Gestation starts at conception and continues until birth. 25 to 50% are naturally aborted. What is harm to public under US Constitution?

[NotfooledbyW]

nf.23.09.29 #34 What is the harm to non-involved individuals or to society if gestation is aborted?

jtthght.23.09.29
#40

Besides the obvious, the loss of a life, there have been 60+million abortions in the United States since 1973, and the United States population is currently in decline. It directly effects society, especially with the decline of future generations.

Look at my question again please, and then explain to me why non-involved individuals have a right to tell all menstruating females they must make “X” amount of babies every year in order to satisfy state or Wall Street targets of positive population growth.

The problem is ‘contraception’ as I understand all those who demand their state governments pass laws to force full term gestation on women as a way to punish women who do not want to be mothers but engaged in unprotected sex anyway. When they get pregnant they use abortion as a last ditch means of contraception.

I do not see banning or not banning abortion having a significant impact on US population growth. If women do not want to get pregnant they will find a way to not get pregnant like forcing their hunks of manly flesh to get vasectomies if they want to partake of vaginal sex.

Vasectomy Rates Increase After Roe v. Wade Overturn​

In light of recent political developments, avoiding or terminating a pregnancy has become harder for women in the United States. Some men are taking action.by Katherine Fan updated Jun 1, 202​

​

A recent Supreme Court ruling has American men racing to get the snip.​

​

Vasectomy procedures increased 30% nationwide following the June 2022 overturn of Roe v. Wade, compared to the same time frame a year prior. In 11 states where abortion immediately became illegal following the overturn, the number of vasectomy procedures increased by 39%, according to a study conducted by Komodo Health.​

​

The Supreme Court of the United States overturned Roe v. Wade in June 2022, revoking abortion as a constitutional right at the federal level. In Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization, the Supreme Court voted 6-3 in favor of allowing individual states to regulate abortion.​

​

As a result of the Supreme Court's recent decision, women in a number of socially conservative states have lost access to pregnancy termination resources, even in extreme cases. In response, more men are taking permanent measures to prevent conception at the source.​

​

Historically, men have pursued vasectomies after completing their families. But in recent years, some men opt to undergo this medical procedure earlier, especially if they do not want biological children.​

nf.23.09.30 #41

 

[Frankeneinstein]

tddstrptrt.23.09.27
#3

Miscarriage does not kill infants that have met the live birth requirement of natural law rights to the individual and therefore the unborn are not under the jurisdiction of the US Constitution for the same protections as you and I have. But a two year old infant does have the same protections as a 252 month old young adult.

Gestational life is not independent life.

The two month old has been born and it’s right to life liberty and pursuit of happiness is protected under jurisdiction of the Constitution of the United States of America.

But that doesn't answer the question you first posed and was repeated back to you...what harm does it do to non involved individuals and/or society?.....you've been at this for how long now, 8 or 9 years?

 

[zaangalewa]

znglw.23.08.29
#30

On that day I took my first breath and God breathed divine spirit and the mystery of human consciousness into me.

The second part of this sentence is pure blasphemic bullshit and a religious diletantism, because god gave only one human being his "breath" - Adam - that's why we all are "human beings".

But when I asked you what makes a difference between a human being one day before blrth and one day after birth I liked to get from you not a fake-religious answer but a natural-scientific answer. I call a human being one day before birtth and one day after birth a human being and the step "birth" between this two days a totally normal part of the growth or evolution of a human being. Sure is this a qualitative a new step and for everyone very important - but the child one day before birth is not different. 90% of all babies are born between the 38th and 42th week - so you can see very well that even a whole month is not a big problem.

So tell me excatly - in terms of natural science or rational philosophy - why the ability "to breath" after brith makes a himanbegiun toi a himanbeuign adn why a human being one day beofer is no himan being - indepedent from your wish that you like tio ahev tzhenrotgh top aboirt babaies ahnd you think it is gopod to do absortoins. this wuitosdnis very inmsosnrtta because a himan nroisght to kil himan beings is not able to be a human right. Such a construct destroys everything what is right6 or wiong. - Oh - that's perhaps your problem. Do you think it exists right or wrong or do you think right or wrong are unimportant and/or not existing?

 

[Winco]

In Catholic doctrine believers are taught that humans must not intervene in the reproductive process in any way because each new human life is created in HIS image and to terminate HIS Creation is a sin.

Life begins at conception. It is both science and a Catholic doctrine called Humanae Vitae. The doctrine teaches that God wants a personal relationship with every unique life He creates at conception.

Some, perhaps as many as half of those new lifes, die of natural causes within 20 weeks of conception. Why do you say your conception of God is not involved in killing those that you consider to be innocent human beings?

1). There are Others besides the believers in the 'Catholic doctrine'. YES.
2). His Image....?????
3). Life Begins at Birth. You call it what you want...I'm OK with your beliefs.
4). Is there REALLY a GOD? It's just a faith, right? An ALL-Seeing GOD?

 

[zaangalewa]

3). Life Begins at Birth.

What's definetelly wrong.

 

[Captain Caveman]

Natural abortion is God's will. A woman seeking an abortion is an usurper.

I had to Google, "Natural Abortion". It's called miscarriage. Calling a miscarriage a natural abortion is the most ridiculous thing I've read this year.

 

[zaangalewa]

NotfooledbyW

Here again my post #43 - better corrected :

The second part of this sentence is pure blasphemic bullshit and a religious diletantism, because god gave only one human being his "breath" - Adam - that's why we all are "human beings".

But when I asked you what makes a difference between a human being one day before blrth and one day after birth I liked to get from you not a fake-religious answer but a natural-scientific answer. I call a human being one day before birtth and one day after birth a human being and the step "birth" between this two days a totally normal part of the growth or evolution of a human being. Sure is this a qualitative a new step and for everyone very important - but the child one day before birth is not different. 90% of all babies are born between the 38th and 42th week - so you can see very well that even a whole month is not a big problem.

So tell me excatly - in terms of natural science or rational philosophy - why the ability "to breath" after birth makes a human being to a human being and why a human being one day before is no human being - indepedent from your wish that you like to have the right to abort babies and you think it is good to do abortians. This is very unimportant because the human right to kill human beings is not able to be a human right. Such a construct destroys everything what is right or wrong. - Oh - that's perhaps your problem. Do you think it exists right or wrong or do you think right or wrong are unimportant and/or not existing?

 

[yidnar]

yvdnvr.23.09.29
#36

yvdnvr.23.09.29 #2 “the evil left will never admit that a child in the womb is a living human being .. the left is perverted ,insane , gender confused, death cult”​

​

nf.23.09.29 #34 to yvdnvr.23.09.29 #2 “Every abortion kills and causes a brainless womb human being to die when aborted within the first 23 weeks of gestation. Period.​

​

Gestation starts at conception and continues until birth. It is considered to be somewhere in a range of 25 to 50% conceptions that are naturally aborted.​

​

So please answer me this:​

​

What is the harm to non-involved individuals or to society if gestation is aborted?​

​

yvdnvr.23.09.29 #35 if your question is does an abortion kill a living human being the answer is yes it does death cultist .”​

My question was very clear;

What is the harm to non-involved individuals or to society if gestation is aborted?

nf.23.09.29 #37

​

​

it devalues life .. innocent life .. defenseless life ...human life !

 

[NotfooledbyW]

yvdnvr.23.09.29 #2 “the evil left will never admit that a child in the womb is a living human being .. the left is perverted ,insane , gender confused, death cult”​

nf.23.09.29 #34 to yvdnvr.23.09.29 #2 “Every abortion kills and causes a brainless womb human being to die when aborted within the first 23 weeks of gestation. Period.​

​

Gestation starts at conception and continues until birth. It is considered to be somewhere in a range of 25 to 50% conceptions that are naturally aborted.​

​

So please answer me this:​

​

What is the harm to non-involved individuals or to society if gestation is aborted?​

yvdnvr.23.09.30
#48

it devalues life .. innocent life .. defenseless life ...human life !

When a miscarriage results in a natural abortion and a living organism dies, does it devalue innocent, defenseless human life in any way?

What is a natural miscarriage?​

A miscarriage is the loss of pregnancy before 20 weeks’ gestation. Babies born before 20 weeks do not have developed enough lungs to survive. Most miscarriages happen before week 12.​

 

[yidnar]

yvdnvr.23.09.29 #2 “the evil left will never admit that a child in the womb is a living human being .. the left is perverted ,insane , gender confused, death cult”​

nf.23.09.29 #34 to yvdnvr.23.09.29 #2 “Every abortion kills and causes a brainless womb human being to die when aborted within the first 23 weeks of gestation. Period.​

​

Gestation starts at conception and continues until birth. It is considered to be somewhere in a range of 25 to 50% conceptions that are naturally aborted.​

​

So please answer me this:​

​

What is the harm to non-involved individuals or to society if gestation is aborted?​

yvdnvr.23.09.30
#48

When a miscarriage results in a natural abortion and a living organism dies, does it devalue innocent, defenseless human life in any way?

What is a natural miscarriage?​

A miscarriage is the loss of pregnancy before 20 weeks’ gestation. Babies born before 20 weeks do not have developed enough lungs to survive. Most miscarriages happen before week 12.​

no its a tragedy ... a medically induced abortion when the pregnancy poses no threat to the mother is murder !

 

[NotfooledbyW]

yvdnvr.23.10.01
#50

no its a tragedy ... a medically induced abortion when the pregnancy poses no threat to the mother is murder !

Every woman who finds out she is pregnant must assume a certain risk may occur the closer she gets to full term. In that case being true, the decision to take the risk or not to take the risk has to be on her. The government cannot possibly guarantee that a women being forced to use her body for full term gestation will suffer zero health issues up to and including death.

Allowing the woman to make the decision that only she should make to abort is not allowing her to murder a person; it is not amoral and there is no detrimental impact on uninvolved persons and it does not devalue life any more than if a woman experiences a miscarriage devalues life.

If your religion tells you abortion is a sin; do not sin and mind your own business with everyone else.

nf.23.10.01 #51

 

[martybegan]

And yet a unique situation exists in a free and independent woman’s body when pregnant in earliest stages when a brainless living organism has become part of her body

Your “act of man” that is taking an individual “brain alive” person’s life is incomparable to the elective medical procedure of abortion taking a non-person’s life.

The fetus as a parasite argument is invalid because parasites have to be of another species, not the offspring of said species.

 

[NotfooledbyW]

mrtybgn.23.10.02
#52

The fetus as a parasite argument is invalid

A fetus is no parasite and never was in my argument for pro-choice.

A fetus is a human organism that becomes a part of its potential birth mother’s body and remains so in diminishing degrees until separated independent life is sustainable normally at full term gestation.

A parasite is an independent life form that finds a host and attaches to it. If your dog goes into the weeds and picks up a tick, that tick was independent alive before it found your dog.

Your attack is bullshit because a parasite is not created from the female egg becoming inseminated and the stages of a new DNA coded unique human life begins. The ZEF for the first twenty weeks is part of the woman’s entire body but specifically her brain and neurological system is keeping the ZEF alive until separation at birth. At birth the ZEF’s brain and neurological system takes control for the first time with all the biological support systems functioning as one complete life sustaining new independent human being.

nf.23.09.22 #11,146 No. A fetus is not an independent person in terms of physiology until it is born.​

​

Not as a scientific matter of dependent life versus independent life a brainless womb being is dependent upon a mature human being’s neurological system for survival​

​

A baby who survives live birth is an independent immature being functioning as a newborn person independent of another person’s brain, heart, lungs, mouth, stomach intestines, kidneys, ureters, bladder and urethra and anus and neurological system with consciousness?​

​

Every newborn person can survive with foster care that does not involve its birthmother.​

​

nf.23.08.11 #10,222 . . . . . . Birth is the line between dependent life and independent life due to physiological and neurological development sufficient to be separated from its birth mother. •••• The right to life liberty and pursuit of happiness applies to mature independent individuals and every one of their offspring from the exact moment of birth which is complete separation from their birth mother.​

​

​

nf.23.08.12 #10,223 to bckvgn.23.03.09 #7,495 . . . . . . Transition from dependent life to independent life at FIRST BREATH and cutting of the cord {note hadit } ends the contest between the woman’s right of bodily control vs the fetus’ right to life.​

​

That fact is not possible to dispute.​

​

A dependent being such as a fetus in it’s early stages of gestation does not have a superseding right to significant and lengthy use of an independent being’s body, specifically when that use of another person’s body has potential to deprive her of her right to life on chance of maternal death from complications during childbirth.​

nf.23.10.02
#53

 

[PeterPilot]

I had to Google, "Natural Abortion". It's called miscarriage. Calling a miscarriage a natural abortion is the most ridiculous thing I've read this year.

Another term for it is 'spontaneous abortion'. Biology has its own rules.

 

[M14 Shooter]

Does Government have a CONSTITUTIONAL right to pass laws that restrict the liberty of a gestating individual if the action taken under the liberty of the individual causes no harm to the public outside of her private circle of family and friends?

State governments unquestionably have the power to do so, and almost all of them exercise that power.
And that was -before- the USSC overturned Roe.

 

[NotfooledbyW]

M14 Shooter said:
power


nf.23.09.27 #1 “Does Government have a CONSTITUTIONAL right to pass laws that restrict the liberty of a gestating individual …?”

mnnshtr.23.10.23 #55 to nf.23.09.27 #1 “State governments unquestionably have the power to do so, and almost all of them exercise that power.”

Is there ever a time when the USSC decides a state cannot deprive an individual of his or her liberty because they have a right that is not numerated in the Bill of Rights and the state cannot prove the liberty caused no harm to any other individual singular or plural and poses no threat to public safety and security?

See Post nf.23.05.26 #423

See Post ctsnmtrs.23.09.13 #111

See Post bvndvg.23.09.20 #175

See Post thssm.23.09.28 #11,248

See Post nf.23.09.20 #11,114

See Post nf.23.08.07 #10,135

See Post ctsnmtrs.23.05.18 #47

See Post nf.23.05.26 #422

See Post vbvtvs.23.06.01 #187

See Post dgsnn.14.03.04 #2

nf.23.10.23

 

[M14 Shooter]

Is there ever a time when the USSC decides a state cannot deprive an individual of his or her liberty because they have a right that is not numerated in the Bill of
Rights and the state cannot prove the liberty caused no harm to any other individual singular or plural and poses no threat to public safety and security?

Your question makes no sense and does not in any way meaningfully address what I said.
Try harder.

 

[ding]

Does Government have a CONSTITUTIONAL right to pass laws that restrict the liberty of a gestating individual if the action taken under the liberty of the individual causes no harm to the public outside of her private circle of family and friends?

Abortion should be a misdemeanor.

 

[Libby von H]

Does Government have a CONSTITUTIONAL right to pass laws that restrict the liberty of a gestating individual if the action taken under the liberty of the individual causes no harm to the public outside of her private circle of family and friends?

Can anyone make the case that natural abortion inflicts one iota of a harm to the general public or any individual physically mentally or morally?

Gestation starts at conception and continues until birth. It is considered to be somewhere in a range of 25 to 50% conceptions that are naturally aborted.

What is the harm to non-involved individuals or to society if gestation is aborted?

This is so confused, I can't tell what the issue is !!! or what side you are taking.

3 clarifications about your fallacious statement
"Causes no harm" can't just be asserted !!! You are putting your conclusion in your premise tsk, tsk
Natural abortion is not what anyone wants so you can't use it to support anything you are arguing for.
Don't you see the irony in making yourself a special case !!! IF this is nothing to do with those outside the family, then it has nothing to do with you AND why act as if the family , the baby, the general public are something with no connection to the Constitution (we are the final power according to the Constitution) and the only conclusion I can draw Congress fails if it doens't agree with you

 

[M14 Shooter]

Does Government have a CONSTITUTIONAL right to pass laws that restrict the liberty of a gestating individual

No.
It has the constitution - power - to do so.
For reference, read Roe.