Roe v. Wade getting overturned!!

[whutTHEYsay]

NFBW: Why and how do you say HeyNorm that every singje American mother as a 30 trillion cell individual choose this to happen ??????????

 

[HeyNorm]

NFBW: Why and how do you say HeyNorm that every singje American mother as a 30 trillion cell individual choose this to happen ??????????
View attachment 752982

If she consents to have sexual relations, regardless of arbitrary numbers, she consents to its creation. And by doing so, if/when abortion is banned, she has granted the government the right to protect this newly created human being…………


Even if batshit crazies like you try to convince her otherwise.

Oh, good morning!

 

[whutTHEYsay]

80zepher230131- #483 • If a fertilized egg is the start of human life, how can it be anything other than a human life?

NFBW: Do you choose to believe or not believe 80zephyr that the human life in the earliest stage of human life depicted in the image here

can survive and continue living without attaching itself to the uterus and then becoming a biological part of the woman who was born with the egg and matured to a point when that egg became fertilized following having sex with a male,

END2302020906

 

[HeyNorm]

80zepher230131- #483 • If a fertilized egg is the start of human life, how can it be anything other than a human life?

NFBW: Do you choose to believe or not believe 80zephyr that the human life in the earliest stage of human life depicted in the image here
View attachment 752985
can survive and continue living without attaching itself to the uterus and then becoming a biological part of the woman who was born with the egg and matured to a point when that egg became fertilized following having sex with a male,

END2302020906

Hey, if she consented to it, sure. Doesn’t matter if the photo is of an ovum being fertilized, some arbitrary number, or you parking your POS yugo in a garage.

Glad I could clear this up for you.

 

[elektra]

^
NFBW221006-#101 So to have a Jesus police state protect the “life” inside every uterus where life grows / do you white Christian Jesus do-gooders with high tech innovations, implant chips in girls 10 and up to monitor menstrual cycles ? E out

Hahaha what a fool.

1. The idiot stereotypes those who are pro life
2. The idiot makes up a science fiction scenario that not exist.
3. The idiot believes 10 year olds are those having sex and needing abortions (little scarry pedo...)

AN outragous argument entirely made up giving us a glimpse into the mind of people who are worried ten year old girls will not be able to hide that they are pregnant from thier parents

 

[CarsomyrPlusSix]

Yeah, come to think, he does seem like the type to molest children.

 

[whutTHEYsay]

NFBW230202-#7,041 • Why and how do you say HeyNorm that every singje American mother as a 30 trillion cell individual chooses this

to happen ??????????

HeyNorm230202-#7,042 • If she consents to have sexual relations,

NFBW: Therefore you rule HeyNorm in favor of women not having an equal right to the private pleasures of sex that men have by virtue of women being born with child bearing reproductive organs.

END2302020940

 

[HeyNorm]

NFBW230202-#7,041 • Why and how do you say HeyNorm that every singje American mother as a 30 trillion cell individual chooses this
View attachment 752993
to happen ??????????

HeyNorm230202-#7,042 • If she consents to have sexual relations,

NFBW: Therefore you rule HeyNorm in favor of women not having an equal right to the private pleasures of sex that men have by virtue of women being born with child bearing reproductive organs.

END2302020940

The argument you make appears to be from the 1950’s.

In todays world, sex education is part of school curriculums, and there are numerous birth control methods, which, combined with the male using a condom are virtually foolproof in stopping pregnancy from occurring. Actually, the term unwanted pregnancy is a thing of a distant past given the above.

Other than rape, then, yes, the woman ALWAYS consents that she may become pregnant when having sexual relations with a man, and when abortion is banned, has been given notice that the state will protect the human being within her.

Once again, glad I could be here to educated a time traveler from the past.

Wait, is your name Biff, by chance?

 

[whutTHEYsay]

electra221006-#92 elektra • “Viability? All babies are viable if you do not abort them”

NFBW: is that a baby that can take its first breath directly from the same atmosphere that all viable human beings breathe. ?????

END2302021005

 

[HeyNorm]

electra221006-#92 elektra • “Viability? All babies are viable if you do not abort them”

View attachment 752998

NFBW: is that a baby that can take its first breath directly from the same atmosphere that all viable human beings breathe. ?????

END2302021005

So breath creates viability. A whole lot of people that went on ventilators during covid would disagree.

Damn, you are one cold hearted POS.

Have a nice day!

 

[CarsomyrPlusSix]

Surfactant is all that matters to NotFooledByW. It’s entirely stupid, but that befits him.

 

[HeyNorm]

Surfactant is all that matters to NotFooledByW. It’s entirely stupid, but that befits him.

He seems quite arbitrary in his belief formation. One minute the human deserved governmental protection at 24 weeks gestation, and the next at its first breath.

That’s why he reminds me of Biff from Back to the future! His thought process is from the 1950’s.

I think I’ll act like Marty McFly and end all my responses to him with……….

Good old Biff!

 

[whutTHEYsay]

electra221006-#92 elektra • “Viability? All babies are viable if you do not abort them”
^^
View attachment 752998
•
NFBW239292-#7,049 • NFBW: is that a baby that can take its first breath directly from the same atmosphere that all viable human beings breathe. ?????
^^
HeyNorm230202-#7,050 • So breath creates viability. A whole lot of people that went on ventilators during covid would disagree.

NFBW: Do you agree with CarsomyrPlusSix when he stereotypes Jewish people as barbarians when they believe life begins at first breath.

Do you understand HeyNorm what “first breath” means? Every viable human being that went on ventilators during Covid were not taking their ‘first breath’ on a ventilator.

END2302021941

 

[HeyNorm]

electra221006-#92 elektra • “Viability? All babies are viable if you do not abort them”
^^
View attachment 752998
•
NFBW239292-#7,049 • NFBW: is that a baby that can take its first breath directly from the same atmosphere that all viable human beings breathe. ?????
^^
HeyNorm230202-#7,050 • So breath creates viability. A whole lot of people that went on ventilators during covid would disagree.

NFBW: Do you agree with CarsomyrPlusSix when he stereotypes Jewish people as barbarians when they believe life begins at first breath.

Do you understand HeyNorm what “first breath” means? Every viable human being that went on ventilators during Covid were not taking their ‘first breath’ on a ventilator.

END2302021941

Yes, and by your arbitrary meaning, once a person quits breathing, and maybe even dies, if resessitated, he’s taking “a first breath”.

Good ol Biff!

 

[80zephyr]

DanteR230111-#1 • What Constitutional Rights Apply to an Unborn Fetus”
~~
80zepher230131-#481 • Science says that human life begins at conception.
^^
BluesMan230131-#482 • I never said it didn't. •••• I said the fetus has no rights of personhood.
^^
80zepher230131- #483 • If a fertilized egg is the start of human life, how can it be anything other than a human life?
^^
BluesMan230131-#484 • Where did I say it wasn't human life?
^^
80zepher230131-#485 • If it is a human life, it should be afforded every protection as everyone else. It seems self evident.
~~
BluesMan230201-#488 • “So you think a single cell should be endowed with all the rights of personhood”
^^
80zepher230201-#489 • “Yes. Either it is a human life or it’s not. There is no gray area”
^^
BluesMan230201-#490 • A single human cell is not a person
^^
80zephyr230201-491 • By definition, it is a human life
^^
dblack230201-#492 • Whatever. The question is whether it's a person with Constitutionally protected rights. That's the difference between a fetus and person, between born and unborn.
^^
80zephyr230201-#495 • How can it be a human life and not be protected?

NFBW: You have put forth the ding decree in your post 0481 that “Science says that human life begins at conception.” and I could not agree more with the science you state.
View attachment 752966
ding220730-#4,060 ding “It's only the job of science to inform society when it is scientifically alive and genetically distinct

NFBW: Do we all agree 80zephyr you me and #ding that science cannot and does not dictate matters of conscience for humans who are living the human lifespan continuum from conception depicted above until death?

Science does not recognize or demand a public duty to defend the single cell human organism during its first twelve hours of human life as if it is entitled to a right to life and bodily autonomy that subjugates the mother to her fetus’
will to survive.

Yes 80zepher Science says that human life begins at conception.

END2302020817

If life begins at conception, it should not be a "matter of conscience" as to whether it should be protected or not. This should be self evident.

 

[whutTHEYsay]

once a person quits breathing, and maybe even dies, if resessitated, he’s taking “a first breath”.

No. You are a liar First breath applies to the first breath during childbirth.

NFBW239292-#7,049 • NFBW: is that a baby that can take its first breath directly from the same atmosphere that all viable human beings breathe. ?????

Every conception begins the human lifespan continuum that only ends with death. The continuum has only one moment in time where it transitions developmentally from not viable to viable outside of the womb. It occur only once during the fetal stage of life when it has the potential to live outside the womb even with assistance such as a ventilator.

If a person is resuscitated later in life while on the human lifespan continuum HeyNorm and is and brought back to life by breathing again. Keyword is “again” It would be a second first breath on the human lifespan continuum.

END2302021119

 

[HeyNorm]

No. You are a liar First breath applies to the first breath during childbirth.

NFBW239292-#7,049 • NFBW: is that a baby that can take its first breath directly from the same atmosphere that all viable human beings breathe. ?????

Every conception begins the human lifespan continuum that only ends with death. The continuum has only one moment in time where it transitions developmentally from not viable to viable outside of the womb. It occur only once during the fetal stage of life when it has the potential to live outside the womb even with assistance such as a ventilator.

If a person is resuscitated later in life while on the human lifespan continuum HeyNorm and is and brought back to life by breathing again. Keyword is “again” It would be a second first breath on the human lifespan continuum.

END2302021119

Seeing the arbitrary reasoning you have posted time and time again, I see no reason to trust you.

One minute you say one thing, the next a different reasoning.

One minute viability is achieved at 24 weeks gestation and another at “first breath”

Your all tied up in knots Mr. Biff.

No wonder you get annoyed.

 

[whutTHEYsay]

80zephyr230202-#7,055 • “If life begins at conception, it should not be a "matter of conscience" as to whether it should be protected or not.

NFBW: Do you agree with James Madison that my freedom of conscience and your freedom of conscience must be protected as the . most sacred of all property. ?

​

Conscience is the most sacred of all property; other property depending in part on positive law, the exercise of that being a natural and unalienable right. To guard a man's house as his castle, to pay public and enforce private debts with the most exact faith, can give no title to invade a man's conscience, which is more sacred than his castle, or to withhold from it that debt of protection for which the public faith is pledged by the very nature and original conditions of the social pact. James Madison​

END2302021147

 

[whutTHEYsay]

One minute viability is achieved at 24 weeks gestation and another at “first breath”

NFBW: That is not my position at all. You are a liar.

viability is confirmed with a newborn’s ability to breathe on its own. 24 weeks is based on potential successful viability as I have posted many times.

NFBW230121-#6,815 Nixon appointee to the Supreme Court in 1970…. Justice Harry Blackmun, writing the majority opinion for Roe, defined viability as the point where a fetus “has the capability of meaningful life outside the mother’s womb”:

With respect to the State’s important and legitimate interest in potential life, the “compelling” point is at viability. This is so because the fetus then presumably has the capability of meaningful life outside the mother’s womb. State regulation protective of fetal life after viability thus has both logical and biological justifications. If the State is interested in protecting fetal life after viability, it may go so far as to proscribe abortion during that period, except when it is necessary to preserve the life or health of the mother.

END2302021157

 

[HeyNorm]

NFBW: That is not my position at all. You are a liar.

viability is confirmed with a newborn’s ability to breathe on its own. 24 weeks is based on potential successful viability as I have posted many times.

NFBW230121-#6,815 Nixon appointee to the Supreme Court in 1970…. Justice Harry Blackmun, writing the majority opinion for Roe, defined viability as the point where a fetus “has the capability of meaningful life outside the mother’s womb”:

With respect to the State’s important and legitimate interest in potential life, the “compelling” point is at viability. This is so because the fetus then presumably has the capability of meaningful life outside the mother’s womb. State regulation protective of fetal life after viability thus has both logical and biological justifications. If the State is interested in protecting fetal life after viability, it may go so far as to proscribe abortion during that period, except when it is necessary to preserve the life or health of the mother.

END2302021157

Arbitrary again. A slow developing 24 week fetus has no better chance of living outside the womb, as a quickly developing 23 week gestated fetus. Therefore the 23 week gestated fetus, by the similarly situated legal standard, must be afforded equal protections under the law.

Got it Biff?