Should Abortion Be Illegal Once a Heartbeat Is Detectable?

[jillian]

It's no effort at all to show that you didn't know it was an elephant embryo. Or are you resorting to more empty - and apparently allowable - trolling and flaming because you still don't get it?

they're too busy repringinting rightwingnut misogynist BS.

wingers need to stay out of other people's business.

i love the pretend moral religious right.

 

[Arianrhod]

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

Uh no.

"5 weeks

Your baby still resembles a tadpole more than a human, but is growing fast. The circulatory system is beginning to form, and the tiny heart will start to beat this week.

Your baby is the size of a sesame seed."

So which one are you thinking is a "scientific" proof of a lack of life and humanity: size, or not being an adult?

As with death, life begins and ends with neural activity. That's not until much later.

I'm against abortion, but not against it being legal. Wanna kill your baby that's up to you. And in the case of rape or significant health risk to the mother am ok with it. I just take exception to euphamisms being used in some half-assed attempt to justify it. It's killing the baby, at least be honest about it. Not the ideal situation, but sometimes it's the best one. Shouldn't force a victim of rape to go through 9 months of pregnancy, nor should you write off the mother if staying pregnant's gonna kill her or seriously mess her up.

Well, that's a bold assertion, but you do realize that I have no intention of simply taking your word for it, yes? So I will now be expecting you to produce scientific evidence that the definition of life is "neural activity".

You once worked in a fertility clinic and you're unfamiliar with the stages of gestation? Interesting.

 

[playtime]

NEVER totally illegal. The health of the mother should always be top priority.

Otherwise, unless it's viable & can beat on its own outside the womb then restrictions should be in place.

 

[Cecilie1200]

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

Uh no.

"5 weeks

Your baby still resembles a tadpole more than a human, but is growing fast. The circulatory system is beginning to form, and the tiny heart will start to beat this week.

Your baby is the size of a sesame seed."

So which one are you thinking is a "scientific" proof of a lack of life and humanity: size, or not being an adult?

As with death, life begins and ends with neural activity. That's not until much later.

I'm against abortion, but not against it being legal. Wanna kill your baby that's up to you. And in the case of rape or significant health risk to the mother am ok with it. I just take exception to euphamisms being used in some half-assed attempt to justify it. It's killing the baby, at least be honest about it. Not the ideal situation, but sometimes it's the best one. Shouldn't force a victim of rape to go through 9 months of pregnancy, nor should you write off the mother if staying pregnant's gonna kill her or seriously mess her up.

Well, that's a bold assertion, but you do realize that I have no intention of simply taking your word for it, yes? So I will now be expecting you to produce scientific evidence that the definition of life is "neural activity".

You once worked in a fertility clinic and you're unfamiliar with the stages of gestation? Interesting.

Hey, wow, another non sequitur.

Is there anyone on this planet who doesn't think you're a waste of space? I'm just curious.

 

[Cecilie1200]

NEVER totally illegal. The health of the mother should always be top priority.

Otherwise, unless it's viable & can beat on its own outside the womb then restrictions should be in place.

Considering that leftists define "health of the mother" as "she's stressed and crying because her boyfriend lied about the condom", this is singularly unimpressive.

 

[playtime]

Considering that leftists define "health of the mother" as "she's stressed and crying because her boyfriend lied about the condom", this is singularly unimpressive.

^^^ cue ^^^

 

[Delta4Embassy]

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

Uh no.

"5 weeks

Your baby still resembles a tadpole more than a human, but is growing fast. The circulatory system is beginning to form, and the tiny heart will start to beat this week.

Your baby is the size of a sesame seed."

So which one are you thinking is a "scientific" proof of a lack of life and humanity: size, or not being an adult?

As with death, life begins and ends with neural activity. That's not until much later.

I'm against abortion, but not against it being legal. Wanna kill your baby that's up to you. And in the case of rape or significant health risk to the mother am ok with it. I just take exception to euphamisms being used in some half-assed attempt to justify it. It's killing the baby, at least be honest about it. Not the ideal situation, but sometimes it's the best one. Shouldn't force a victim of rape to go through 9 months of pregnancy, nor should you write off the mother if staying pregnant's gonna kill her or seriously mess her up.

Well, that's a bold assertion, but you do realize that I have no intention of simply taking your word for it, yes? So I will now be expecting you to produce scientific evidence that the definition of life is "neural activity".

"4. The uniform determination of death. The National Conference of Commissioners on Uniform State Laws in 1980 formulated the Uniform Determination of Death Act. It states that: "An individual who has sustained either (1) irreversible cessation of circulatory and respiratory functions, or (2) irreversible cessation of all functions of the entire brain, including the brain stem is dead. A determination of death must be made in accordance with accepted medical standards." This definition was approved by the American Medical Association in 1980 and by the American Bar Association in 1981."
Death

If death is the cessation of neural activity, the reverse is also true, that neural activity means there's life and not death or 'un-life' as with a fetus vs human being.

 

[Arianrhod]

Uh no.

"5 weeks

Your baby still resembles a tadpole more than a human, but is growing fast. The circulatory system is beginning to form, and the tiny heart will start to beat this week.

Your baby is the size of a sesame seed."

So which one are you thinking is a "scientific" proof of a lack of life and humanity: size, or not being an adult?

As with death, life begins and ends with neural activity. That's not until much later.

I'm against abortion, but not against it being legal. Wanna kill your baby that's up to you. And in the case of rape or significant health risk to the mother am ok with it. I just take exception to euphamisms being used in some half-assed attempt to justify it. It's killing the baby, at least be honest about it. Not the ideal situation, but sometimes it's the best one. Shouldn't force a victim of rape to go through 9 months of pregnancy, nor should you write off the mother if staying pregnant's gonna kill her or seriously mess her up.

Well, that's a bold assertion, but you do realize that I have no intention of simply taking your word for it, yes? So I will now be expecting you to produce scientific evidence that the definition of life is "neural activity".

You once worked in a fertility clinic and you're unfamiliar with the stages of gestation? Interesting.

Hey, wow, another non sequitur.

You said "I will now be expecting you to produce scientific evidence that the definition of life is 'neural activity'" and you can't see how my post would follow on from that? Your lack of comprehension is your own responsibility.

Is there anyone on this planet who doesn't think you're a waste of space? I'm just curious.

You can't even state that with certainty on a message board, but do get back to us after you've polled everyone on the planet. I'd like to see your data.

 

[Cecilie1200]

Considering that leftists define "health of the mother" as "she's stressed and crying because her boyfriend lied about the condom", this is singularly unimpressive.

^^^ cue ^^^

Honey, I'm not the one who kneejerks to, "But what about RAAAAPPPEEE?!?!?" every time the question of abortion comes up. Because we can't be reminded too often that all abortions are a result of rape.

Is it "drama" to note the existence and ridiculousness of drama?

 

[playtime]

^^^

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

Not sure why this topic is in this forum, but riddle me this: Should fertility clinics be banned?

Of course not.

And neither should abortion.

The problem of abortion needs to be addressed in a manner consistent with privacy rights jurisprudence; not in a manner where the size and authority of government is increased at the expanse of individual liberty, which those who advocate 'banning' abortion seek to do.

 

[Arianrhod]

Not sure why this topic is in this forum, but riddle me this: Should fertility clinics be banned?

Of course not.

And neither should abortion.

The problem of abortion needs to be addressed in a manner consistent with privacy rights jurisprudence; not in a manner where the size and authority of government is increased at the expanse of individual liberty, which those who advocate 'banning' abortion seek to do.

I raised the question because with one exception upthread, none of the "pro-life" crowd ever seems to object to the destruction of embryos in fertility clinics (one of them even claims to have worked in a fertility clinic but, given her lack of knowledge about the stages of gestation, the claim is dubious).

Which, to my mind, says it's not really about "life" at all. They know what would happen if they tried to shut down fertility clinics.

 

[Geaux4it]

BLUF: If it has a heartbeat, the abortion becomes murder

-Geaux

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

Not sure why this topic is in this forum, but riddle me this: Should fertility clinics be banned?

Of course not.

And neither should abortion.

The problem of abortion needs to be addressed in a manner consistent with privacy rights jurisprudence; not in a manner where the size and authority of government is increased at the expanse of individual liberty, which those who advocate 'banning' abortion seek to do.

I raised the question because with one exception upthread, none of the "pro-life" crowd ever seems to object to the destruction of embryos in fertility clinics (one of them even claims to have worked in a fertility clinic but, given her lack of knowledge about the stages of gestation, the claim is dubious).

Which, to my mind, says it's not really about "life" at all. They know what would happen if they tried to shut down fertility clinics.

Correct.

It's isn't about being 'pro-life,' it's about compelling conformity through force of law.

 

[Geaux4it]

When allowing a heartbeat to cease as a result of removing life support, does not compare to abortion

There is a difference between letting someone die, vs denying someone live

-Geaux

 

[Cecilie1200]

Not sure why this topic is in this forum, but riddle me this: Should fertility clinics be banned?

Of course not.

And neither should abortion.

The problem of abortion needs to be addressed in a manner consistent with privacy rights jurisprudence; not in a manner where the size and authority of government is increased at the expanse of individual liberty, which those who advocate 'banning' abortion seek to do.

I raised the question because with one exception upthread, none of the "pro-life" crowd ever seems to object to the destruction of embryos in fertility clinics (one of them even claims to have worked in a fertility clinic but, given her lack of knowledge about the stages of gestation, the claim is dubious).

Which, to my mind, says it's not really about "life" at all. They know what would happen if they tried to shut down fertility clinics.

Correct.

It's isn't about being 'pro-life,' it's about compelling conformity through force of law.

You leftists would know all about that. The irony of you people excoriating others for your own game plan never fails to amuse and appall.

On the bright side, though, you and Arian make a cute couple. So glad you two can entertain each other while the adults talk.

 

[Arianrhod]

Not sure why this topic is in this forum, but riddle me this: Should fertility clinics be banned?

Of course not.

And neither should abortion.

The problem of abortion needs to be addressed in a manner consistent with privacy rights jurisprudence; not in a manner where the size and authority of government is increased at the expanse of individual liberty, which those who advocate 'banning' abortion seek to do.

I raised the question because with one exception upthread, none of the "pro-life" crowd ever seems to object to the destruction of embryos in fertility clinics (one of them even claims to have worked in a fertility clinic but, given her lack of knowledge about the stages of gestation, the claim is dubious).

Which, to my mind, says it's not really about "life" at all. They know what would happen if they tried to shut down fertility clinics.

Correct.

It's isn't about being 'pro-life,' it's about compelling conformity through force of law.

You leftists would know all about that. The irony of you people excoriating others for your own game plan never fails to amuse and appall.

On the bright side, though, you and Arian make a cute couple. So glad you two can entertain each other while the adults talk.

And Cecelie provides us with another example of a thoughtful content-filled post (the "content" being, true to form, "you leftists," amateurish attempts to set herself up as a poor man's eHarmony and, for the pièce de résistance, a reference to "adults") in an attempt to deflect from the fact that she once worked in a fertility clinic and will not deny that she was fine with the clinic's policy of destroying unused embryos.

Because a true adult would defend her position. A petulant child would leave it hanging so that the only logical conclusion is: Fertility clinics Good (because the right class of women pay for their services) while abortions Bad (because the prevailing mythology is that only poor women have them).

Classism at its finest.


Now, treat us to another content-filled post.

 

[initforme]

Perhaps one way to encourage women NOT to have abortions is to give them some help in the form of money if they come in for an abortion. If they HAVE the child, then they receive some gov't assistance. Otherwise, even if abortion becomes illegal, those who REALLY want one will find a way to have one. Pro life means helping out AFTER the child is born as well as BEFORE.

 

[Arianrhod]

Perhaps one way to encourage women NOT to have abortions is to give them some help in the form of money if they come in for an abortion. If they HAVE the child, then they receive some gov't assistance. Otherwise, even if abortion becomes illegal, those who REALLY want one will find a way to have one. Pro life means helping out AFTER the child is born as well as BEFORE.

Agree with your last sentence 100%, but in my observation access to education and contraception is far more effective. The goal for sane people is to prevent as many unplanned pregnancies as possible.

But with idiots trying to shut down one of the major sources of both education and contraception because these things go against their religion (i.e., attempting to legislate morality), the issue becomes more complicated.

 

[Book of Jeremiah]

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

Should murder be illegal?