Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
The position of any sane, moral person is that anyone who engages in a sexual reproductive act resulting in sexual reproduction, i.e. creating a new offspring son or daughter, is a parent and that parent should take care of their kid.Is it your position that any woman who engages is sexual intercourse should immediately have her personal reproductive freedom seized by the State?
So you _are_ clueless about basic biology. But then, you're a pro-lifer, so that's a given.
An unfertilized egg developed into me. This is not debatable. It's human, it's alive, it's individual, it developed into me.
So, by your standards, killing it should be murder. Yet you say not. You're not consistent or believable.
Now, move those goalposts more. Contort everything so you can define yourself as correct. Keep yelling "BECAUSE I SAY SO!!" over and over. Pretend that your entirely arbitrary classifications aren't arbitary. That is, lie your ass off. What else can you do?
Seized by the state? No and irrelevant.Is it your position that any woman who engages is sexual intercourse should immediately have her personal reproductive freedom seized by the State?
No, I don't support such an draconian, authoritarian imposition - neither for males or females.
No enlightened, advanced democracy would tolerate such an abuse of power.
The position of any sane, moral person is that anyone who engages in a sexual reproductive act resulting in sexual reproduction, i.e. creating a new offspring son or daughter, is a parent and that parent should take care of their kid.
You framing this as something out of Draco from Athens is just you showing your ass and demonstrating absolute ignorance.
That's clearly an insane claim on your part, since any human can trace their development back to an unfertilized egg.And unfertilized egg CAN’T develop into ANYTHING!
You say the woman has a choice. I disagree, the man and the woman have two choices -
When I was growing up, abortion was basically illegal everywhere. Furthermore, there were very strong social sanctions attached to it in most communities. If a girl/woman got an abortion, it was basically the same as a confirmation that she was a slut/whore/you pick the right word.
But there was a movement afoot around the country in the late 60's and early 70's, and a few states had repealed their laws or stopped trying to enforce them, or making exceptions for "research" or whatever. The Supreme Court figuratively took the world by storm when they decreed that [basically] a woman had a "right" to get an abortion during the first trimester of pregnancy. We now know that this "right" was nothing more than Leftist sophistry that has now been properly tossed into the dustbin of history.
During the looooooong period when abortion was outlawed (from the Founding until, say, 1973) there were occasions when desperate women tried primitive means to self-abort, and occasionally these measures resulted in permanent damage, or even death to the woman using them. The current Leftist Narrative is that huge numbers of women died in these attempts, and that "fact" justifies their campaign to re-establish a "woman's right to choose."
A nationwide ban on abortions could only be created by a Constitutional Amendment, which in turn would require super-majorities in legislatures, etc., which supermajority does not currently exist. There could be a ban in a few states - Utah comes to mind - but it would not be completely effective, as various "rights" groups would seek to avoid it by offering free transportation and services to those in need of an abortion.
Polls create false narratives about abortions being supported and opposed; the result of the poll invariably depends on how the questions are presented. While it pains me to type this, President Clinton was on the right track when he suggested that abortions should be legal, safe, and rare. The only question is how to define "rare."
That's clearly an insane claim on your part, since any human can trace their development back to an unfertilized egg.
Is there any pro-lifer who doesn't fail at basic biology?
Americans will not tolerate politicians penalizing women who have sexual congress with men by arrogating control of their wombs.The position of any sane, moral person is that anyone who engages in a sexual reproductive act resulting in sexual reproduction, i.e. creating a new offspring son or daughter, is a parent and that parent should take care of their kid.
You framing this as something out of Draco from Athens is just you showing your ass and demonstrating absolute ignorance.
Your fantasizing about sex and sitting in judgment of women in no way impacts Americans' respect for reproductive freedom and a woman's right to control her own body if and until a viable, sentient person has developed in her womb.Seized by the state? No and irrelevant.
You refuse to answer a simple question because it fucks up your arguement. If you as a person wishes to have children, you would go out and meet the opposite sex with the same said values and have a baby. I don't think I need to explain how conception happens. So the gent and lady made a choice.
Now, a gent and lady decide to have some sexy fun. They could watch some porn, do a 69, anal, lay cable on her chest, watersports etc.. One other option is to put the penis in the vagina. From school, they will remember the algebra equation in sex education, Sperm + Egg = Baby. So now they have a choice, do they deliver the equation, or prevent the equation. Now, we know there's pills, condoms, gels, implants, coils etc.. to avoid the equation. Each one has an extremely high success rate.
You say the woman has a choice. I disagree, the man and the woman have two choices -
1 - Have a sexy night that involves ejaculation and an orgasm without sexual intercourse.
2 - Ejaculate in the vagina but before undertaking this sex algebra equation, choose to have a baby or not. If no, revert back to my comments above and contraception.
So societies have healthcare centres, hospitals etc.. to treat illnesses and diseases. So the gent and lady, for whatever reason, implement the equation. So is the fetus an illness, a disease? I don't think so, but you're wanting healthcare to kill it.
Which then HAD to be fertilized, the only way it would develop into a human.That's clearly an insane claim on your part, since any human can trace their development back to an unfertilized egg.
Is there any pro-lifer who doesn't fail at basic biology?
Americans will not tolerate politicians penalizing women who have sexual congress with men by arrogating control of their wombs.
If pregnancy results, Americans overwhelmingly concur that, unless and until a microscopic, mindless amalgam of cells evolves into an actual, viable, sentient person, it is a private matter over which politicians and bureaucrats have no control.
Fanatics seeking such an authoritarian imposition can forget it.
So a sentient viable PERSON develops in the womb. Other than killing it, how can one tell exactly when this happens?Your fantasizing about sex and sitting in judgment of women in no way impacts Americans' respect for reproductive freedom and a woman's right to control her own body if and until a viable, sentient person has developed in her womb.
I mean you think this retarded bullshit all you want, but it won’t be an accurate framing of reality.Americans will not tolerate politicians penalizing women who have sexual congress with men by arrogating control of their wombs.
I mean you’re a mindless aggregate of cells, far dumber than the pig that became my breakfast sausage today. Important fact to keep in mind there. For other people, not you, obviously, you can’t keep anything in mind.If pregnancy results, Americans overwhelmingly concur that, unless and until a microscopic, mindless amalgam of cells evolves into an actual, viable, sentient person
At the minimal, it must have developed a brain.So a sentient viable PERSON develops in the womb. Other than killing it, how can one tell exactly when this happens?
And………….At the minimal, it must have developed a brain.
In summation, I disagree with the thread's thesis:
Abortion should be banned in the United States
Abortion is banned under oppressive, authoritarian regimes such as in El Salvador, Nicaragua, and Iran, not in any advanced democratic nations, nor do I expect such a radical devolution in personal freedom to be inflicted upon the populace by radical politicians and bureaucrats, not in the U.S., not in any advanced democracy.
Obviously the debate is beyond you.You left out "the woman has an abortion".
Sure, _you_ say it's not a choice, but since nobody made you dictator, nobody cares.
Simply put, basic sex education is above your IQYour fantasizing about sex and sitting in judgment of women in no way impacts Americans' respect for reproductive freedom and a woman's right to control her own body if and until a viable, sentient person has developed in her womb.
