Should Abortion Be Illegal Once a Heartbeat Is Detectable?

I am the one that is "fucked up"? I am not the one trying to use domestic violence as an excuse to kill a child.

You're one hell of a person to be lecturing anyone on willful ignorance. :lol:

You really are stupid and dishonest. Never did I suggest that DV was an excuse for abortion. Impregnating women is a common method imployed by abusers to gain power and control. Of course you acknowledged your ignorance of power and control in relationships proudly. Which is why I conclude you are "fucked Up". In polite words a callous and ignorant jerk.

When it's thrown back that why I'm sure you think you didn't. But the reality is that if you insist that if government is going to be resposible for children being born who otherwise wouldn't be, then government must also be responsible for keeping those same children from being abused, you are in fact using potential abuse as a justification for having an abortion.

I didn't say what you claim. In simple words I said the authors of the bill are demagogues. The bill painted with a broad brush, some women abort their pregnancies for very legitimate reasons and do so legally.
I added, which obviously confused you, that the demagogues have taken no action to reduce abortions by providing the needed resources to prevent unwanted pregnancies. Such resources include providing age appropriate sex education in public schools, including information on contraceptives and their proper use; the dangers of STD, on issues of power and control and parental responsibility would in my opinon do just that. It might help too if the demagogoues funded enforcement of parental support laws and jailed fathers who didn't pay support when ordered by the court to do so.
 
Amazing the left is crying tonight because Kansas has new regulations for abortion clinics.They are upset because these clinics will not be performing abortions tomorrow or the next day or the day after at least until they comply with the new regs.

It amazes me with the Lefts love and utter craving for abortions and how sad they get when they don't get to have one any time at all.

It might be a good idea to practice some form of birth control no? These girls today want to bang like bunnys and when they get preggers,well no big deal....

Geez....

"These girls today want to bang like bunnys"
Hate to inform you there Moe but it takes BOYS also.
The boys are the ones that need to be held accountable and in most cases they are ignored, left out of the equation like you did and not held to the SAME STANDARD.
 
You really are stupid and dishonest. Never did I suggest that DV was an excuse for abortion. Impregnating women is a common method imployed by abusers to gain power and control. Of course you acknowledged your ignorance of power and control in relationships proudly. Which is why I conclude you are "fucked Up". In polite words a callous and ignorant jerk.

When it's thrown back that why I'm sure you think you didn't. But the reality is that if you insist that if government is going to be resposible for children being born who otherwise wouldn't be, then government must also be responsible for keeping those same children from being abused, you are in fact using potential abuse as a justification for having an abortion.

I didn't say what you claim. In simple words I said the authors of the bill are demagogues. The bill painted with a broad brush, some women abort their pregnancies for very legitimate reasons and do so legally.
I added, which obviously confused you, that the demagogues have taken no action to reduce abortions by providing the needed resources to prevent unwanted pregnancies. Such resources include providing age appropriate sex education in public schools, including information on contraceptives and their proper use; the dangers of STD, on issues of power and control and parental responsibility would in my opinon do just that. It might help too if the demagogoues funded enforcement of parental support laws and jailed fathers who didn't pay support when ordered by the court to do so.

In Georgia child support is considered a civil matter BEFORE any action can be taken.
Amazing how they want to ban abortions and do not make any effort to make men responsible for their own children.
 
A heart beat indicates life, end of discussion. We can argue for ever over what may or may not happen but we should not take a life without penalty.
 
A heart beat indicates life, end of discussion. We can argue for ever over what may or may not happen but we should not take a life without penalty.

And you want government to be the determiner of "it was done in the interest of the health of the mother"?
And you believe that the medical lobby is not strong enough to influence every state and every prosecutor in the country?
And you do not know that NO doctor will state that another doctor illegally performed an abortion as you do not know that is ALWAYS the evidence and the ONLY needed to convict.

Respectfully, you folks have not been around long enough to know how this works. Blame the doctors if you want but that is the way it worked when it was illegal and that is the only way it will ever work.

You never stop abortions with regulation. Doesn't work and never has work. Doctors do it and find a legal way to do it and that will always be.
Real world.
 
You really are stupid and dishonest. Never did I suggest that DV was an excuse for abortion. Impregnating women is a common method imployed by abusers to gain power and control. Of course you acknowledged your ignorance of power and control in relationships proudly. Which is why I conclude you are "fucked Up". In polite words a callous and ignorant jerk.

When it's thrown back that why I'm sure you think you didn't. But the reality is that if you insist that if government is going to be resposible for children being born who otherwise wouldn't be, then government must also be responsible for keeping those same children from being abused, you are in fact using potential abuse as a justification for having an abortion.

I didn't say what you claim. In simple words I said the authors of the bill are demagogues. The bill painted with a broad brush, some women abort their pregnancies for very legitimate reasons and do so legally.
I added, which obviously confused you, that the demagogues have taken no action to reduce abortions by providing the needed resources to prevent unwanted pregnancies. Such resources include providing age appropriate sex education in public schools, including information on contraceptives and their proper use; the dangers of STD, on issues of power and control and parental responsibility would in my opinon do just that. It might help too if the demagogoues funded enforcement of parental support laws and jailed fathers who didn't pay support when ordered by the court to do so.

It's nice to think that will help, but it won't. Here's your education kids: A 'side effect' of sex is a baby. EDUCATION OVER.

Believe it or not, I am pro choice.......to a point. But the fact is the vast majority of abortions are performed for convenience reasons.
 
A heart beat indicates life, end of discussion. We can argue for ever over what may or may not happen but we should not take a life without penalty.

And you want government to be the determiner of "it was done in the interest of the health of the mother"?
And you believe that the medical lobby is not strong enough to influence every state and every prosecutor in the country?
And you do not know that NO doctor will state that another doctor illegally performed an abortion as you do not know that is ALWAYS the evidence and the ONLY needed to convict.

Respectfully, you folks have not been around long enough to know how this works. Blame the doctors if you want but that is the way it worked when it was illegal and that is the only way it will ever work.

You never stop abortions with regulation. Doesn't work and never has work. Doctors do it and find a legal way to do it and that will always be.
Real world.

"Reality" is no excuse to not take every measure necessary to keep an innocent life from being murdered.
 
When it's thrown back that why I'm sure you think you didn't. But the reality is that if you insist that if government is going to be resposible for children being born who otherwise wouldn't be, then government must also be responsible for keeping those same children from being abused, you are in fact using potential abuse as a justification for having an abortion.

I didn't say what you claim. In simple words I said the authors of the bill are demagogues. The bill painted with a broad brush, some women abort their pregnancies for very legitimate reasons and do so legally.
I added, which obviously confused you, that the demagogues have taken no action to reduce abortions by providing the needed resources to prevent unwanted pregnancies. Such resources include providing age appropriate sex education in public schools, including information on contraceptives and their proper use; the dangers of STD, on issues of power and control and parental responsibility would in my opinon do just that. It might help too if the demagogoues funded enforcement of parental support laws and jailed fathers who didn't pay support when ordered by the court to do so.

It's nice to think that will help, but it won't. Here's your education kids: A 'side effect' of sex is a baby. EDUCATION OVER.

Believe it or not, I am pro choice.......to a point. But the fact is the vast majority of abortions are performed for convenience reasons.

I disagree. How convienient is it for a women to go to a clinic, especially in a state like Kansas, with pickets out in front calling you a baby killer? Seems to me, and the women I've known intimately, the pill, IUD or diaphram is simpler, easier and damn effective.

Your comment is tantamount to Nancy Reagan's solution for drug abuse, just say no never worked and the result hasn't benefited anyone; how many billions have been wasted on the war on drugs; how many women became septic from back alley abortions? One is too many.
 
Last edited:
Is lack of proper health care legalized murder? Is collateral damage murder? Are sanctions which only kill children and the sickly murder? Is the lack of a fair wage and a place to sleep murder? If parents can be held accountable for their children after birth and society finds it acceptable to punish them, then shouldn't all those who argue against healthcare, child support, food programs, and welfare, shouldn't they too be held accountable? Is invading a sovereign nation on trumped up charges murder? Did you protest Iraq? Did you cry these crocodile tears? So called pro life may be the biggest hypocritical religious position of modern America as none of these people want to support the living, feed the hungry, stop war, or follow their own phoney stance and have lots of children. None would take care all the children born except to place them into servitude and condemn them. Hypocrites all.

Why is it men who cannot make this decision know the proper decision? Keep your religion out of other people lives.

Does pro-life include not eating and killing other life forms for surely they suffer and die at a more advanced level of life and feeling?

Each month a women, a couple, decide on whether the cells, the potential cells are to be discarded or if they are to attempt a conception and thus life. If they choose not to create life, is that OK, for surely this is life (cellular life) being discarded?

Two out of five (or more) conceptions end naturally, who is at fault here? Nature or gawd? Are these humans?

How is it that a decision, a moral judgment, that a women or a couple makes is thought of as wrong by another person or entity who have no authority to tell or command another person?

I repeat when anti abortion foes stop the needless deaths of living, feeling humans throughout the world who die every 15 seconds, when they even care and protest that this happens, when they protest wars that kill the innocent, when they provide welfare and care for the homeless and the hungry in America and the world, then I will take them serious. But till then they are hypocrites because their only desire to control another who they give not a flying fluck about and probably condemn. It's so easy to be moral when nothing is demanded of you and you do nothing but preach and legislate.


"In the 1950s, about a million illegal abortions a year were performed in the U.S., and over a thousand women died each year as a result. Women who were victims of botched or unsanitary abortions came in desperation to hospital emergency wards, where some died of widespread abdominal infections. Many women who recovered from such infections found themselves sterile or chronically and painfully ill. The enormous emotional stress often lasted a long time." HISTORY OF ABORTION


Boston Review — Judith Jarvis Thomson
Top 10 Anti-Abortion Myths - Top 10 Myths About Abortion
Why Francis Beckwith
 
I didn't say what you claim. In simple words I said the authors of the bill are demagogues. The bill painted with a broad brush, some women abort their pregnancies for very legitimate reasons and do so legally.
I added, which obviously confused you, that the demagogues have taken no action to reduce abortions by providing the needed resources to prevent unwanted pregnancies. Such resources include providing age appropriate sex education in public schools, including information on contraceptives and their proper use; the dangers of STD, on issues of power and control and parental responsibility would in my opinon do just that. It might help too if the demagogoues funded enforcement of parental support laws and jailed fathers who didn't pay support when ordered by the court to do so.

It's nice to think that will help, but it won't. Here's your education kids: A 'side effect' of sex is a baby. EDUCATION OVER.

Believe it or not, I am pro choice.......to a point. But the fact is the vast majority of abortions are performed for convenience reasons.

I disagree. How convienient is it for a women to go to a clinic, especially in a state like Kansas, with pickets out in front calling you a baby killer? Seems to me, and the women I've known intimately, the pill, IUD or diaphram is simpler, easier and damn effective.

Your comment is tantamount to Nancy Reagan's solution for drug abuse, just say no never worked and the result hasn't benefited anyone; how many billions have been wasted on the war on drugs; how many women became septic from back alley abortions? One is too many.

I'm not saying everyone must be abstinent if they don't want kids. I'm saying you're an idiot to think the abortion rate will drop by educating people on what everyone already knows.
 
Is lack of proper health care legalized murder? Is collateral damage murder? Are sanctions which only kill children and the sickly murder? Is the lack of a fair wage and a place to sleep murder? If parents can be held accountable for their children after birth and society finds it acceptable to punish them, then shouldn't all those who argue against healthcare, child support, food programs, and welfare, shouldn't they too be held accountable? Is invading a sovereign nation on trumped up charges murder? Did you protest Iraq? Did you cry these crocodile tears? So called pro life may be the biggest hypocritical religious position of modern America as none of these people want to support the living, feed the hungry, stop war, or follow their own phoney stance and have lots of children. None would take care all the children born except to place them into servitude and condemn them. Hypocrites all.

Why is it men who cannot make this decision know the proper decision? Keep your religion out of other people lives.

Does pro-life include not eating and killing other life forms for surely they suffer and die at a more advanced level of life and feeling?

Each month a women, a couple, decide on whether the cells, the potential cells are to be discarded or if they are to attempt a conception and thus life. If they choose not to create life, is that OK, for surely this is life (cellular life) being discarded?

Two out of five (or more) conceptions end naturally, who is at fault here? Nature or gawd? Are these humans?

How is it that a decision, a moral judgment, that a women or a couple makes is thought of as wrong by another person or entity who have no authority to tell or command another person?

I repeat when anti abortion foes stop the needless deaths of living, feeling humans throughout the world who die every 15 seconds, when they even care and protest that this happens, when they protest wars that kill the innocent, when they provide welfare and care for the homeless and the hungry in America and the world, then I will take them serious. But till then they are hypocrites because their only desire to control another who they give not a flying fluck about and probably condemn. It's so easy to be moral when nothing is demanded of you and you do nothing but preach and legislate.


"In the 1950s, about a million illegal abortions a year were performed in the U.S., and over a thousand women died each year as a result. Women who were victims of botched or unsanitary abortions came in desperation to hospital emergency wards, where some died of widespread abdominal infections. Many women who recovered from such infections found themselves sterile or chronically and painfully ill. The enormous emotional stress often lasted a long time." HISTORY OF ABORTION


Boston Review — Judith Jarvis Thomson
Top 10 Anti-Abortion Myths - Top 10 Myths About Abortion
Why Francis Beckwith

Maybe you should ask yourself that if you support the murder of an unborn child, why should the rest of us believe you are sincere in your concerns for "the living".

I would also like to know who "argues against healthcare". What a rediculous statement. As if we conservatives don't want anyone to have health care. As if we don't all have family members who get sick, and wish we had a system of health care to make them better.

Aside from that, your idiotic rant against war in general demonstrates what a partisan hack you are. Anyone who is against "all war" is a coward. A coward that is willing to let the bullies of the world run rampant over the weak. A coward that doesn't believe in standing up against evil. And there is EVIL in this world, whether you want to believe it or not. Evil men who cut people's heads off, rape women and kill children. And yes killing children includes the unborn.
 
Across the country, Republicans and Democrats are wrangling over proposed changes to state abortion laws. On Tuesday, the Ohio House of Representatives voted on a measure that has the power to transform the state’s — and the nation’s — abortion dialogue. In a landmark move, the House voted 54 to 43 to ban abortions after a fetal heartbeat becomes detectable to doctors.

The measure, known as the “Heartbeat Bill,” has been touted by Republicans in the state, with the majority of them voting affirmatively for its passage. There has been no shortage of controversy surrounding the proposal, as a heartbeat can be detected as early as six weeks (by some accounts, it can be found even earlier). Also, the measure does not include exemptions for rape or incest, but it does include one for the health of the mother. Reuters has more about this intriguing legislative initiative:

Should Abortion Be Illegal Once a Heartbeat Is Detectable? | Breaking news and opinion on The Blaze

That's a good question. At this point it's all about haggling over where to draw the line anyway. A heartbeat doesn't sound unreasonable.
 
"Abolition of a woman's right to abortion, when and if she wants it, amounts to compulsory maternity: a form of rape by the State." Edward Abbey

Maybe you should ask yourself that if you support the murder of an unborn child, why should the rest of us believe you are sincere in your concerns for "the living".....

So how many children do you have? Are you going to adopt? Will you pay higher taxes for all the children? Please don't masturbate or let a month go by without impregnating your wife as that constitutes the killing of cells too, murder in your words? If you are a women are you willing to take care of the frozen embryos and bring them to fruition? You did protest the sanctions and bombing of innocents right? Do you pay for research so each fertilization comes to term? And since life matters so much are you a vegetarian? Animals are more advanced than the cells you argue for? You do fight hard for the living child that dies every 15 seconds as we live? You do right? Or are you as I claim above a total hypocrite whose mind and moral worth hasn't gotten beyond the fact birth choices and raising children is work and requires mature decisions and that cells are not people, and if they are you better live up to the standards set above, not doing so would make you a hypocrite who does nothing but preach. After you have done all of the above come back and preach.

No religion has ever defined when human life begins. Catholicism considers sexual activity as procreative activity and thus wrong outside of marriage or for pleasure and not the propagation of the faith.

Until recent history, a child was only considered a person after the age of seven. Death before then meant the soul went to a place called purgatory. Considering that none of this is known nor verifiable, without direct communication with a gawd it hasn't any relevance.


"It seems to me that a case can be made for taking a human life statute that dates the origin of personhood at conception to be an "establishment" of religious doctrine. The argument runs as follows. For reasons given above, it is quite contrary to common sense to claim that a newly fertilized human ovum is already an actual person. Employing the term 'person' in the normal fashion, no one thinks of a fertilized egg in that way. The only arguments that have been advanced to the conclusion that fertilized eggs are people, common sense notwithstanding, are arguments with theological premises. These premises are part of large theological and philosophical systems that are very much worthy of respect indeed, but they can neither be established nor refuted without critical discussion of the whole systems of which they form a part. In fact, many conscientious persons reject them, often in favor of doctrines stemming from rival theological systems; so for the state to endorse the personhood of newly fertilized ova would be for the state to embrace one set of controversial theological tenets rather than others, in effect to enforce the teaching of some churches against those of other churches (and nonchurches), and to back up this enforcement with severe criminal penalties. The state plays this constitutionally prohibited role when it officially affirms a doctrine that is opposed to common sense and understanding and whose only proposed arguments proceed from theological premises. This case, it seems to me, is a good one even if there is reason, as there might be, for affirming the personhood of fetuses in the second or third trimester of pregnancy." Joel Feinberg, Abortion
 
Last edited:
Should Abortion Be Illegal Once a Heartbeat Is Detectable?

A heartbeat is detectable by 42 days gestational ...

Here's what the (Embryo size = 0.5 inch, 12 mm) fetus looks like at that point in gestation

8_weeks_ga_-2.jpg
 
Last edited:
"Abolition of a woman's right to abortion, when and if she wants it, amounts to compulsory maternity: a form of rape by the State." Edward Abbey

Maybe you should ask yourself that if you support the murder of an unborn child, why should the rest of us believe you are sincere in your concerns for "the living".....

So how many children do you have? Are you going to adopt? Will you pay higher taxes for all the children? Please don't masturbate or let a month go by without impregnating your wife as that constitutes the killing of cells too, murder in your words? If you are a women are you willing to take care of the frozen embryos and bring them to fruition? You did protest the sanctions and bombing of innocents right? Do you pay for research so each fertilization comes to term? And since life matters so much are you a vegetarian? Animals are more advanced than the cells you argue for? You do fight hard for the living child that dies every 15 seconds as we live? You do right? Or are you as I claim above a total hypocrite whose mind and moral worth hasn't gotten beyond the fact birth choices and raising children is work and requires mature decisions and that cells are not people, and if they are you better live up to the standards set above, not doing so would make you a hypocrite who does nothing but preach. After you have done all of the above come back and preach.

No religion has ever defined when human life begins. Catholicism considers sexual activity as procreative activity and thus wrong outside of marriage or for pleasure and not the propagation of the faith.

Until recent history, a child was only considered a person after the age of seven. Death before then meant the soul went to a place called purgatory. Considering that none of this is known nor verifiable, without direct communication with a gawd it hasn't any relevance.


"It seems to me that a case can be made for taking a human life statute that dates the origin of personhood at conception to be an "establishment" of religious doctrine. The argument runs as follows. For reasons given above, it is quite contrary to common sense to claim that a newly fertilized human ovum is already an actual person. Employing the term 'person' in the normal fashion, no one thinks of a fertilized egg in that way. The only arguments that have been advanced to the conclusion that fertilized eggs are people, common sense notwithstanding, are arguments with theological premises. These premises are part of large theological and philosophical systems that are very much worthy of respect indeed, but they can neither be established nor refuted without critical discussion of the whole systems of which they form a part. In fact, many conscientious persons reject them, often in favor of doctrines stemming from rival theological systems; so for the state to endorse the personhood of newly fertilized ova would be for the state to embrace one set of controversial theological tenets rather than others, in effect to enforce the teaching of some churches against those of other churches (and nonchurches), and to back up this enforcement with severe criminal penalties. The state plays this constitutionally prohibited role when it officially affirms a doctrine that is opposed to common sense and understanding and whose only proposed arguments proceed from theological premises. This case, it seems to me, is a good one even if there is reason, as there might be, for affirming the personhood of fetuses in the second or third trimester of pregnancy." Joel Feinberg, Abortion

Wow. So this is what your arguement boils down to. Comparing a growing embryo with other cells like unfertilized eggs. I would say your just an idiot for not knowing the difference, but I honestly don't believe even you are that dumb, I just think you are being disingenuous at this point.
You've gotten to the point where now you are saying pro-lifers are hypocrits because they eat steak.

This has nothing to do with reliigion. Why would I care if most religions "don't define when life begins"? So just because Hindu doesn't define when life begins, that means the debate is over.

Also, I love the quote....not allowing a woman to kill her unborn child is considered a "form of rape".

You wackos need to be put in a mental hospital.
 
A heart beat indicates life, end of discussion. We can argue for ever over what may or may not happen but we should not take a life without penalty.

And you want government to be the determiner of "it was done in the interest of the health of the mother"?
And you believe that the medical lobby is not strong enough to influence every state and every prosecutor in the country?
And you do not know that NO doctor will state that another doctor illegally performed an abortion as you do not know that is ALWAYS the evidence and the ONLY needed to convict.

Respectfully, you folks have not been around long enough to know how this works. Blame the doctors if you want but that is the way it worked when it was illegal and that is the only way it will ever work.

You never stop abortions with regulation. Doesn't work and never has work. Doctors do it and find a legal way to do it and that will always be.
Real world.

"Reality" is no excuse to not take every measure necessary to keep an innocent life from being murdered.

And you want the government in charge of those measures. That is about as unAmerican as it gets.
SCARY.
The Constitution limits the power of government. The Founders knew that and wanted that and had NO restrictions against abortion.
You may believe they were ignorant and backward but I don't.
 
Of course it should be illegal at that point.

Its amazing how liberals pick and choose which scientific facts to ignore. They don't want to admit that the unborn has its own DNA and its growing right from the begining.

Its also rather amazing that liberals don't want the people to have any say on the subject. Any attempts of bringing the subject to the people for a vote is met with fury. And yet Americans consistantly vote that abortion should not be used freely as birth control.

conservative and religious women have abortions also, try to fix that myopia you suffer from.
 
Doesn't make any difference if it is illegally except women will be getting back alley abortions and the woman would be in danger of her life. Illegal never stopped women from having abortion or stopped any other kind of murder. The death penalty were suppose to stop murders. Guns don't kill but they do.



Dangers of illegal abortions. Before the 1973 Roe v. Wade decision legalized abortion throughout the U.S., abortions were allowed in some of the states. In 1972, 586,800 legal abortions were performed in those states.8 It is estimated that between 200,000 and 1,200,000 illegal abortions were also performed each year in the U.S.9 Many women living in areas where abortion was not allowed simply traveled to states or countries where abortion was legal to terminate their pregnancies. Those who could not afford that option often sought out someone to perform the procedure illegally. Some sympathetic doctors were willing to help. But many illegal abortions were performed by unqualified practitioners, and many women suffered exploitation, sexual abuse, injury, infection, sterility and even death at the hands of these "back alley" practitioners.10,11,12 Despite some claims to the contrary, the mainstream of medical opinion is that legal abortions are very safe, with less risk to a woman's physical and mental health than continuing a pregnancy.13
What does the Bible say about abortion?
 
....Also, I love the quote....not allowing a woman to kill her unborn child is considered a "form of rape".

You wackos need to be put in a mental hospital.

Say what you like, it the pudding that counts, you care not for the living child as your political philosophy attests to too often, but you really really care about a few cells. Life is a powerful force you needn't worry about it, in the end it is the wackos as you name us who are pro-life, you are simply pro-controlling another person's life. Manage your own life and keep out of other's people's lives, this is still a free country in spite of religion based politics. Judge yourself.

"In the 1950s, about a million illegal abortions a year were performed in the U.S., and over a thousand women died each year as a result. Women who were victims of botched or unsanitary abortions came in desperation to hospital emergency wards, where some died of widespread abdominal infections. Many women who recovered from such infections found themselves sterile or chronically and painfully ill. The enormous emotional stress often lasted a long time."
HISTORY OF ABORTION
Boston Review — Judith Jarvis Thomson
Top 10 Anti-Abortion Myths - Top 10 Myths About Abortion
Why Francis Beckwith
 

Forum List

Back
Top