61% Americans Say Abortions Should Be Legal!

[healthmyths]

NFBW 23MAY30: { to vths #510 } When a tree is chopped down it is true that a life is terminated. Do you know of any woman who was growing a tree inside her body when “she” decided to chop it down?

Courtesy Mr Redstrmrsng #44 totalitarian red wave rising propagandist

View attachment 790291

Science says there is only one brain and one neurological system sustaining life until 24 weeks. That means there is only one person inside a pregnant woman’s body. My question is based on when there is a quantity of one, how can the one be accused of killing somebody else?

And science says that the body instead of the woman can in almost all cases NOT be stopped from growing UNLESS the woman does something to stop.

 

[Dragonlady]

A woman seeking an abortion is not a "patient" Those are people who have afflictions by no choice of their own.

And abortion is a medical procedure with THREE parties involved.
1. The pregnant woman (a matter of convenience)
2. The doctor ( a $ale)
3. The pre-born person (a matter of life & death) > HIGHEST RANK

There is no such thing as a “pre-born person”.

Doctors make more money caring for a pregnant woman through the birth of a child than they do by an abortion.

A lot more. Thousands, compared to hundreds.

 

[healthmyths]

Honestly, I don't judge people that's Gods job (it is all about role and responsibilities for me).

I don't know what goes on in people's lives and I am pretty certain I want Government to have a lot less control in the bedroom as this...

This has basically nothing to do with us... Even Jesus didn't comment...

Well back in the time of Jesus The population of the world was about 300 million at the time of Christ and changed very little in the next thousand years. The population of the world reached one billion in 1804, three billion in 1960, and rose to about 6.8 billion in 2010.

World’s Population and the Church’s Response

2016 Book of Resolutions, #3361

www.umcjustice.org

Now what that has to do with abortion is everything! People would NEVER kill a human that would eventually be helping older people to survive.
See the concept of euthanasia was never a concept at that period and keeping people alive was a daily task.

Living as we do with mass-produced food, markets, and restaurants in every town, and giant supermarket complexes that are often just down the road, it takes some imagination to think of finding food every day in the natural environment. Yet that is just what humans (Homo sapiens) have done for most of their time on Earth — from their appearance about 200,000 years ago until about 11,000 years ago when they began to develop agriculture. Before Homo sapiens evolved, our hominine ancestors foraged for millions of years.

https://www.khanacademy.org/humanities/big-history-project/early-humans/how-did-first-humans-live/a/foraging

So going to McDonalds and in less than 5 minutes you get what your ancestors took all day. So keeping humans alive especially babies was primary in
the early humans survival!
But most of you idiots have NEVER had to scrounge for food most of the day so your appreciation of the sacredness of life is apparent.

 

[Dragonlady]

And science says that the body instead of the woman can in almost all cases NOT be stopped from growing UNLESS the woman does something to stop.

That’s bulkshit. The fetus frequently stops growing, or fails to develop properly. 400,000 American women have a miscarriage or stillbirth after the first trimester.

Half those women will suffer a stillbirth after 20 weeks.

In total, 1 million American women will miscarry every year. That’s a far cry from “nothing will stop that baby from growing”.

 

[protectionist]

There is no such thing as a “pre-born person”.

Doctors make more money caring for a pregnant woman through the birth of a child than they do by an abortion.

A lot more. Thousands, compared to hundreds.

There most certainly IS a such thing as a pre-born person. And we all were that at one time, when our parents decided to not abort us.

I dont care what doctors make more money at. Whichever they make more money at, still the doctors only involvement is money (unless there is some medical complication involved)

I have no idea what this is referring to >> "A lot more. Thousands, compared to hundreds."

 

[Lesh]

There most certainly IS a such thing as a pre-born person. And we all were that at one time, when our parents decided to not abort us.

I dont care what doctors make more money at. Whichever they make more money at, still the doctors only involvement is money (unless there is some medical complication involved)

I have no idea what this is referring to >> "A lot more. Thousands, compared to hundreds."

So you don't care about facts...you're just a fundie anti-abortion freak.

Got it

 

[GWV5903]

So you agree no state should be allowed to pass laws that restrict access to safe legal abortion through 24 weeks of gestation. Is that correct?

Not at all, but you knew this before you asked…

Do you have anything in your limited opinion that justifies abortion? You understand life begins at conception…

Based on your perspective, anyone should be able to kill another human being and face no consequences…

 

[whutTHEYsay]

Does anybody have any idea what all this babbling is about ?... or how it in any way relates to my Post # 421, which it quoted ?

NFBW #420 Do you think all the Christian’s who voted for Biden have no moral compass if they are pro~ choice?

Mr protectnvst #421 The pre-born person does not HAVE a choice.

NFBW #433 At 16 weeks gestation how many functional neurological systems are sustaining life in a {woman’s body}

NFBW 23MAY30: I asked you a question Mr protectnvst in post #433 without realizing that you don’t answer questions that often.

In your post #421 You are inferring that there are two “persons” in the body of woman who is 15 weeks pregnant. At that stage of development the fetus is about two months from having its own brain. There is no such thing as a person that does not have brain.

And not having a brain means a fetus can’t have a choice.

It also means there is no way a woman can murder a part of herself if she has it removed.

 

[protectionist]

NFBW #420 Do you think all the Christian’s who voted for Biden have no moral compass if they are pro~ choice?

Mr protectnvst #421 The pre-born person does not HAVE a choice.

NFBW #433 At 16 weeks gestation how many functional neurological systems are sustaining life in a {woman’s body}

NFBW 23MAY30: I asked you a question Mr protectnvst in post #433 without realizing that you don’t answer questions that often.

In your post #421 You are inferring that there are two “persons” in the body of woman who is 15 weeks pregnant. At that stage of development the fetus is about two months from having its own brain. There is no such thing as a person that does not have brain.

And not having a brain means a fetus can’t have a choice.

It also means there is no way a woman can murder a part of herself if she has it removed.

I never "infer", insinuate, or imply ANYTHING. Looks like the "infer" is in YOUR head, not mine.

In the gobblegook that you posted, I see you are saying that "the fetus can’t have a choice."
Well, that is exactly what I said in Post # 421, which started this exchange. I said >> "First of all the word "choice" is incorrect. The pre-born person does not HAVE a choice.

So since you are in agreement with me, why are you talking to me as if you were in DISagreement ?

 

[whutTHEYsay]

Based on your perspective, anyone should be able to kill another human being and face no consequences…

Now you’re being rather absurd. No human being can kill another human being who is outside of the killer’s body, except in self-defense. Now if a woman wants to terminate her pregnancy and end the life of the living human organism being kept alive inside of her body then it is absolutely no business of mine or yours or the government’s .

 

[protectionist]

Now you’re being rather absurd. No human being can kill another human being who is outside of the killer’s body, except in self-defense. Now if a woman wants to terminate her pregnancy and end the life of the living human organism being kept alive inside of her body then it is absolutely no business of mine or yours or the government’s .

FALSE! Some blue states (Maryland and California) have extended their abortion lunacy to the legalization of infanticide. They have made it legal to kill already born babies up to 28 days old. See California perinatal law.

And it most certainly IS the business of you and me, and the govt, because the highest ranking member of the 3 involved parties (pregnant woman, doctor, pre-born person) is the pre-born person who has the most to lose (his/her life)

And since that pre-born person is unable to speak for him/herself, thus, you and me and the govt speak for them.

 

[whutTHEYsay]

I never "infer"

You wrote in post #421 “The pre-born person does not HAVE a choice.”


When you identified individual one as “the pre-born person” and the fact is to be an “unborn person” reason dictates that it would be inside the body of individual two.

That is two persons exactly as I said you inferred.,

Because it is a biological fact that a fetus has no neurological system that can sustain life or consciousness at 15 weeks it is impossible for individual one to be a person capable of having or needing a choice in the decision that it’s mother has every right to make on her own.

 

[Leo123]

Now the quite part Democrats don’t want to talk about out loud:

65% said abortion should usually be illegal in the second trimester, and 80% said that about the third trimester.

In other words, if Democrats are forced to fight for their actual position on abortion legislatively, they'll be demolished. Third-term abortions are an 80%-20% loser. Second-term abortions are a 65%-35% loser.

So... will Democrats fight for a federal abortion law promising people the right to an abortion in the first fifteen weeks of pregnancy? The period of time the current Mississippi law permits? The one they're claiming is a monstrosity that strips away women's rights?
BRING ON THE FIGHT!

AP-NORC poll: Most say restrict abortion after 1st trimester

A new poll shows a solid majority of Americans believe most abortions should be legal in the first three months of a woman’s pregnancy, but most say the procedure should usually be illegal in the second and third trimesters.

apnews.com

In encourage all Democrat leftists to abort. We don't need no more 'o 'dem.'

 

[whutTHEYsay]

They have made it legal to kill already born babies up to 28 days old. See California perinatal law.

Its been explained to you a couple of weeks ago;

Mr protctnvst #8,861 “In California infanticide became legal when Newsome signed AB 2223,legalizing the killing of BORN BABIES up to 28 days old.”

23MAY13 NFBW {to: 08,861} Why are you spreading v such blatant white Christian MAGA disinformation. Your bullshit started by a goddamned lying preacher.

The pastor of a southern California megachurch, for example, posted a message on Facebook claiming that the bill “would legalize infanticide!”

“perinatal death due to a pregnancy-related cause.” Can happen after a live birth. Nobody is killing an infant under this bill. AB2223 doesn’t prevent the state from keeping children safe. This isn’t a bill about infanticide. This is about protecting Californians who suffer pregnancy loss from being unjustly investigated, prosecuted or incarcerated. Full stop,”

 

[whutTHEYsay]

So... will Democrats fight for a federal abortion law promising people the right to an abortion in the first fifteen weeks of pregnancy?

Mr weathrmn0 post #1 “if Democrats are forced to fight for their actual position on abortion legislatively, they'll be demolished.

NFBW: two more national elections there will be at least 61 Democrat US SENATORS effectively permanently mothballing the Republican Party to never pick a Supreme Court anti-woman pro-gun Justice ever again

 

[Bob Blaylock]

NFBW: two more national elections there will be at least 61 Democrat US SENATORS effectively permanently mothballing the Republican Party to never pick a Supreme Court anti-woman pro-gun Justice ever again

“Anti-woman”? You mean like the most recent Justice, that can't even define what a woman is?

 

[GWV5903]

Now you’re being rather absurd.

I’m not advocating that abortion is an acceptable form of birth control, you are…

No human being can kill another human being who is outside of the killer’s body, except in self-defense.

Murder is when one human being takes another human beings life, we will continue in this society to justify abortion based on your beliefs, that you choose to defend it, doesn’t make it right…

Now if a woman wants to terminate her pregnancy and end the life of the living human organism being kept alive inside of her body then it is absolutely no business of mine or yours or the government’s .

All women have the right to choose what they want to do with the unborn child that they carry, that’s free will. That doesn’t make it right, but you keep telling yourself it’s none of our business…

 

[protectionist]

You wrote in post #421 “The pre-born person does not HAVE a choice.”


When you identified individual one as “the pre-born person” and the fact is to be an “unborn person” reason dictates that it would be inside the body of individual two.

That is two persons exactly as I said you inferred.,

Because it is a biological fact that a fetus has no neurological system that can sustain life or consciousness at 15 weeks it is impossible for individual one to be a person capable of having or needing a choice in the decision that it’s mother has every right to make on her own.

I guess I don't speak the sane jibberish language you do.

I said >> "First of all, the word "choice" is incorrect. The pre-born person does not HAVE a choice."

That is a 100% STATEMENT of FACT. NO, it is not an inference.

The fact that a fetus is incapable of making a choice, is exactly the reason WHY it doesnt one. Duh!

 

[protectionist]

Its been explained to you a couple of weeks ago;

Mr protctnvst #8,861 “In California infanticide became legal when Newsome signed AB 2223,legalizing the killing of BORN BABIES up to 28 days old.”

23MAY13 NFBW {to: 08,861} Why are you spreading v such blatant white Christian MAGA disinformation. Your bullshit started by a goddamned lying preacher.

The pastor of a southern California megachurch, for example, posted a message on Facebook claiming that the bill “would legalize infanticide!”

“perinatal death due to a pregnancy-related cause.” Can happen after a live birth. Nobody is killing an infant under this bill. AB2223 doesn’t prevent the state from keeping children safe. This isn’t a bill about infanticide. This is about protecting Californians who suffer pregnancy loss from being unjustly investigated, prosecuted or incarcerated. Full stop,”

FALSE! AB2223 DOES prevent th state from keeping children safe.
Whatever else AB2223 does is irrelevant to this discussion. The fact is the legislation, as signed by the governor, even after being amended, still contains the word "PERINATAL", and dictionaries are defining that as up to 4 weeks AFTER BIRTH.

The bill, now law, prohibits a “pregnant person” from being prosecuted for the loss of a pregnancy from “miscarriage, stillbirth, or abortion, or perinatal death due to a pregnancy-related cause.”
Well, that being the case, the plain text of this bill/law denies life-saving protections to newly born children, by sanctioning perinatal death due to a pregnancy-related cause.

Compounding those concerns is a section in the bill saying that “a person shall not be subject to civil or criminal liability … based on their actions or omissions,” spurring questions about whether “actions” includes intentional harm to a newborn. (up to 28 days old)

If the coroner does decide to investigate the reasons for a fetal death, foes noted that the bill prohibits the findings from being used to prosecute “any person, whether or not they were the person who was pregnant with the fetus.”

“This law would leave babies born alive after a failed abortion vulnerable to murder or death by neglect,” said a joint statement from Real Impact, Capitol Resource Institute, and the California Family Council.

perinatal
[per″ĭ-na´t'l]
relating to the period shortly before and after birth; from the twentieth to twenty-ninth week of gestation to 1 to 4 weeks after birth.

perinatal

Definition of perinatal in the Medical Dictionary by The Free Dictionary

medical-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com

 

[protectionist]

NFBW: two more national elections there will be at least 61 Democrat US SENATORS effectively permanently mothballing the Republican Party to never pick a Supreme Court anti-woman pro-gun Justice ever again

Since 50% of the pre-born people involved in abortion are female, and those opposed to it are saving their lives, that oppoistion could hardly be called "anti-woman"