Do You Support A Woman's Right To Choose?

You're just full of ignorant arguments based on, "I'm too dumb to know things, and reality must conform to my stupidity!" aren'tcha? First we get "It doesn't look like an adult human, so it's not human!" Now we get, "Well, we celebrate birthdays so THAT must mean that's when life starts!"

I'll bet your third-grade education loves to babble about "The Science!" too.
You make me laugh. You're attempt at ridicule is idiotic. I'm sorry you can't accept the facts of Life.
 
In the beginning of Life, the zygote, the embryo, even the fetus are totally dependent on the woman to sustain their life. They are not an independent entity you could call a human being in any way shape or form. That is the point that is important. Our laws are based on human beings, citizens not potential human beings, not potential citizens. That's why a woman's right to choose is so important she actually exists she is a human being she is a citizen you cannot take away her autonomy over her own body and consider her an equal citizen of the United States. The laws protect citizens the law has to protect the women not the fetuses that's the bottom line.

I see where you got confused. They're independent beings in the scientific sense, not in the idiot-on-the-street "Ohmigod, they need something from their mothers, that means they AREN'T REALLY HUMAN!" way.

"The zygote, the embryo, even the fetus" need nutrition and protection from the woman to sustain their lives . . . the same things the newborn and toddler need from her later on. (And by the way, chanting scientific words over and over doesn't make you sound smart, especially when everything you say about them is wrong.)
 
Sure, they are names--the same as infant, toddler, pre-teen, adolescent, young adult, middle age, elderly. Are those not human?

Do you actually bother to read and understand the posts you respond to you at all? Or do you just grab one phrase out of it and kneejerk a reaction to what you think is being said?

Did you want to waste some more time arguing "against" people for positions they didn't take? Or would you like to direct your attention to someone who ACTUALLY supports abortion?

Dumbass.
 
I see where you got confused. They're independent beings in the scientific sense, not in the idiot-on-the-street "Ohmigod, they need something from their mothers, that means they AREN'T REALLY HUMAN!" way.

"The zygote, the embryo, even the fetus" need nutrition and protection from the woman to sustain their lives . . . the same things the newborn and toddler need from her later on. (And by the way, chanting scientific words over and over doesn't make you sound smart, especially when everything you say about them is wrong.)
I am not confused, you are. I am not emotional, you are. You have a life and you are wasting it. This accomplishes nothing. It changes nothing. You can look at this in a negative manner if you wish, but it's a pragmatic issue at the worst, a blessing at the best. Some things were never meant to be.
 
20 years after roe versus wade was made the law of the land all violent crimes went down there's no other explanation for it other than the fact that women who carried unwanted pregnancies were able to have abortions rather than bear the children that would become the criminals to host even more violence upon us. You want to return to that.

"No other explanation for it"? Well, other than the period after Roe v. Wade also coinciding with a number of "Law and Order" campaigns, tougher criminal punishments, minimum sentencing requirements, "Three Strikes" laws, reduction in marijuana possession being treated as a felony . . .

I think what you meant to say was, "There's no other explanation I will accept for it".
 
"No other explanation for it"? Well, other than the period after Roe v. Wade also coinciding with a number of "Law and Order" campaigns, tougher criminal punishments, minimum sentencing requirements, "Three Strikes" laws, reduction in marijuana possession being treated as a felony . . .

I think what you meant to say was, "There's no other explanation I will accept for it".
Your argument isn't with me, it's with the scientists who did the study. It's listed on 44 different sites.
 
You make me laugh. You're attempt at ridicule is idiotic. I'm sorry you can't accept the facts of Life.

You make me sad for the decline of human intelligence. I'm sorry you think "This is facts, because I said so!" is some sort of argument.
 
I am not confused, you are. I am not emotional, you are. You have a life and you are wasting it. This accomplishes nothing. It changes nothing. You can look at this in a negative manner if you wish, but it's a pragmatic issue at the worst, a blessing at the best. Some things were never meant to be.

Yeah, trying to be right by simply stating over and over that you are is always the hallmark of clear-thinking reason.
 
You make me sad for the decline of human intelligence. I'm sorry you think "This is facts, because I said so!" is some sort of argument.
Your argument is with life itself, it is what it is and laws aren't going to change it.
 
Women have a choice of:
abstinence,
condoms,
birth CONTROL pills,
IUD's,
morning after pills
etc.
If she is stupid enough to get pregnant with all of that at her disposal, then her rights stop at conception and the new life's rights begin.
The morning after pill works by preventing the implantation of the zygote to the womb. It thus works after conception.
 
Last edited:
The morning after pill works by preventing the implantation of the zygote to the womb. It this works after conception.
It can take up to 6 days after having sex for conception to occur. Given that fact the morning after pill seldom effects a zygote.
 
I agree. Nevertheless, I consider it a better alternative than carving up a live birthed baby for parts...
You're both wrong, it's simply flushes out the vagina making it impossible for a zygote to implant itself, if one even exists yet. Remember it takes up to 6 days for sperm to reach the egg and fertilize it then you have a zygote. So most of the time when taking the morning a zygote hasn't even formed yet.
 
Wrong.

Only a fertilization will yield a zygote. And it takes a zygote to be implanted. The morning after pill ONLY works post-conception.
Good morning after pill does not end a pregnancy that has implanted it simply delays ovulation preventing pregnancy. There are two different pills the other is mifeprex ( Ru-486 ) the abortion pill which does end a pregnancy.
 
Good morning after pill does not end a pregnancy that has implanted it simply delays ovulation preventing pregnancy. There are two different pills the other is mifeprex ( Ru-486 ) the abortion pill which does end a pregnancy.
Nope. But only in part. The purpose of the morning after pill is to prevent implantation. I guess that’s the so-called Plan B pill.

You are, however, correct that one of the so-called morning after pills is designed to prevent (delay) ovulation
 
Good morning after pill does not end a pregnancy that has implanted it simply delays ovulation preventing pregnancy. There are two different pills the other is mifeprex ( Ru-486 ) the abortion pill which does end a pregnancy.
I also didn’t say it prevents a pregnancy after implantation. I said that it prevents implantation after conception. As I noted a moment ago, there are two different types of morning after pill.
 

Forum List

Back
Top