Abortions: Should Women be Allowed to Choose?

[nodoginnafight]

If a woman favors legalization of abortion it does not automatically mean she would go out and have one herself.

Ok WHY is that though?

More than likely its because she believes each woman has the right to decide what's right for herself and not have to be subjected to what you or koshergrl think.

MHO: I am more than willing to let people make their own choices as long as they are not victimizing someone else. When someone decides to do something that injures someone else, that someone else deserves protection.

 

[Wicked Jester]

Ya' might want to educate yourself, before making such ridiculous claims.

I do read the facts a$$Hat. The early brain functions have to do with movement, not pain, or higher functions.

Researchers from the University of California, San Francisco in the Journal of the American Medical Association concluded in a meta-analysis of data from dozens of medical reports and studies that fetuses are unlikely to feel pain until the third trimester of pregnancy. There is an emerging consensus among developmental neurobiologists that the establishment of thalamocortical connections (at about 26 weeks) is a critical event with regard to fetal perception of pain.

So much for your torturing and killing hypothesis.

JAMA Network | JAMA | Fetal PainA Systematic Multidisciplinary Review of the Evidence

Keyword, dumbass, ""unlikely"....They don't even fuckin' know.

Look, I realize all of you pro-abortion types need to find some kind of way to feel better about yourselves, and your thirst for killing the innocent, but there is no concrete evidence whatsoever that a fetus does NOT feel pain during the final month of the first trimester.

At least I don't have to look for ways to feel good about my position on the issue....'cause I don't the support the wholesale slaughter of the innocents, who are considered nothing more than expendable inconveniences, and have no choice in the matter.

 

[bendog]

I don't ask, and please don't tell me.

 

[sfcalifornia]

Ok WHY is that though?

More than likely its because she believes each woman has the right to decide what's right for herself and not have to be subjected to what you or koshergrl think.

MHO: I am more than willing to let people make their own choices as long as they are not victimizing someone else. When someone decides to do something that injures someone else, that someone else deserves protection.

At the moment, according to law, a zygote is not considered someone else. Are you willing to let people make their own choices in deciding what is considered someone else? Because that's where the whole debate starts.

 

[koshergrl]

That's right. You do not have the right to determine whether or not an innocent and defenseless person's life is *worth* something. That's not your call. Even if the life you are dismissing is the life of your child.

 

[JoeB131]

Progressive word twisting has no effect on the reality of the situation.

Pro-choice is pro-abortion. You think it's perfectly okay for OTHER people to get abortions.

That's the way totalitarianism gets in the ring. Morons.

No, Pro-Choice is Pro-Choice.

It's not our decision to make.

We neither try to force an abortion on someone who doesn't want one (like they do in Mitt Romney's favorite investment oppurtunity, China) nor do we try to hinder a woman from getting one if that is what she has decided.

 

[koshergrl]

Shut up, pervert. Nobody wants to be slimed by you.

 

[JoeB131]

[Uh, excuse me, but......we now have government mandated health care.....Nothing's changed, nor will it.....You were saying?

No, we have a bunch of patches over a god awful system. Folks like my ex-boss still fire pregnant women on the theory they won't excercise their rights.

I owned a restaurant for many years, I gave my employees paid medical and family leave.....You were saying?

I'm happy for you... what does that have to do with the guys who don't- which is most of them. Shit, the GOP fought tooth and nail against UNPAID family leave.

There are already strong worker protections.....I know, I owned a successful business, OSHA ensured worker protection.....You were saying?

Has little to do with OSHA, guy. I was talking about bosses who fire pregnant employees or won't hire them. Kind of hard to tell women YOU MUST HAVE THIS BABY when you do nothing to help them when they get pregnant.

[/quote]Got any other stupid, loony libprog talking points to spew?[/QUOTE]

No, pretending you did the right thing (when no one can prove you did) more than makes up for the fact most people don't and your political movement puts the rights of the wealthy above those of working people.

 

[Cowman]

Abortion is murder. You confuse the terms "murder" and "legal". Just because a radical Supreme Court unconstitutionally legalized it, doesn't mean it's no longer murder. It's just "legalized" (and I use that term loosely) murder.

Murder is a legal definition, you ******* idiot. Murder... manslaughter, self defense, etc... they're all just legal definitions.

So who is confusing what?

Murder is defined as "the unlawful killing, with malice aforethought, of another person"

Please tell me how the mother and doctor are acting with malice?

They are literally killing and you don't consider that "malice"?!?

Is an owner acting with malice when he kills his gravely injured horse?

Look up what malice means. Look up what malice means in context of the law.

 

[koshergrl]

You look it up, if you intend to make some sort of point regarding the definition. Look it up, post the meaning, and explain what your malfunction is.

A gravely injured horse is not an unborn child.

 

[Noomi]

That's right. You do not have the right to determine whether or not an innocent and defenseless person's life is *worth* something. That's not your call. Even if the life you are dismissing is the life of your child.

We decide the value of a person's life each and every day. Why the uproar over abortion, when we have decided that people in other countries are not worthy of the same life as us?

 

[JoeB131]

You look it up, if you intend to make some sort of point regarding the definition. Look it up, post the meaning, and explain what your malfunction is.

A gravely injured horse is not an unborn child.

No, but they are terminated under the same theory.

 

[Dragonlady]

You look it up, if you intend to make some sort of point regarding the definition. Look it up, post the meaning, and explain what your malfunction is.

A gravely injured horse is not an unborn child.

You're blithering again.

I have not seen any of you right wingers post anything that would indicate that you give a rat's ass for these children once they're born. You don't care what kind of life they have, so long as they're alive. You oppose any sort of social programs to help poor families, and then go on about "personal responsibility". I see NOTHING about personal responsibility in the Bible and a whole lot about giving and helping one another.

You want these children to be born, but you don't want them to have any kind of life once they are. You don't care whether their parents can afford the child or what happens to the rest of the family because of the hardship of the pregnancy and delivery, and loss of income to the family.

You don't care about living families at all. XXXXXXX No Family.

 

[koshergrl]

That's right. You do not have the right to determine whether or not an innocent and defenseless person's life is *worth* something. That's not your call. Even if the life you are dismissing is the life of your child.

We decide the value of a person's life each and every day. Why the uproar over abortion, when we have decided that people in other countries are not worthy of the same life as us?

We don't target infants in other countries.

If we were, what you are saying is you approve. It's okay by you? After all, abortion is, and this is your reason...

 

[koshergrl]

You look it up, if you intend to make some sort of point regarding the definition. Look it up, post the meaning, and explain what your malfunction is.

A gravely injured horse is not an unborn child.

You're blithering again.

I have not seen any of you right wingers post anything that would indicate that you give a rat's ass for these children once they're born. You don't care what kind of life they have, so long as they're alive. You oppose any sort of social programs to help poor families, and then go on about "personal responsibility". I see NOTHING about personal responsibility in the Bible and a whole lot about giving and helping one another.

You want these children to be born, but you don't want them to have any kind of life once they are. You don't care whether their parents can afford the child or what happens to the rest of the family because of the hardship of the pregnancy and delivery, and loss of income to the family.

You don't care about living families at all.

What juvenile claptrap. Look up logical fallacy, moron.

 

[Contumacious]

Abortions: Should Women be Allowed to Choose?

No sir.

Remember , we are now a theocratic banana republic.

.To the woman he said, "I will make your pains in childbearing very severe; with painful labor you will give birth to children. Your desire will be for your husband, and he will rule over you."

Genesis 3:16

.

 

[buckeye45_73]

That's right. You do not have the right to determine whether or not an innocent and defenseless person's life is *worth* something. That's not your call. Even if the life you are dismissing is the life of your child.

We decide the value of a person's life each and every day. Why the uproar over abortion, when we have decided that people in other countries are not worthy of the same life as us?

What are you talking about? worthy of what same life? And I'd rather the government not determine who is valued and who is not, it's fascism/communism.

 

[Dragonlady]

What are you talking about? worthy of what same life? And I'd rather the government not determine who is valued and who is not, it's fascism/communism.

Do you value and respect the lives of the working poor or do you refer to them as "takers"? Do you value and respect the lives of people who aren't white? Do you value and respect the lives of people on welfare?

If you don't value all of these people equally, does that make you a communist/facist?

 

[buckeye45_73]

What are you talking about? worthy of what same life? And I'd rather the government not determine who is valued and who is not, it's fascism/communism.

Do you value and respect the lives of the working poor or do you refer to them as "takers"? Do you value and respect the lives of people who aren't white? Do you value and respect the lives of people on welfare?

If you don't value all of these people equally, does that make you a communist/facist?

Do you know any conservatives at all? What you think we lynch blacks and call them ******* all day long?
God you're stupid, I work and have friends that are gay, black, asian, indian, you name it sister. The fact is we agree on somethings, disagree on others, but everyone has value....and should have a chance at life.

Some people grow up in tough circumstances and dont make it (dead, jail, ect), but some do, it's not up to us to pick and CHOOSE.
As for the working poor, I've been there and I didnt hate rich people...not all of them do, because some understand how things work. Some are lazy and dont do shit, some work and go to school, trying to better their situation.

I dont have respect for lazy people, but I dont think they should be killed, they should have a much humbler life and quit bitching about what others have and they dont. They could do something about it...and CHOOSE not to.


but valuing life in general is not the same as specific people. Everyone should be given a chance and valued, but I dont value a guy like James holmes....because when you kill or rape people, I stop valuing your life and it should end....I think those requirements are not unreasonable and pretty universal.

 

[kaz]

What are you talking about? worthy of what same life? And I'd rather the government not determine who is valued and who is not, it's fascism/communism.

Do you value and respect the lives of the working poor or do you refer to them as "takers"?

Riddle me this batman. How exactly does objecting to government confiscating money and giving it to people for not working mean that anyone doesn't like people who do work?

Do you value and respect the lives of people who aren't white? Do you value and respect the lives of people on welfare?

So you don't think there are white people on welfare? Where did you get that delusion? Doesn't that make you the racist if you think only non-whites need welfare?

If you don't value all of these people equally, does that make you a communist/facist?

So if we don't want to pay pay non-whites (who you claim are the only people on welfare) to not work, like we don't want to pay whites to not work, that means we think they aren't equal?

You might want to say these arguments out loud before you type them. At least read them before you hit "enter." Just a thought.