Zone1 A Question For Pro-Choicers

[hadit]

You mean a question for a majority of America.

Unlike you, who are a minority of America.

Abortion exists as a medical procedure to end pregnancies that are no longer viable, due to complications. Which are 95% of all abortions.

It has nothing to do with choice.

Source for that assertion?

 

[Hellbilly]

If babies aren't alive in the womb then how does abortion exist? After all, how can you kill somebody who was never alive in the first place?

Then the Lord God formed a man from the dust of the ground and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life, and the man became a living being.
Genesis 2:7

 

[Bob Blaylock]

I wouldn't call something "alive" if it can't sustain itself on its own.

Then you do not know how life is defined.

Even after birth, a human being cannot survive on his own without a lot of support from other, more developed human beings.

I suspect that very few of us ever develop the abilities that we would need to truly survive on our own, without some support from other humans.

 

[Bob Blaylock]

Function? You mean live outside a host? Most after 27 weeks approximately.

So, put a 27-week-old human being out on the street, to fend for himself. How long will he survive?

 

[Road Runner]

Then the Lord God formed a man from the dust of the ground and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life, and the man became a living being.
Genesis 2:7

What's the point that you're trying to make here?

 

[whutTHEYsay]

A Question For Pro-Choicers 240304 {post•1184} Bob Blaylock Feb’24: So, put a 27-week-old human being out on the street, to fend for himself. How long will he survive? bbblylck 240304 Saqfpc01184

How Catholics Voted - Catholics for Choice pblshd.21.01.21 national survey​

​

A national survey of Catholic voters in the 2020 election shows that an overwhelming majority of Catholics continue to respect the intensely personal nature of reproductive health issues and support people exercising their own conscience when it comes to making these decisions​

The Republican ignorance on abortion 230716 [post•342} Bob Blaylock said: If we're going to arbitrarily decide which human beings are more unimportant than which other human beings, then……bbblylck 230716 Strioa00342


A Question For Pro-Choicers 240304 {post•1186}

Then what? Saint Bobblaylock

A six months old baby is separated from his/her mother and has therefore met the live birth requirement in the US Constitution for state protection for a right to life. If you abandon that baby to the elements and seek to dehydrate and starve any human being that has been separated from their mother to death or injury you are committing a crime.

When a woman terminates her own pregnancy, she is doing what the overwhelming majority of Catholics honor. They honor the Constitution of the United States, and the very principle of separation of state and conscience embedded in it

When the majority of Catholics in America can respect people exercising their own conscience when it comes to decisions about ending an unwanted pregnancy in their life: why then, Saint Bobblaylock do you need to get involved and want states to get involved? The state should stay entirely out of it.

nfbw 240304 Vaqfpc01186 to Strioa00342

 

[Bob Blaylock]

A Question For Pro-Choicers 240304 {post•1184} Bob Blaylock Feb’24: So, put a 27-week-old human being out on the street, to fend for himself. How long will he survive? bbblylck 240304 Saqfpc01184

The Republican ignorance on abortion 230716 [post•342} Bob Blaylock said: If we're going to arbitrarily decide which human beings are more unimportant than which other human beings, then……bbblylck 230716 Strioa00342

Then what? Saint Bobblaylock

Once again, a malfunctioning AI 'bot, unable to write like an actual human being, is worthy only of mockery and ridicule, and not of being taken seriously in any manner.

 

[whutTHEYsay]

Once again,

can you refute this?

A six months old baby is separated from his/her mother and has therefore met the live birth requirement in the US Constitution for state protection for a right to life.

 

[hadit]

The bottom line remains, the argument is not over science, because science definitely states that a developing human baby in the womb is a living, growing, developing human being at an early stage of life. That baby is alive, there is no argument that can hold against it.

That means that we are left to argue over legal semantics. Now, it would seem somewhat hypocritical for a group of people who argue vehemently that we must "follow the science" in all matters to suddenly jettison said science in favor of legal hair-splitting.

 

[Bob Blaylock]

That means that we are left to argue over legal semantics. Now, it would seem somewhat hypocritical for a group of people who argue vehemently that we must "follow the science" in all matters to suddenly jettison said science in favor of legal hair-splitting.

Keep in mind that the “science” that these fools want us to follow is the same “science” that asserts that Bruce Jenner is a woman.

 

[hadit]

Keep in mind that the “science” that these fools want us to follow is the same “science” that asserts that Bruce Jenner is a woman.

And that "science" is NOT biology.

 

[Bob Blaylock]

And that "science" is NOT biology.

It's not even real science.

 

[ding]

That is not the issue in being allowed to choose an abortion.

Keep wearing your blinders, repeating only what your church or leaders want people to believe.

And your premise is totally sickening, to begin with.

Talk about things you actually know about.

Don't women need state approval for an abortion in Israel? Isn't that because abortion is ending a human life?