Roe v. Wade getting overturned!!

[beagle9]

NFBW: Why do you support the government being involved in a woman’s health decision then?

Your language used here makes you highly suspect of working for the DNC thus promoting their agenda. Health decision??? How convenient.... Pffft.

 

[NotfooledbyW]

You can Google disinformation for laymen

What disinformation results for writing arguments using laymen’s terms ? ZI am a layman with regard to reproductive biology just like mostly everybody else here. Zygote and fertilized egg as a definition is commonly used and accepted by medical professionals, biologists abd laymen alike. There is no disinformation involved.

You cannot be serious with this bullshit.

More than one human being has been created in history. The plural of sperm is sperm.

Sperm cells and egg cells fuse

Your statement was erroneous as written.

You don’t know that eggs and sperm fuse and create a new organism.

You wrote that multiple eggs and sperm fuse and create a new organism. A new organism is singular. Only one egg is involved to create a new organism.

 

[CarsomyrPlusSix]

I am a layman with regard to reproductive biology just like mostly everybody else here.

I am not.

So stop spewing your retardation.

 

[NotfooledbyW]

Your language used here makes you highly suspect of working for the DNC

I’m not a Democrat. I belong to no Party and definitely do not work for the DNC.

 

[NotfooledbyW]

I am not.

Yes you are a highly educated biologist or whatever you claim to be but on the subject of women’s freedom of choice on reproductive matters you are a fucking deplorable moron who lies a lot as documented,

 

[CarsomyrPlusSix]

Yes you are a highly educated biologist or whatever you claim to be but on the subject of women’s freedom of choice on reproductive matters

I don’t know why you bring up unrelated and nebulous concepts that you don’t understand.

Freedom of choice has nothing to do with women specifically anymore than it does to
men as it is an economic concept, and hiring someone to do violence upon others is not something that has ever belonged on even the most free of markets.

I’m well educated in biology as has been demonstrated, and this is absolutely part of my basis in opposing needless violence against innocent human beings.

Inhuman pro-abort filth like you just lie, and lie, because you can’t defend the horror you enabled. Be honest with yourself and others for a change and just try to work on some kind of logical and moral defense for attacking and killing innocent human beings.

It’s indefensible, but that is the obligation you have taken by being pro-abort filth.

 

[ClaireH]

NFBW220816-#5,156 - “I am not wrong to point out that a fetus cannot survive without extreme physical impairment prior to 24 weeks of development within the womb without nutrients and oxygenated blood from it’s mother.”​

NFBW: Your dishonesty is also exposed whenever you use the same trick that posters like ding and Correll use when they and you realize I am right . you cry “irrelevant to the point” - The similarities are uncanny. END2209161014

So NFBW-Your "points" are exactly like the following scenario: let's say the current topic that we're discussing was not about abortion but was about whether or not an orange really appears orange in color. So, throughout the discussion you continue to say, or yell out maybe, "But it is a fruit! It is a f-r-u-i-t it is a FrUit etc."

As you see, your argument lacks any substance. By the way, an orange is really orange, otherwise it would be called purple.

 

[NotfooledbyW]

your argument lacks any substance

On topic, this part of my argument is factual and true as posted:

NFBW220816-#5,156 - “I am not wrong to point out that a fetus cannot survive without extreme physical impairment prior to 24 weeks of development within the womb without nutrients and oxygenated blood from it’s mother.”​

​

NFBW: If you think I am wrong, please explain in your response why I am wrong.

If you think I am right, say so, and I will explain the relevance of viability to why I think it is appropriate for society to value a new life in the womb at 24 weeks versus CarsomyrPlusSix demand that society value life at the one cell zygote stage (which in laymen’s terms Is a one cell egg) while it is still in the fallopian tube. END2209162153

 

[CarsomyrPlusSix]

and I will explain the relevance of viability

Viability is irrelevant. It just means you have surfactant in lungs so that you can breathe.

Life begins at fertilization. This is scientific fact. Learn it. Adopt reality already.

to why I think it is appropriate for society to value a new life in the womb at 24 weeks versus CarsomyrPlusSix demand that society value life at the one cell zygote stage while it is still in the fallopian tube. END2209162153

I think it is appropriate for a civilization to believe in equality and treat all human life as worthy of protection.

You want a barbaric uncivilized society to be discriminatory against some human beings to the point of legal contracted homicide against them. Your hate is no better and no different than a slaveholder or a concentration camp commander.

 

[NotfooledbyW]

You don’t need to be religious to not support violence against innocent human beings, you fucktarded scumbag.

NFBW: But you need religion to assign sanctity of life to a one cell brainless heartless zygote residing in a fallopian tube of a woman who is about to find out that she is pregnant.

Scientists do not assign value to a one cell brainless zygote because it would not be scientific to do so. The Constitution values human life at birth.

Lindsay Graham says we should value new life at 15 weeks. CarsomyrPlusSix and Graham are 15 weeks apart on when to value human life.

Myself and Graham are only six weeks apart.

It all shows there is no scientific basis for CarsomyrPlusSix to accuse a woman who chooses to terminate a pregnancy of murdering a person of equal value to the pregnant woman. It is very absurd. END2209152245

 

[NotfooledbyW]

Viability is irrelevant. It just means you have surfactant in lungs so that you can breathe.

NFBW: then deliver the babies before 15 weeks when Graham the Trump Republican says it’s ok to murder unborn babies. Just remove the surfactant from the lungs and let them breathe if viability is irrelevant. END2209162255

 

[CarsomyrPlusSix]

NFBW: But you need religion to assign sanctity of life to a one cell brainless heartless zygote residing in a fallopian tube of a woman who is about to find out that she is pregnant.

No, you don’t need religion to value the lives of other human beings, you brainless heartless piece of shit.

You just don’t, because you are vile.

 

[NotfooledbyW]

No, you don’t need religion to value the lives of other human beings,

NFBW: Of course you don’t. But you need religion to assign sanctity of life to a one cell brainless heartless zygote residing in a fallopian tube of a woman who is about to find out that she is pregnant. Thats what I wrote. Can you respond to that or are you just going to have a conversation with yourself from here on out? END2209170130

 

[NotfooledbyW]

Inhuman pro-abort filth like you

I am not pro-abort. I am pro-choice that enables women to terminate a pregnancy within 24 weeks from when a zygote is formed in her fallopian tube. A one celled zygote is not a human being..A one celled zygote is zygote. Scientists do not refer to a zygote as a human being.

 

[NotfooledbyW]

No, you don’t need religion to value the lives of other human beings,

NFBW: All believers in religion are or were viable human beings..All believers in science are or were viable human beings. All believers in science and religion are or were viable human beings. All writers and readers of the US Constitution are or were viable human beings when they wrote it or when they read it.. . . . There is no requirement in science to value the lives of other human beings whether the lives are viable or not viable..There is a requirement in the US Constitution to value the lives of other viable human beings. There is no requirement in the US Constitution to value the lives of not viable human beings. There is a requirement in the religion of Catholicism and other religions to value the lives of both viable and not viable human brings from the moment of conception.

Can any viable human being claire ding Ray From Cleveland Correll etc discover and find anything not true in the paragraph above?

END2209170400

 

[CarsomyrPlusSix]

NFBW: Of course you don’t.

Great. Then shut the fuck up with your stupid lies? Oh wait, no, you immediately repeat yourself like the waste of oxygen you are.

But you need religion to assign sanctity of life to a one cell brainless heartless zygote

No you drooling fucktard. You do not not need to be religious at all to value the lives of your fellow human beings.

I get that you’re hatemongering filth who denies the humanity and life of abortion victims, but that doesn’t make your bigoted stupidity reality. You can’t speak English. You type words and don’t know what your own words mean, then you lie about what you literally just said. Fuck off and preferably spontaneously combust. And then we can call you a “combusted egg.”

 

[CarsomyrPlusSix]

I am not pro-abort.

Shut up, pro-abort filth.

I am pro-choice

Freedom of choice has nothing to do with your support for legal contract killing.

A one celled zygote is not a human being..

Objectively false. You are retarded.

 

[beagle9]

NFBW: But you need religion to assign sanctity of life to a one cell brainless heartless zygote residing in a fallopian tube of a woman who is about to find out that she is pregnant.

Scientists do not assign value to a one cell brainless zygote because it would not be scientific to do so. The Constitution values human life at birth.

Lindsay Graham says we should value new life at 15 weeks. CarsomyrPlusSix and Graham are 15 weeks apart on when to value human life.

Myself and Graham are only six weeks apart.

It all shows there is no scientific basis for CarsomyrPlusSix to accuse a woman who chooses to terminate a pregnancy of murdering a person of equal value to the pregnant woman. It is very absurd. END2209152245

Look, if you would just understand that people in a CIVILIZED SOCIETY live by law's and rule's, otherwise things that have been broken badly in what once stood as a CIVILIZED SOCIETY not so long ago. So if you would want the law's and rule's to be re-enforced instead of destroyed or confused even further, then you would allow for the rule's to be rewritten in support of, and then enforced in order to promote a more CIVILIZED SOCIETY that promotes life, embraces life, and love's life when it is found to be growing within the female's body after fertilization is complete.

Making it easy to disreguard life (so easily), has led this NATION off of a cliff where it is barely hanging on. Need to get a grip, and think about what you're adamantly arguing for, and how it's been so horribly abused in your name as a supporter of.

Need to replant it into the minds of young women that "consequences" are great for one's careless action's, otherwise they shouldn't want a lifetime of regret over their careless action's, and also it isn't worth following trend's and a death loving culture down into the pitts of hell when all is said and done.

Have to restart somewhere, otherwise making sense of one's purpose upon the earth, and it isn't supporting a death cult that had taken their so called "Planned Parenthood" term to the extreme opposite of what that term should actually stand for or mean.

 

[dblack]

No

 

[NotfooledbyW]

Making it easy to disreguard life (so easily), has led this NATION off of a cliff where it is barely hanging on.

NFBW: In the British colonies when America was being founded, abortions were legal if they were performed prior to quickening which was somewhere between 16 to 24 weeks. At 24 weeks, viability of the fetus was the original accepted moral restriction on abortion during the birth of our nation end through the early 1800s. Abortion was not widespread banned until after the 1860s

Well then beagle9 your moral Jesus driven histrionics are what is over the cliff when you assign Rio v Wade as the primary cause of sexual debauchery in post 1950s “Leave it to Beaver” America. END220917092