Roe v. Wade getting overturned!!

Except pre birth, then, as you’ve described multiple times, it has no more rights than a doorknob, which is property not a human being.
Is that scumbag seriously denying that he regards human beings as property when he believes mothers own their unborn kid and can dispose of them on a whim?

Patently ridiculous.

Eggboy over here is just the most disingenuous trash imaginable on a political debate forum, and he mixes it in with so much noise. He’s an infinite time sink of self-contradictions, blatant ignorance, disinformation, and other such bullshit.
 
Except pre birth, then, as you’ve described multiple times, it has no more rights than a doorknob, which is property not a human being.
NO. I have never compared a fetus to an inanimate object such as a doorknob. THE FETUS is on the human life continuum and by virtue of being both an individual living human organism as well as a dependent part of its mother’s body, every fetus coming into existence is protected by the same right to life as its mother. Doorknobs have no life that can be protected. So you are a liar.

Why aren’t you lying on this thread?

Ringo230120-#60 “ "The Anglican Church has announced that it will begin to bless same-sex civil marriages" •••• What a flexible thing, organized religion in the conditions of capitalism, the elites of which have firmly decided to adopt the most cannibalistic practices of eugenics.. “

END2301270903
 
Last edited:
NO. I have never compared a fetus to an inanimate object such as a doorknob. THE FETUS is on the human life continuum and by virtue of being both an individual living human organism as well as apart of its mother’s body, every fetus coming into existence is protected by the same right to life as its mother. Doorknobs have no life that can be protected. So you are a liar.

Why aren’t you lying on this thread?

Ringo230120-#60 “ "The Anglican Church has announced that it will begin to bless same-sex civil marriages" •••• What a flexible thing, organized religion in the conditions of capitalism, the elites of which have firmly decided to adopt the most cannibalistic practices of eugenics.. “

END2301270903

You are quite the shister. “Protected by the same right to life as the mother.”

So now you want the right to kill expectant mothers? That is what you wrote afterall.

But, wait, you only want the right to kill expectant Mothers up to the 24th week of their pregnancy.

Got it.
 
HeyNorm230127-#6,920 • Except pre birth, then, as you’ve described multiple times, it has no more rights than a doorknob, which is property not a human being.
^^
Cplus6230127-#6,921 Is that scumbag seriously denying that he regards human beings as property when he believes mothers own their unborn kid and can dispose of them on a whim?

NFBW: Does the good Christian Alabamian eagle1462010 regard human beings as property since he an I are in agreement that a woman has a right to terminate her pregnancy during the first fifteen weeks. Apparently conceding that right to women is not structured only into liberalism after all.

eagle14140621-#31 “I believe in God the Father Almighty Maker of the Heavens and the Earth.” I believe Jesus Christ died for our sins and is the son of God. Anyone that doesn't believe that may quite frankly Go to Hell.

3399 dblack said: Do you have an opinion on the matter? Would you vote for, or against, such a law in your state?
^^
eagle14220515-#3,399 • I agree with a compromise down to 15 weeks. Bur the blue states end late term abortion. •••• If you self abort here after 15 weeks enjoy prison.

END2301270925
 
Is that scumbag seriously denying that he regards human beings as property when he believes mothers own their unborn kid and can dispose of them on a whim?

Patently ridiculous.

Eggboy over here is just the most disingenuous trash imaginable on a political debate forum, and he mixes it in with so much noise. He’s an infinite time sink of self-contradictions, blatant ignorance, disinformation, and other such bullshit.

You need to understand. He is obviously a follower of eugenics. And abortion is how he plans this purification. The disproportionate share of blacks getting abortions is mind bending. We can only hope we can stop his kind before we have slaves working the cotton fields again.
 
eagle14140621-#31 “I believe in God the Father Almighty Maker of the Heavens and the Earth.” I believe Jesus Christ died for our sins and is the son of God. Anyone that doesn't believe that may quite frankly Go to Hell.

3399 dblack said: Do you have an opinion on the matter? Would you vote for, or against, such a law in your state?
^^
eagle14220515-#3,399 • I agree with a compromise down to 15 weeks. Bur the blue states end late term abortion. •••• If you self abort here after 15 weeks enjoy prison.

You need to understand. He is obviously a follower of eugenics. And abortion is how he plans this purification.

Is eagle1462010 ”a follower of eugenics” let me know if you think so CarsomyrPlusSix / thanks
 
Is eagle1462010 ”a follower of eugenics” let me know if you think so CarsomyrPlusSix / thanks
Please quote where Eagle implied that expectant mothers have no right to life during their first 24 weeks of pregnancy. If you can’t, as you did earlier today, then this is pure deflection

Can we get back to discussing why you think you can define human life as property, but not have to follow property law? And how, the only time property was converted to human life was when Abraham Lincoln freed the slaves?

I’ll bet you just hate that part of history. In your mind, ol Abe should have just left good enough alone! Right?
 
Please quote where Eagle implied that expectant mothers have no right to life during their first 24 weeks of pregnancy.
NFBW: I have not implied …….
that expectant mothers have no right to life during their first 24 weeks of pregnancy.
NFBW: To the contrary I have clearly stated that …….

THE FETUS is on the human life continuum and by virtue of being both an individual living human organism as well as a dependent part of its mother’s body, every fetus coming into existence is protected by the same right to life as its mother.

That is the right to life for fetus and mother from conception through birth - then after successful living first breath through it’s own lungs the fetus assumes full rights sane as any other newborn in America after it leaves having the rights through his or her mother.

END2301271136
 
Last edited:
So, the newborn gains rights at birth, but is similarly situated to the newborn pre birth, thus extending rights pre birth.

If not it’s personal property of the Mother and she has no known right to demand anyone else care and support her property at any time.

I don’t care if you want to obfuscate reality. It is either personal property like a doorknob, with no rights, or a human being deserving of rights.
 
When we can all agree that an unborn baby is a human at an early stage of life, we can have an honest conversation about the relative worth of that life. And yes, we set a value on human life, let's not pretend we don't. Doubt me? We happily accept the loss of tens of thousands of lives every year just so we can drive fast. We would lose very few on the highways if vehicles physically could not travel more than 35mph, but how many of us would trade our ability to be moving at 80mph to save those lives?

At least then it would be an honest discussion, where people would say, "Yes, I'm willing to destroy a human life just so I'm not stuck with child support payments", or "Yes, I'm willing to destroy a human life just so my body doesn't get fat for 9 months", and the other side would say, "Yes, I'm willing to help support the babies who will have a chance at life because we protected them", or, "Yes, I'm willing to make the sperm donor take care of the mother while she can't work because we made her have a baby".

If it takes a village to raise a child, then the village should have a voice in whether the child lives to be born or is shredded by a saw.
 
Cplus6221111-#5,524 Why is this thread now about RetardedBitchofW’s orange man bad spam? •••• •••• Why don’t you just make a blog instead of blathering endlessly about what a mean ol’ racist someone not related to the thread topic is?
^^
hadit221111-#5,525 It's the democrat MO. "You Republicans need to nominate this guy. We like him, he's not the other guy". That lasts until they actually nominate the guy, then they start with the hate

NFBW: Who nominated the latest three judges on the Supreme Court who happen to be anti-abortion choice Catholics for a total of six anti-abortion choice Catholics who decided women’s choice on abortion are a matter for states to decide thus ending fifty years of precedence and settled law - to please God, themselves and the white religious right who put Trump to take away the rights and liberty of American women.

Trump was a key player in the topic of this thread - Why the crying about it when he gave you what you want?

END2301271403
 
HeyNorm230127-#6,929 So, the newborn gains rights at birth, but is similarly situated to the newborn pre birth, thus extending rights pre birth.

NFBW: The newborn is not physically, biologically or constitutionally similarly situated to a fetus prior to cutting the umbilical cord that sustains its life.

San Souci said: Wrong. The BABY has its own blood stream.
^^
NFBW220801-#4,141 science is more in line with JEWISH BELIEF not CATHOLIC BELIEF

“With the first breaths of air, the lungs start to expand and the ductus arteriosus and the foramen ovale both close. The baby's circulation and blood flow through the heart now function like an adult's. “

While still in the uterus, the baby's lungs aren't being used. The baby’s liver isn't fully developed. Circulating blood bypasses the lungs and liver by flowing in different pathways and through special openings called shunts.

Blood flow in the unborn baby follows this pathway:
  • Oxygen and nutrients from the mother's blood are transferred across the placenta to the fetus through the umbilical cord.
  • This enriched blood flows through the umbilical vein toward the baby’s liver. There it moves through a shunt called the ductus venosus.
  • This allows some of the blood to go to the liver. But most of this highly oxygenated blood flows to a large vessel called the inferior vena cava and then into the right atrium of the heart.
Here is what happens inside the fetal heart:
  • When oxygenated blood from the mother enters the right side of the heart, it flows into the upper chamber (the right atrium). Most of the blood flows across to the left atrium through a shunt called the foramen ovale.
  • From the left atrium, blood moves down into the lower chamber of the heart (the left ventricle). It's then pumped into the first part of the large artery coming from the heart (the ascending aorta).
  • From the aorta, the oxygen-rich blood is sent to the brain and to the heart muscle itself. Blood is also sent to the lower body.
  • Blood returning to the heart from the fetal body contains carbon dioxide and waste products as it enters the right atrium. It flows down into the right ventricle, where it normally would be sent to the lungs to be oxygenated. Instead, it bypasses the lungs and flows through the ductus arteriosus into the descending aorta, which connects to the umbilical arteries. From there, blood flows back into the placenta. There the carbon dioxide and waste products are released into the mother's circulatory system. Oxygen and nutrients from the mother's blood are transferred across the placenta. Then the cycle starts again.
  • At birth, major changes take place. The umbilical cord is clamped and the baby no longer receives oxygen and nutrients from the mother. With the first breaths of air, the lungs start to expand and the ductus arteriosus and the foramen ovale both close. The baby's circulation and blood flow through the heart now function like an adult's.
NFBW: There is no such “SIMILAR SITUATION” of the baby still on maternal life support and a baby breathing on its own - time of birth when day month year is recorded and the cord is cut.

END2301271517
 
Yes, I'm willing to destroy a human life just so my body doesn't get fat for 9 months",

when one kills a human being because one drove too fast, lost control and slammed into their car would the dead person be “viable outside the womb” in order for one to kill them.

Your condition would be more correct if stated according to reality I am “willing to destroy a not viable human life just so that not viable human life does not make my body fat for 9 months and have a potential to kill me.”
 
Last edited:
HeyNorm230127-#6,929 So, the newborn gains rights at birth, but is similarly situated to the newborn pre birth, thus extending rights pre birth.

NFBW: The newborn is not physically, biologically or constitutionally similarly situated to a fetus prior to cutting the umbilical cord that sustains its life.

San Souci said: Wrong. The BABY has its own blood stream.
^^
NFBW220801-#4,141 science is more in line with JEWISH BELIEF not CATHOLIC BELIEF

“With the first breaths of air, the lungs start to expand and the ductus arteriosus and the foramen ovale both close. The baby's circulation and blood flow through the heart now function like an adult's. “

While still in the uterus, the baby's lungs aren't being used. The baby’s liver isn't fully developed. Circulating blood bypasses the lungs and liver by flowing in different pathways and through special openings called shunts.

Blood flow in the unborn baby follows this pathway:
  • Oxygen and nutrients from the mother's blood are transferred across the placenta to the fetus through the umbilical cord.
  • This enriched blood flows through the umbilical vein toward the baby’s liver. There it moves through a shunt called the ductus venosus.
  • This allows some of the blood to go to the liver. But most of this highly oxygenated blood flows to a large vessel called the inferior vena cava and then into the right atrium of the heart.
Here is what happens inside the fetal heart:
  • When oxygenated blood from the mother enters the right side of the heart, it flows into the upper chamber (the right atrium). Most of the blood flows across to the left atrium through a shunt called the foramen ovale.
  • From the left atrium, blood moves down into the lower chamber of the heart (the left ventricle). It's then pumped into the first part of the large artery coming from the heart (the ascending aorta).
  • From the aorta, the oxygen-rich blood is sent to the brain and to the heart muscle itself. Blood is also sent to the lower body.
  • Blood returning to the heart from the fetal body contains carbon dioxide and waste products as it enters the right atrium. It flows down into the right ventricle, where it normally would be sent to the lungs to be oxygenated. Instead, it bypasses the lungs and flows through the ductus arteriosus into the descending aorta, which connects to the umbilical arteries. From there, blood flows back into the placenta. There the carbon dioxide and waste products are released into the mother's circulatory system. Oxygen and nutrients from the mother's blood are transferred across the placenta. Then the cycle starts again.
  • At birth, major changes take place. The umbilical cord is clamped and the baby no longer receives oxygen and nutrients from the mother. With the first breaths of air, the lungs start to expand and the ductus arteriosus and the foramen ovale both close. The baby's circulation and blood flow through the heart now function like an adult's.
NFBW: There is no such “SIMILAR SITUATION” of the baby still on maternal life support and a baby breathing on its own - time of birth when day month year is recorded and the cord is cut.

END2301271517

Ya screwed the pooch on this one. The cord remains attached until after the birth.

We have similarly situated individuals, one with a full set of civil rights, the other without.

Dang, that’s gotta hurt.
 
when one kills a human being because one drove too fast, lost control and slammed into their car would the dead person be “viable outside the womb” in order for one to kill them.

Your condition would be more correct if stated according to reality I am “willing to destroy a not viable human life just so that not viable human life does not make my body fat for 9 months and have a potential to kill me.”

So the “potential” to kill you gives you the right to take another’s life?

Just about all humans have that potential. Who are you? Rambo?
 
So the “potential” to kill you gives you the right to take another’s life?
The pregnant woman is in a special relationship with a NOT-fucking-VIABLE human life which all your arguments fail to acknowledge the realities involved in that special relationship that a human male can never experience or relate to

This is not viable outside the fluids and organism within which it lives

1674853016300.png


A woman has a special right to terminated the life inside her in my opinion and ttat is the only human relationship where taking human life is a right except self defense and justified war an law enforcement
 
Last edited:
The pregnant woman is in a special relationship with a NOT-fucking-VIABLE human life which all your arguments fail to acknowledge the realities involved in that special relationship that a human male can never experience or relate to

This is not viable outside the fluids and organism within which it lives

View attachment 751379

What a strange argument. It not human because if you take away what it needs to survive it will die.
 
What a strange argument. It not human because if you take away what it needs to survive it will die.
I have never argued it is not human. That is the fatal flaw in all your absurd arguments.

please learn to read

The pregnant woman is in a special relationship with a NOT-fucking-VIABLE human life which all your arguments fail to acknowledge the realities involved in that special relationship that a human male can never experience or relate to

This is not viable outside the fluids and organism within which it lives

1674853016300.png



A woman has a special right to terminate the HUMAN life inside her own body in my opinion and that is the only human relationship where taking human life is a right except self defense and justified war and law enforcement.

Two things establish the woman’s right to take a not viable human life in my opinion. Bodily autonomy and right to privacy and a third if the pregnancy is unwanted, and it causes distress and fear of harm then it is self defense. And it is none of your business until the 24th week of pregnancy has passed by then she should have made up her mind sooner in my opinion
 
The pregnant woman is in a special relationship with a NOT-fucking-VIABLE human life which all your arguments fail to acknowledge the realities involved in that special relationship that a human male can never experience or relate to

This is not viable outside the fluids and organism within which it lives

View attachment 751379

A woman has a special right to terminated the life inside her in my opinion and ttat is the only human relationship where taking human life is a right except self defense and justified war an law enforcement

Look, the woman, as long as it wAS consensual PUT HERSELF IN THE SPECIAL SITUATION.

This is like saying that if you rob a bank and later you get caught, you should simply have to return the money and not face prison time, because prison could be bad for your health and you might die!

This is not special in the least bit given

1. We are the most educated society to ever walk this planet

2. Birth control is incredibly easy to obtain making this the only time in history that it’s been this friggen easy NOT TO GET PREGNANT.
 
I have never argued it is not human. That is the fatal flaw in all your absurd arguments.

please learn to read

The pregnant woman is in a special relationship with a NOT-fucking-VIABLE human life which all your arguments fail to acknowledge the realities involved in that special relationship that a human male can never experience or relate to

This is not viable outside the fluids and organism within which it lives

1674853016300.png



A woman has a special right to terminate the HUMAN life inside her own body in my opinion and that is the only human relationship where taking human life is a right except self defense and justified war and law enforcement.

Two things establish the woman’s right to take a not viable human life in my opinion. Bodily autonomy and right to privacy and a third if the pregnancy is unwanted, and it causes distress and fear of harm then it is self defense. And it is none of your business until the 24th week of pregnancy has passed by then she should have made up her mind sooner in my opinion

You keep making this absurd 24 week exception as though a 23 week fetus may have actually progressed beyond many 24 week fetuses.

A calendar date cannot do what you think it can. Once you set it, then the legal argument of similarly situated comes into play!
 

Forum List

Back
Top