Zone1 Does anyone object to the use of abortion pills to terminate pregnancies before 10 weeks?

[iamwhatiseem]

Spare us the details, please. Even grandpa shouldn't know those details.

There's no reason your daughter-in-law can't have sex. Have sex with a person willing to commit to staying together to raise any child that comes from sex.

Use a condom; oral sex; B.o.B. sex. or just don't have sex if you don't want to raise a child. No, your granddaughter should not be allowed to use abortion as birth control.

Yeah... go ahead and point where I said that

 

[iamwhatiseem]

awwww congrats! The best news. I hope I can be a grandma someday--I can't WAIT

We have a grandaughter that is 1 1/2, and then another grandaughter that is due in November. It is pretty awesome. You get to have fun with them - and then they go home!!

 

[woodwork201]

I'm mostly with you, but a fertilized egg is not an embryo. First. Second, this leaves you on very shaky ground when it comes to ectopic pregnancy. A pregnancy implanted in the fallopian tube WILL NOT result in a baby and very much can kill the mother if left. In most cases, "the life of the mother" is an excuse to abort the baby--but not in ectopic pg.

So for that reason alone it is not rational to take your hard line.

A fertilized egg is a human life. Tubal pregnancies are risks to the mother; no one, not even me, has suggested that you can't take the baby to save the mother. If the mother dies, both die.

You've mostly been pretty solid on anti-abortion but you're leaking your true position... There are cases where you believe it is acceptable to take a human life, ripping it apart, limb-from-limb, snapping it's little head from its spine...

The only intelligent, reasonable, honest answer is no abortion except to save the life of the mother. No exceptions.

 

[woodwork201]

Yeah... go ahead and point where I said that

Where you said what? I only quoted, using the site quote function, exactly what you said so whatever I said you said, you said... So be specific. I know people hate that what's said on the Internet stays on the Internet.

 

[woodwork201]

We have a grandaughter that is 1 1/2, and then another grandaughter that is due in November. It is pretty awesome. You get to have fun with them - and then they go home!!

We have 12 grandchildren and 3 great-grandchildren. They're wonderful. You can do so many fun things with them:

Play ball,
Buy them loud, obnoxious toys,
Just watch them laugh,
Kill them in the womb,
Set them on a table after birth and watch them die,
Share a banana split.,


Yep, just all kinds of fun stuff

 

[iamwhatiseem]

Where you said what? I only quoted, using the site quote function, exactly what you said so whatever I said you said, you said... So be specific. I know people hate that what's said on the Internet stays on the Internet.

Details... you said "grandpa should not know those details".
I don't know any freaking details of my son /daughter in laws sex FFS.
They said they wasn't trying to have a baby. I said... well - this is 2022, how can you accidently get pregnant?
That is when she said "I can't take birth control pills" - I asked no questions OBVIOUSLY... that is all I said - some women can't use birth control, which I didn't even know before they told me

 

[woodwork201]

Details... you said "grandpa should not know those details".
I don't know any freaking details of my son /daughter in laws sex FFS.
They said they wasn't trying to have a baby. I said... well - this is 2022, how can you accidently get pregnant?
That is when she said "I can't take birth control pills" - I asked no questions OBVIOUSLY... that is all I said - some women can't use birth control, which I didn't even know before they told me

What's said on the Internet stays on the Internet. You said a lot more details than that she can't take birth control. This is just gross to think of or say about your son and daughter-in-law. I know how my grand children came to be - I know the biology and the science. I don't want to hear or talk about whether the pulled out or how excited they were. All I need to know is that she's pregnant. The remark about not being able to take birth control isn't so bad but, of course, it had nothing to do with it.

But since we're talking about pulling out, surely you know that pulling out is not the same as birth control, right? Just how fucking stupid are you and your male offspring if you think pulling out is how you prevent babies.

And BTW - she is pregnant now, they messed up the time and got exited and he stayed in.

 

[SweetSue92]

A fertilized egg is a human life. Tubal pregnancies are risks to the mother; no one, not even me, has suggested that you can't take the baby to save the mother. If the mother dies, both die.

You've mostly been pretty solid on anti-abortion but you're leaking your true position... There are cases where you believe it is acceptable to take a human life, ripping it apart, limb-from-limb, snapping it's little head from its spine...

The only intelligent, reasonable, honest answer is no abortion except to save the life of the mother. No exceptions.

I do not believe it is acceptable to take a human life "ripping it apart, limb from limb, snapping it's little head from its spine...". That's an abortion. I do not think abortion is MORAL or should be LEGAL.

There is a line we are each willing to draw: what is MORAL and what is LEGAL. What do WE think is right and what do we think the govt should regulate?

Some contraceptives will prevent a fertilized ovum from implanting, did you know that? Such as the IUD. I might be morally opposed to this but I don't think that should be legally regulated because a pregnancy hasn't been established. Pregnancy is not established at fertilized ovum. It's established when that ovum implants in the uterus.

I disagree strongly with "The only intelligent, reasonable, honest answer is no abortion except to save the life of the mother."

Here's another intelligent, reasonable, honest answer. You have a devastated and panicked 15 yo daughter in the ER who has just been raped. The ER staff is ready to give her a "morning after" pill. You're going to tell her, sorry honey, this medication will likely stop you from ovulating and prevent a pregnancy, but there's a small chance it will prevent a fertilized ovum from implanting. On that small chance, we're just going to let this rapist's fertilized ovum implant. Let's see if you're pregnant in two weeks!

YOU can make that choice, and tell your daughter that. *I* will not. Note: this is not RU 486 which expels (aborts) a known pregnancy. It's the morning-after pill I'm talking about.

Secondly, you can tell your daughter let's see if you conceive your rapist's child at 15 years old. But I think your attempts to make this LEGAL would be very, very unpopular.

 

[woodwork201]

I do not believe it is acceptable to take a human life "ripping it apart, limb from limb, snapping it's little head from its spine...". That's an abortion. I do not think abortion is MORAL or should be LEGAL.

There is a line we are each willing to draw: what is MORAL and what is LEGAL. What do WE think is right and what do we think the govt should regulate?

Some contraceptives will prevent a fertilized ovum from implanting, did you know that? Such as the IUD. I might be morally opposed to this but I don't think that should be legally regulated because a pregnancy hasn't been established. Pregnancy is not established at fertilized ovum. It's established when that ovum implants in the uterus.

I disagree strongly with "The only intelligent, reasonable, honest answer is no abortion except to save the life of the mother."

Here's another intelligent, reasonable, honest answer. You have a devastated and panicked 15 yo daughter in the ER who has just been raped. The ER staff is ready to give her a "morning after" pill. You're going to tell her, sorry honey, this medication will likely stop you from ovulating and prevent a pregnancy, but there's a small chance it will prevent a fertilized ovum from implanting. On that small chance, we're just going to let this rapist's fertilized ovum implant. Let's see if you're pregnant in two weeks!

YOU can make that choice, and tell your daughter that. *I* will not. Note: this is not RU 486 which expels (aborts) a known pregnancy. It's the morning-after pill I'm talking about.

Secondly, you can tell your daughter let's see if you conceive your rapist's child at 15 years old. But I think your attempts to make this LEGAL would be very, very unpopular.

You're trying to replace the idea of a living human being with the case of the woman being pregnant. If a woman can kill the living human being before it implants, it was still a living human being. You can justify your support for abortion, or for killing the innocent unborn, in anyway that lets you sleep at night but you're an abortionist.

You've made it quite clear; like Elizabeth Warren, you support abortion. The only difference between her and you is that you support it less often than she does.

 

[woodwork201]

Your post is just so absolutely hypocritical that I have to respond with more detail.

I do not believe it is acceptable to take a human life "ripping it apart, limb from limb, snapping it's little head from its spine...". That's an abortion. I do not think abortion is MORAL or should be LEGAL.

So murder is immoral but shouldn't be illegal?

There is a line we are each willing to draw: what is MORAL and what is LEGAL. What do WE think is right and what do we think the govt should regulate?

No, there's not a line each of us is willing to draw about taking innocent life. Once again, should the government regulate murder? Should they regulate giving care to the newborn instead of setting it on a table and then having a discussion with the mother?

Some contraceptives will prevent a fertilized ovum from implanting, did you know that? Such as the IUD. I might be morally opposed to this but I don't think that should be legally regulated because a pregnancy hasn't been established. Pregnancy is not established at fertilized ovum. It's established when that ovum implants in the uterus.

Pregnancy is not the determination of life. What you're doing now is arguing the viability argument just like the rest of your pro-abortion allies. You're just arguing for an earlier state of viability.

You're arguing that we don't let nature, or God's plan if you will and if you won't - nature, run it's course and the baby attaches or doesn't attach. Or the rest of your pro-abortion allies say, either the baby would survive or it wouldn't.

The answer is, let nature, or God's plan, take its own course and we don't get to interject our wishes and prevent God's plan, whether it is attachment and miscarriage, or don't attach, or for the baby to come to birth, it is God's plan and God's will - or since you're not nearly as Christian as you pretend to be and lie to yourself that you are, at least have the decency to call it nature's plan and let nature take it's course. You don't get to decide.

I disagree strongly with "The only intelligent, reasonable, honest answer is no abortion except to save the life of the mother."

I get that you are a pro-abortionist. Just in fewer cases than Margaret Sanger and Elizabeth Warren.

I'm disappointed to hear you say this because, until this thread, I had held you in respect for you respect for human life. But in this thread the truth has come out and you're not actually anti-abortion, you just want fewer of them than does AOC and Warren and company.

But I'll give you kudos for being honest and coming out of the closet as a pro-abortionist.

YOU can make that choice, and tell your daughter that. *I* will not. Note: this is not RU 486 which expels (aborts) a known pregnancy. It's the morning-after pill I'm talking about.

I don't know how old you are but when the abortion pill was first being argued for availability, and against availability, it wasn't called the "morning-after pill"; it was, properly, called the abortion pill. "Morning after" instead of "Abortion" is a euphemism just as is saying "fetus" or "fertilized egg" or your own personal choice, "fertilized ovum" instead of calling it a baby.

You should really go back to all your posts where you called it a baby and delete the lie (in your mind) of calling it a baby since you clearly did not, all along, believe it is a baby. Fertilized ovum my ass.

Secondly, you can tell your daughter let's see if you conceive your rapist's child at 15 years old. But I think your attempts to make this LEGAL would be very, very unpopular.

Hopefully, my daughter would have already understood that we don't kill babies for the sin of its creation.

But we don't develop our morals based on popularity. Supporting the overturning of Roe v. Wade wasn't very popular, either. From your popularity standard, you were wrong to support overturning Roe v. Wade.

Like I said, I'm disappointed, stunned even, to have to argue against abortion with you, based on your post history, but it shouldn't have surprised me. Most people only have morals when it's popular.

You're pro-abortion.

 

[Jets]

Require DNA proof of fatherhood and the fathers and mothers pay to support their own children. A woman who claims she doesn't know who is the father then must meet the financial needs of her child on her own. The only help she should get legally would be to name the father and have that verified by DNA and then the father will be required to help.

Failure to maintain the appropriate financial resources to provide for the minimal care - a dry, warm, bed at night, three nutritious meals a day, and clothing including shoes that fit and have no holes in the soles, gets alternating jail months for the two parents.

Pretty much beyond that, a child doesn't need much other than love.

Good luck with such a proposal. Taxpayers will still get stuck with the bill regardless because the number of fathers that end up in jail will be astronomical. Jailed fathers are not picking up any tabs. Irresponsible women will continue to just go on the government dole only more so.

 

[CarlinAnnArbor]

Good luck with such a proposal. Taxpayers will still get stuck with the bill regardless because the number of fathers that end up in jail will be astronomical. Jailed fathers are not picking up any tabs. Irresponsible women will continue to just go on the government dole only more so.

Bring back "slavery." Put the father to work to pay for his kids.

Make America RESPONSIBLE Again

 

[woodwork201]

Good luck with such a proposal. Taxpayers will still get stuck with the bill regardless because the number of fathers that end up in jail will be astronomical. Jailed fathers are not picking up any tabs. Irresponsible women will continue to just go on the government dole only more so.

Wrong. When fathers learn that they take care of their children or they go to jail, then almost no fathers will be jailed for not caring for their children.

There will be in initial surge while the message goes out but it will stop.

 

[woodwork201]

Bring back "slavery." Put the father to work to pay for his kids.

Make America RESPONSIBLE Again

And, in fact, the 13th Amendment allows for that.

 

[Care4all]

Yeah, I know, that is 2 1/2 months past the point where you were late with your period! Which means you are heading for your FORTH missed period! Kind of a long time for someone to notice and decide maybe they better try a pregnancy stick!

FYI

That's not true. The way they count pregnancy weeks, is they start with the first day of your last period..... Crazy, when you haven't even had sex yet that lead to pregnancy, but that is how they count the weeks of pregnancy.

So 10 weeks of pregnancy, is actually about 8 weeks from conception....and you would have just missed your second period.

 

[Coyote]

A fertilized egg is a human life. Tubal pregnancies are risks to the mother; no one, not even me, has suggested that you can't take the baby to save the mother. If the mother dies, both die.

You've mostly been pretty solid on anti-abortion but you're leaking your true position... There are cases where you believe it is acceptable to take a human life, ripping it apart, limb-from-limb, snapping it's little head from its spine...

The only intelligent, reasonable, honest answer is no abortion except to save the life of the mother. No exceptions.

A fertilized egg has no limbs, no spine no head.

 

[Coyote]

FYI

That's not true. The way they count pregnancy weeks, is they start with the first day of your last period..... Crazy, when you haven't even had sex yet that lead to pregnancy, but that is how they count the weeks of pregnancy.

So 10 weeks of pregnancy, is actually about 8 weeks from conception....and you would have just missed you second period.

Plus some woman have very erratic periods.

 

[Coyote]

Your post is just so absolutely hypocritical that I have to respond with more detail.


So murder is immoral but shouldn't be illegal?

No, there's not a line each of us is willing to draw about taking innocent life. Once again, should the government regulate murder? Should they regulate giving care to the newborn instead of setting it on a table and then having a discussion with the mother?

Pregnancy is not the determination of life. What you're doing now is arguing the viability argument just like the rest of your pro-abortion allies. You're just arguing for an earlier state of viability.

You're arguing that we don't let nature, or God's plan if you will and if you won't - nature, run it's course and the baby attaches or doesn't attach. Or the rest of your pro-abortion allies say, either the baby would survive or it wouldn't.

The answer is, let nature, or God's plan, take its own course and we don't get to interject our wishes and prevent God's plan, whether it is attachment and miscarriage, or don't attach, or for the baby to come to birth, it is God's plan and God's will - or since you're not nearly as Christian as you pretend to be and lie to yourself that you are, at least have the decency to call it nature's plan and let nature take it's course. You don't get to decide.

I get that you are a pro-abortionist. Just in fewer cases than Margaret Sanger and Elizabeth Warren.

I'm disappointed to hear you say this because, until this thread, I had held you in respect for you respect for human life. But in this thread the truth has come out and you're not actually anti-abortion, you just want fewer of them than does AOC and Warren and company.

But I'll give you kudos for being honest and coming out of the closet as a pro-abortionist.

I don't know how old you are but when the abortion pill was first being argued for availability, and against availability, it wasn't called the "morning-after pill"; it was, properly, called the abortion pill. "Morning after" instead of "Abortion" is a euphemism just as is saying "fetus" or "fertilized egg" or your own personal choice, "fertilized ovum" instead of calling it a baby.

You should really go back to all your posts where you called it a baby and delete the lie (in your mind) of calling it a baby since you clearly did not, all along, believe it is a baby. Fertilized ovum my ass.

Hopefully, my daughter would have already understood that we don't kill babies for the sin of its creation.

But we don't develop our morals based on popularity. Supporting the overturning of Roe v. Wade wasn't very popular, either. From your popularity standard, you were wrong to support overturning Roe v. Wade.

Like I said, I'm disappointed, stunned even, to have to argue against abortion with you, based on your post history, but it shouldn't have surprised me. Most people only have morals when it's popular.

You're pro-abortion.

Do you support government regulation of murder in the death penalty?

 

[toobfreak]

A fertilized egg has no limbs, no spine no head.

Yes, but it is still a STAGE of human development. There's not a person alive on this planet who at one time wasn't a zygote first. Just that zygotes are before a heart, brain or any nervous system has developed, so, hasn't developed any recognizable human characteristics yet, so maybe can be considered a pre-human or quasi-human being.

 

[Anathema]

Does anyone have a problem with greatly expanding the availability and promoting the use of emergency contraceptives a.k.a morning after pills a.k.a abortion pills prior to 10 weeks fetal development?

YES, I do have a problem with it. I have a problem with ANY form of abortion except when the cause of the pregnancy is rape. Even then I believe it needs to be reported to police with an agreement to assist in prosecution of any suspect law enforcement may come up with.

In that case I’m fine with the woman using whatever form of abortion they feel is best for them.