admit that my position is internally inconsistent with abortion. This is omething I will need to work out.

Can those of you who support the death penalty and oppose abortion say as much?

 

[Coyote]

Punishing the innocent along with the guilty is a trade off that societies have accepted to varying degrees for millenia.

Is he trade off worth it though? All I can do is imagine, what it must e like for an innocent person to know they are going to die for a crime they did not commit

One would think that if it is generally thought that a convicted person is innocent that the authorities would move heaven and earth to get them out of prison, but doesnt really work that way.

That troubles me more than anything else, when the authorities are pretty damned sure that they are sending an innocent person to prison and they do it anyway.

You are a good man Jim

 

[Gracie]

I wish other people would stay the hell out of an individual's uterus.

 

[JimBowie1958]

I wish other people would stay the hell out of an individual's uterus.

Yes, it is a very tight fit after all.

 

[Chuz Life]

I cannot accept the killing of an innocent sentient person for any reason. I admit that my position is internally inconsistent with abortion. This is omething I will need to work out.

Can those of you who support the death penalty and oppose abortion say as much?

Absolutely.

 

[Chuz Life]

I wish other people would stay the hell out of an individual's uterus.

You say that but I bet you also claim that a child's right to the equal protections of our laws should begin when their life does.

So. . .

 

[Nosmo King]

Obama must be completely bummed...

And Tim Murphy (r), Pennsylvania is chagrined.

 

[Coyote]

I cannot accept the killing of an innocent sentient person for any reason. I admit that my position is internally inconsistent with abortion. This is omething I will need to work out.

Can those of you who support the death penalty and oppose abortion say as much?

Absolutely.

How can you support the death penalty knowing innocent people are executed?

 

[Montrovant]

I cannot accept the killing of an innocent sentient person for any reason. I admit that my position is internally inconsistent with abortion. This is omething I will need to work out.

Can those of you who support the death penalty and oppose abortion say as much?

I disagree. Your position is only inconsistent if you support abortion after the fetus develops sentience (which depends on how you are defining the word).

 

[Lumpy 1]

I cannot accept the killing of an innocent sentient person for any reason. I admit that my position is internally inconsistent with abortion. This is omething I will need to work out.

Can those of you who support the death penalty and oppose abortion say as much?

Yup, those free thinking criminal unborn, you gotta watch out for um. ..

 

[Lumpy 1]

I cannot accept the killing of an innocent sentient person for any reason. I admit that my position is internally inconsistent with abortion. This is omething I will need to work out.

Can those of you who support the death penalty and oppose abortion say as much?

Absolutely.

How can you support the death penalty knowing innocent people are executed?

.. as long as it's not me I feel okay about it, considering the astronomical odds.

 

[Chuz Life]

I cannot accept the killing of an innocent sentient person for any reason. I admit that my position is internally inconsistent with abortion. This is omething I will need to work out.

Can those of you who support the death penalty and oppose abortion say as much?

Absolutely.

How can you support the death penalty knowing innocent people are executed?

By not mixing apples and oranges. That's how. The Constitutionality of the death penalty is one issue and the implementation and accountability of those States and individuals who utilize it is another.

 

[Chuz Life]

Nice to hear from compassionate fascists.

Yeah, you're the ones wanting to control every aspect of women's reproductive health, but we're the fascists. LOL.

Another lie. All I want people to do is stop killing babies for no reason other than they were irresponsible.

Nobody is killing "babies". They are terminating pregnancies, at which point, it is a fetus. As for responsibility, they ARE taking responsibility in not bringing another unwanted person into being. They may be unable to care for it or unfit to care for it. The fetus may have serious birth defects that the prospective parents are unequipped to deal with. We just want the choice to be left to the prospective parents and their doctor. You apparently think that children belong to the state, or at least think the state should be the final arbiter of human reproduction.

Again, your denials have already been defeated. Your side lost. Our fetal homicide laws already define and recognize "children in the womb" in ANY STAGE of development as human beings.

Now, you can gripe, complain, both and moan about it all you might want to. ... but unless and until you convince lawmakers to change that definition, you can rest assured that prolifers and antiaborts like me are going to USE that definition to further challenge Roe.

Rotsa ruck. All these fetal homicide laws exclude abortion. What is your end game anyway? Are you going to put women in jail for getting an abortion? Death penalty? If a woman travels to another state where abortion is legal, will she be persecuted when she comes home? If a woman has a miscarriage, will she have to prove somehow that she isn't to blame? Will you demand that employers provide maternity leave? Will you ensure that poor women have access to prenatal treatment? Would you force a prepubescent girl to go through a full term pregnancy? Jail for smoking a cigarette while pregnant? For having an alcoholic beverage? Maternity police going around making sure pregnant women are in compliance? And what are you going to do once the precious, wonderful fetuses are born and turn into societal leeches and parasites?

Let's make a deal.


I will gladly answer all those question if you will publically accept and agree that a child's life begins at and by conception and when you also agree that legalized abortion on demand violates the Constitutional rights of those aborted.

 

[Chuz Life]

A zygote is not a baby .
And spare us the moral lecture from the pro death penalty crowd .

"Jews are not human." <- prominent socialists in Europe 80 years ago."
"Kulaks are not human." <- prominent socialists in Europe 80 years ago.

Why do leftists seem to think that they can rob people of their humanity by applying a new word to them other than people/baby/human being?

Except a zygote can be human and still not be a baby.

That's more of a semantics argument really. The more important argument would be the differences between a zygote and an infant, or a zygote and a fetus at a later stage of development, things like that. A zygote is a single cell that is formed from the joining of a sperm with an ovum. While a stage of human development, it is vastly different from an infant or even a fetus. Whether someone believes that a fertilized egg deserves the same protections as a person who has been born or not, I don't think it's hard to see the argument that a zygote is different from an infant or even a fetus.

George Carlin is an odd choice for a quote in an abortion discussion if you are opposed to abortion.

Fascism is never more clearly illustrated than when one human being or group of human beings looks at another and declares that because they are not like "me" they are lesser being and unworthy of even the most basic of human rights.

Let me present an odd hypothetical: You are in a home where a fire has broken out. You only have time to quickly pick something up and run out. There are 2 zygotes inside of coolers which are alive, and there are 2 infants. You cannot carry all of them, you can only pick up 2. Would you have a difficult time deciding?

Obviously that is a ridiculous scenario, but I use it only to highlight that I think the vast majority of people place a different value on a zygote and an infant. A zygote is a single cell. It has no heart, no brain, no organs at all. It has no body. It is a single cell. You may consider a zygote equal to a fetus, equal to an infant, equal to a child, equal to an adult. That's your prerogative. I don't think it's likely that you will convince most people that a zygote is equal to a human being at all stages of development, though. I certainly can't imagine placing the same value on a single cell that I do an adult or an infant.

What do you suppose a couple who has spent tens of thousands of dollars trying to get pregnant would do. . . Especially if the two frozen embryos (no one freezes zygotes) were theirs and the infants were the responsibility of someone else?

The point is that children's rights are not contingent upon how much they are wanted or valued or by how much they tug at anyone's heart strings.

 

[Montrovant]

A zygote is not a baby .
And spare us the moral lecture from the pro death penalty crowd .

"Jews are not human." <- prominent socialists in Europe 80 years ago."
"Kulaks are not human." <- prominent socialists in Europe 80 years ago.

Why do leftists seem to think that they can rob people of their humanity by applying a new word to them other than people/baby/human being?

Except a zygote can be human and still not be a baby.

That's more of a semantics argument really. The more important argument would be the differences between a zygote and an infant, or a zygote and a fetus at a later stage of development, things like that. A zygote is a single cell that is formed from the joining of a sperm with an ovum. While a stage of human development, it is vastly different from an infant or even a fetus. Whether someone believes that a fertilized egg deserves the same protections as a person who has been born or not, I don't think it's hard to see the argument that a zygote is different from an infant or even a fetus.

George Carlin is an odd choice for a quote in an abortion discussion if you are opposed to abortion.

Fascism is never more clearly illustrated than when one human being or group of human beings looks at another and declares that because they are not like "me" they are lesser being and unworthy of even the most basic of human rights.

Let me present an odd hypothetical: You are in a home where a fire has broken out. You only have time to quickly pick something up and run out. There are 2 zygotes inside of coolers which are alive, and there are 2 infants. You cannot carry all of them, you can only pick up 2. Would you have a difficult time deciding?

Obviously that is a ridiculous scenario, but I use it only to highlight that I think the vast majority of people place a different value on a zygote and an infant. A zygote is a single cell. It has no heart, no brain, no organs at all. It has no body. It is a single cell. You may consider a zygote equal to a fetus, equal to an infant, equal to a child, equal to an adult. That's your prerogative. I don't think it's likely that you will convince most people that a zygote is equal to a human being at all stages of development, though. I certainly can't imagine placing the same value on a single cell that I do an adult or an infant.

What do you suppose a couple who has spent tens of thousands of dollars trying to get pregnant would do. . . Especially if the two frozen embryos (no one freezes zygotes) were theirs and the infants were the responsibility of someone else?

The point is that children's rights are not contingent upon how much they are wanted or valued or by how much they tug at anyone's heart strings.

Actually, I think the vast majority of couples in that situation would save the infants, if the choice had to be made.

Children's rights are not contingent upon how much they are wanted or valued, but they are contingent upon whether they constitute persons under the Constitution. In the case of a zygote (which, by the way, I would not call a child; child is a stage of life after being born), the Supreme Court has ruled that is not a person under the 14th amendment.

 

[Chuz Life]

"Jews are not human." <- prominent socialists in Europe 80 years ago."
"Kulaks are not human." <- prominent socialists in Europe 80 years ago.

Why do leftists seem to think that they can rob people of their humanity by applying a new word to them other than people/baby/human being?

Except a zygote can be human and still not be a baby.

That's more of a semantics argument really. The more important argument would be the differences between a zygote and an infant, or a zygote and a fetus at a later stage of development, things like that. A zygote is a single cell that is formed from the joining of a sperm with an ovum. While a stage of human development, it is vastly different from an infant or even a fetus. Whether someone believes that a fertilized egg deserves the same protections as a person who has been born or not, I don't think it's hard to see the argument that a zygote is different from an infant or even a fetus.

George Carlin is an odd choice for a quote in an abortion discussion if you are opposed to abortion.

Fascism is never more clearly illustrated than when one human being or group of human beings looks at another and declares that because they are not like "me" they are lesser being and unworthy of even the most basic of human rights.

Let me present an odd hypothetical: You are in a home where a fire has broken out. You only have time to quickly pick something up and run out. There are 2 zygotes inside of coolers which are alive, and there are 2 infants. You cannot carry all of them, you can only pick up 2. Would you have a difficult time deciding?

Obviously that is a ridiculous scenario, but I use it only to highlight that I think the vast majority of people place a different value on a zygote and an infant. A zygote is a single cell. It has no heart, no brain, no organs at all. It has no body. It is a single cell. You may consider a zygote equal to a fetus, equal to an infant, equal to a child, equal to an adult. That's your prerogative. I don't think it's likely that you will convince most people that a zygote is equal to a human being at all stages of development, though. I certainly can't imagine placing the same value on a single cell that I do an adult or an infant.

What do you suppose a couple who has spent tens of thousands of dollars trying to get pregnant would do. . . Especially if the two frozen embryos (no one freezes zygotes) were theirs and the infants were the responsibility of someone else?

The point is that children's rights are not contingent upon how much they are wanted or valued or by how much they tug at anyone's heart strings.

Actually, I think the vast majority of couples in that situation would save the infants, if the choice had to be made.

Children's rights are not contingent upon how much they are wanted or valued, but they are contingent upon whether they constitute persons under the Constitution. In the case of a zygote (which, by the way, I would not call a child; child is a stage of life after being born), the Supreme Court has ruled that is not a person under the 14th amendment.

Again, your denials have already been defeated by our many fetal homicide laws which for ten years now, the Supreme Court has so far refused to overturn them.