A Touchy Question On Gendercide Or In This Case Homocide

[Amelia]

So you clowns don't want a woman to decide about abortion based on the sex of the fetus,

but you also want to force her to see an ultrasound, and thus learn the sex of the fetus?

lol.

It's hard for your average person to decipher the sex of a child on ultrasound. Either way, this is a slippery slope. If abortion can be based on gender will sexual identity be next? Skin color, eye color, obesity? If Gene GABRG3 is found, will one abort because he/she has an increased risk of alcoholism?

It isn't a slippery slope.

You're already allowed to abort for no reason at all.

Where is there to slip to?

As long as people can abort "just because" why does anyone care about what if any specific reasons a person might have considered?

 

[WillowTree]

So you clowns don't want a woman to decide about abortion based on the sex of the fetus,

but you also want to force her to see an ultrasound, and thus learn the sex of the fetus?

lol.

It's hard for your average person to decipher the sex of a child on ultrasound. Either way, this is a slippery slope. If abortion can be based on gender will sexual identity be next? Skin color, eye color, obesity? If Gene GABRG3 is found, will one abort because he/she has an increased risk of alcoholism?

Get ready for multiple wives in about 20 years..


It isn't a slippery slope.

You're already allowed to abort for no reason at all.

Where is there to slip to?

As long as people can abort "just because" why does anyone care about what if any specific reasons a person might have considered?

Get ready for multiple wives in about 20 years.. harem scarem

 

[CaféAuLait]

So you clowns don't want a woman to decide about abortion based on the sex of the fetus,

but you also want to force her to see an ultrasound, and thus learn the sex of the fetus?

lol.

It's hard for your average person to decipher the sex of a child on ultrasound. Either way, this is a slippery slope. If abortion can be based on gender will sexual identity be next? Skin color, eye color, obesity? If Gene GABRG3 is found, will one abort because he/she has an increased risk of alcoholism?

It isn't a slippery slope.

You're already allowed to abort for no reason at all.

Where is there to slip to?

As long as people can abort "just because" why does anyone care about what if any specific reasons a person might have considered?

I guess you are right. I guess I always thought those who opted for abortion were of the midnset they could not have a child at the moment or had no means to support a child. Of course there are those who do so for medical purposes such as death of the mother and or major birth defect.

I never thought that one would get pregnant on purpose and then kill the baby because it was the wrong sex, sexual orientation, hair or eye color. That is far different IMO. To think that the gender of a child is considered a "defect" by one is mind-blowing to me.

 

[mudwhistle]

So you clowns don't want a woman to decide about abortion based on the sex of the fetus,

but you also want to force her to see an ultrasound, and thus learn the sex of the fetus?

lol.

That's not the point.

Picking who you want to let live is a slippery-slope regardless the reason. Eugenics is the next stage.

Incidentally.......imagine if someone you killed in the womb might have invented something that cured cancer or a new kind of energy that doesn't pollute. It would be a shame to kill the savior of mankind just because the mother doesn't want to change poopy diapers or hates the thought of being tied down.

 

[mudwhistle]

I noticed that when you ask this question the Gay members become silent.


Imagine if you had two homophobic parents that know you're gonna be gay. Would you still support their right to abort you?



It's like college students being all for fairness and the government being able to spread the wealth......but then you ask them if they take a test and score an "A", should the professor spread that A around and give everyone a C.

Heck no......that ain't fair. If it starts to effect them personally, well that's a different story.

Abortion is the killing of life for personal reasons. So what if the personal reason is bigotry?

 

[ScreamingEagle]

So you clowns don't want a woman to decide about abortion based on the sex of the fetus,

but you also want to force her to see an ultrasound, and thus learn the sex of the fetus?

lol.

That's not the point.

Picking who you want to let live is a slippery-slope regardless the reason. Eugenics is the next stage.

Incidentally.......imagine if someone you killed in the womb might have invented something that cured cancer or a new kind of energy that doesn't pollute. It would be a shame to kill the savior of mankind just because the mother doesn't want to change poopy diapers or hates the thought of being tied down.

Eugenics is not "the next stage".......this IS eugenics....

eu·gen·ics   /yuˈdʒɛnɪks/ Show Spelled[yoo-jen-iks] Show IPA
noun ( used with a singular verb )

the study of or belief in the possibility of improving the qualities of the human species or a human population, especially by such means as discouraging reproduction by persons having genetic defects or presumed to have inheritable undesirable traits (negative eugenics) or encouraging reproduction by persons presumed to have inheritable desirable traits (positive eugenics).

Eugenics | Define Eugenics at Dictionary.com

 

[ScreamingEagle]

I noticed that when you ask this question the Gay members become silent.


Imagine if you had two homophobic parents that know you're gonna be gay. Would you still support their right to abort you?



It's like college students being all for fairness and the government being able to spread the wealth......but then you ask them if they take a test and score an "A", should the professor spread that A around and give everyone a C.

Heck no......that ain't fair. If it starts to effect them personally, well that's a different story.

Abortion is the killing of life for personal reasons. So what if the personal reason is bigotry?

and let's not mention racial eugenics either.....

 

[J.E.D]

It's clear Obama and many on the left don't care if people want to find out what sex their unborn baby is before deciding to abort them or not.

It's clear that abortion is legal in the US, and that women don't have to tell any person the reason for their decision to abort.

Thanks for playing.

 

[strollingbones]

mudd the little av you posted...200 million missing...

is that in the us....india or china?

where are the 200 million missing from?

 

[ClosedCaption]

It's their choice dude...in another thread you're going to talk about how freedom is good in every way, not in this one

Oh....you can read minds?????

Nope.....I don't think so. I don't think the way you suggest.


I simply wanted an honest answer on this question.

If you didnt think that way you one, wouldnt post all over this site how freedom at all cost is a good thing and two, wouldve said "WTF are you talking about?"

Instead you deflected.

If someone want to abort for a reason, it's their reason no matter what you think about it. They want to abort gays...their choice.

 

[Katzndogz]

I have just one thought. Forcing a person to raise a child they will dislike or resent as some sort of punishment for gendercide is the wrong way to go. This is a child that will need love and care, and forcing it on someone who really does not want it will most likely not lead to a happy child. If you want to punish it then find some other way to do it.

No one is forced to raise any child. That's why we have safe haven laws. What you propose is to kill a child instead of putting the child into a loving home and imagine that this is better for the child.

 

[ClosedCaption]

I have just one thought. Forcing a person to raise a child they will dislike or resent as some sort of punishment for gendercide is the wrong way to go. This is a child that will need love and care, and forcing it on someone who really does not want it will most likely not lead to a happy child. If you want to punish it then find some other way to do it.

No one is forced to raise any child. That's why we have safe haven laws. What you propose is to kill a child instead of putting the child into a loving home and imagine that this is better for the child.

Forcing a person to birth a child is not better

 

[Ravi]

When Barry Hussein was a state senator he used his power to continue a unique form of infanticide where Chicago hospitals would induce premature birth in women who wished a late term abortion. The hospital would then leave the baby naked on a cold table without so much as a blanket to comfort it as it struggled to breathe and died. A janitor found a living baby in the trash and alerted a nurse who blew the whistle on the secret manslaughter. Barry made sure she was fired and the procedure continued.

Untrue and negged. The nurse in question lied.

It was already illegal to let a child die of neglect in Illinois.

As to the OP, there is no doubt in my mind that the fundies would happily abort any fetus that might be gay.

 

[mudwhistle]

I have just one thought. Forcing a person to raise a child they will dislike or resent as some sort of punishment for gendercide is the wrong way to go. This is a child that will need love and care, and forcing it on someone who really does not want it will most likely not lead to a happy child. If you want to punish it then find some other way to do it.

No one is forced to raise any child. That's why we have safe haven laws. What you propose is to kill a child instead of putting the child into a loving home and imagine that this is better for the child.

Forcing a person to birth a child is not better

Or forced em to go Bareback?

 

[mudwhistle]

When Barry Hussein was a state senator he used his power to continue a unique form of infanticide where Chicago hospitals would induce premature birth in women who wished a late term abortion. The hospital would then leave the baby naked on a cold table without so much as a blanket to comfort it as it struggled to breathe and died. A janitor found a living baby in the trash and alerted a nurse who blew the whistle on the secret manslaughter. Barry made sure she was fired and the procedure continued.

Untrue and negged. The nurse in question lied.

It was already illegal to let a child die of neglect in Illinois.

As to the OP, there is no doubt in my mind that the fundies would happily abort any fetus that might be gay.

I may be mistaken, but you're the first person to answer the question.

 

[ClosedCaption]

No one is forced to raise any child. That's why we have safe haven laws. What you propose is to kill a child instead of putting the child into a loving home and imagine that this is better for the child.

Forcing a person to birth a child is not better

Or forced em to go Bareback?

Bareback is not part of child birth or abortion. Arent we still talking about that or moving the goal posts?

 

[geauxtohell]

It's clear Obama and many on the left don't care if people want to find out what sex their unborn baby is before deciding to abort them or not.

What if it's true that Homosexuality is really genetic?

What if they were to isolate that gene?

What if they were able to say definitively that their child is gonna be straight or Gay and people decided to abort the child accordingly?

What if people started using sexual orientation as a reason to snuff that unborn baby out of existence?

Would you feel the same way about Gendercide...or in this case Homocide.

Just asking.

It's not a tricky question. The right to choice is just that. There is no consideration for why a woman wants to terminate. It's not relevant.

Has the GOP now decided to support prenatal screening since they can use it in the abortion debate?

 

[Katzndogz]

When Barry Hussein was a state senator he used his power to continue a unique form of infanticide where Chicago hospitals would induce premature birth in women who wished a late term abortion. The hospital would then leave the baby naked on a cold table without so much as a blanket to comfort it as it struggled to breathe and died. A janitor found a living baby in the trash and alerted a nurse who blew the whistle on the secret manslaughter. Barry made sure she was fired and the procedure continued.

Untrue and negged. The nurse in question lied.

It was already illegal to let a child die of neglect in Illinois.

As to the OP, there is no doubt in my mind that the fundies would happily abort any fetus that might be gay.

FactCheck.org : Obama and ‘Infanticide’

As originally proposed, the 2003 state bill, SB 1082, sought to define the term "born-alive infant" as any infant, even one born as the result of an unsuccessful abortion, that shows vital signs separate from its mother. The bill would have established that infants thus defined were humans with legal rights. It never made it to the floor; it was voted down by the Health and Human Services Committee, which Obama chaired.


Obama, Senate floor, 2002: [A]dding a – an additional doctor who then has to be called in an emergency situation to come in and make these assessments is really designed simply to burden the original decision of the woman and the physician to induce labor and perform an abortion. … I think it’s important to understand that this issue ultimately is about abortion and not live births.

Obama, Senate floor, 2001: Number one, whenever we define a previable fetus as a person that is protected by the equal protection clause or the other elements in the Constitution, what we’re really saying is, in fact, that they are persons that are entitled to the kinds of protections that would be provided to a – a child, a nine-month-old – child that was delivered to term. That determination then, essentially, if it was accepted by a court, would forbid abortions to take place. I mean, it – it would essentially bar abortions, because the equal protection clause does not allow somebody to kill a child, and if this is a child, then this would be an antiabortion statute.

Obama’s critics are free to speculate on his motives for voting against the bills, and postulate a lack of concern for babies’ welfare. But his stated reasons for opposing "born-alive" bills have to do with preserving abortion rights, a position he is known to support and has never hidden.

 

[koshergrl]

So long as it's a baby you won't find any Progressives going to bat for it.

They'd like them all dead.

 

[Katzndogz]

I have just one thought. Forcing a person to raise a child they will dislike or resent as some sort of punishment for gendercide is the wrong way to go. This is a child that will need love and care, and forcing it on someone who really does not want it will most likely not lead to a happy child. If you want to punish it then find some other way to do it.

No one is forced to raise any child. That's why we have safe haven laws. What you propose is to kill a child instead of putting the child into a loving home and imagine that this is better for the child.

Forcing a person to birth a child is not better

Especially if that child is an unwanted girl-child.