US signs anti-abortion declaration with group of largely authoritarian governments

[playtime]

Just how "authoritarian" is ripping an unborn baby out of the womb and murdering her/him?

ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ. Its none of your fucking business.

Its everyone's business according to those who want to control women.

The sexes are equal. If a man can be a female now, then we can have a say in the matter.

' you ' can say anything you want, but there is only one final decision.

that goes to the one who is pregnant.

Well here ya go...

American man claims to be five months pregnant with a baby girl.

and? right now that transitional man is still pregnant. so that transitional man gets the final decision.

 

[JGalt]

Just how "authoritarian" is ripping an unborn baby out of the womb and murdering her/him?

ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ. Its none of your fucking business.

Its everyone's business according to those who want to control women.

The sexes are equal. If a man can be a female now, then we can have a say in the matter.

' you ' can say anything you want, but there is only one final decision.

that goes to the one who is pregnant.

Well here ya go...

American man claims to be five months pregnant with a baby girl.

and? right now that transitional man is still pregnant. so that transitional man gets the final decision.

There is no such thing as "transitional." People are born either male or female and that is what they will be until the day they die, no matter how horribly they have themselves surgically mutilated.

 

[playtime]

Just how "authoritarian" is ripping an unborn baby out of the womb and murdering her/him?

ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ. Its none of your fucking business.

Its everyone's business according to those who want to control women.

The sexes are equal. If a man can be a female now, then we can have a say in the matter.

' you ' can say anything you want, but there is only one final decision.

that goes to the one who is pregnant.

Well here ya go...

American man claims to be five months pregnant with a baby girl.

and? right now that transitional man is still pregnant. so that transitional man gets the final decision.

There is no such thing as "transitional." People are born either male or female and that is what they will be until the day they die, no matter how horribly they have themselves surgically mutilated.

sure.

 

[theHawk]

Just how "authoritarian" is ripping an unborn baby out of the womb and murdering her/him?

ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ. Its none of your fucking business.

Its everyone's business according to those who want to control women.

The sexes are equal. If a man can be a female now, then we can have a say in the matter.

' you ' can say anything you want, but there is only one final decision.

that goes to the one who is pregnant.

Well here ya go...

American man claims to be five months pregnant with a baby girl.

and? right now that transitional man is still pregnant. so that transitional man gets the final decision.

There is no such thing as "transitional." People are born either male or female and that is what they will be until the day they die, no matter how horribly they have themselves surgically mutilated.

sure.

^^ Gee, we have another biology denier.

 

[JGalt]

Just how "authoritarian" is ripping an unborn baby out of the womb and murdering her/him?

ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ. Its none of your fucking business.

Its everyone's business according to those who want to control women.

The sexes are equal. If a man can be a female now, then we can have a say in the matter.

' you ' can say anything you want, but there is only one final decision.

that goes to the one who is pregnant.

Well here ya go...

American man claims to be five months pregnant with a baby girl.

and? right now that transitional man is still pregnant. so that transitional man gets the final decision.

There is no such thing as "transitional." People are born either male or female and that is what they will be until the day they die, no matter how horribly they have themselves surgically mutilated.

sure.

^^ Gee, we have another biology denier.

It's "science."

Why does the left hate science?

 

[Unkotare]

... generational poverty is conditionally associated with a particular race does not mean that making abortion available to those who would prefer to elect the option for purposes of escaping those conditions is racist .
...

Sanger would approve of your racist hypocrisy, scumbag.

 

[Unkotare]

...

Thus , yes , there is such a thing as legitimate aggression .
...

"based on race," you dishonest, racist, dilettante SOB.

 

[Monk-Eye]

" Ode To An Anti-Racist Racist Scat Lover Selling Self Deprecation "

* A Quick Reminder For The Unaware *

"based on race," you dishonest, racist, dilettante SOB.

Sanger would approve of your racist hypocrisy, scumbag.

Urban Dictionary: Unkotare

Unkotare: [unkotare] \ woon-ko-ta-re \ , noun; Japanese. Roughly translated as [dripping poop]. This word is used to describe a pornographic genre commonly...

www.urbandictionary.com

Japanese. Roughly translated as dripping poop. This word is used to describe a pornographic genre commonly known as Scat.

 

[playtime]

Just how "authoritarian" is ripping an unborn baby out of the womb and murdering her/him?

ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ. Its none of your fucking business.

Its everyone's business according to those who want to control women.

The sexes are equal. If a man can be a female now, then we can have a say in the matter.

' you ' can say anything you want, but there is only one final decision.

that goes to the one who is pregnant.

Well here ya go...

American man claims to be five months pregnant with a baby girl.

and? right now that transitional man is still pregnant. so that transitional man gets the final decision.

There is no such thing as "transitional." People are born either male or female and that is what they will be until the day they die, no matter how horribly they have themselves surgically mutilated.

sure.

^^ Gee, we have another biology denier.

sure.

 

[j-mac]

" Puritanical Church Of Manifest Poverty "

* Critics Without Viable Alternatives *

Objectively, the very creation of PP, racist in its nature, IS racism in practice....Study Sanger.

Just because over population and generational poverty is conditionally associated with a particular race does not mean that making abortion available to those who would prefer to elect the option for purposes of escaping those conditions is racist .

The definition of racism must include illegitimate aggression based on race that would mean coercion and being forced into abortion base upon race and not simply being provided with the option .

http://www.eisenhowerfoundation.org/docs/kerner.pdf

Even if violence does not occur, the consequences are unacceptable. Development of a racially integrated society, extraordinarily difficult today, will be virtually impossible when the present black ghetto population of 12.5 million has grown to almost 21 million.

And by cynically placing abortion centers in black areas is racism...you support that.

 

[Correll]

Yep .... so much for all the ' smaller less intrusive gov'ment' rhetoric if it involves a females' innards or who people love.

Even the most ardent of "small government" Conservatives will agree that the government has a legitimate role to play in protecting the lives and rights of children who can not speak for, nor defend themselves.

playtime is such a bitch, the way she pretends that there is no other perspective than her own.

^^^ most ironic post today ^^^

I address differences of opinion and/or policy. I don't pretend that they don't exist, like you just did, you brainless moron.

bullshit.

my point stands.

You pretended that your position on abortion was the only possible position, and then judged other based on your closed mind, ignoring their completely valid perspectives.


That was you being an asshole.


I don't do that to you.

when it comes to abortion - there IS only one position possible.

a woman should have full autonomy.

any other position is NOT valid, because there can only be one final decision.

you think someone else should be able to tell YOU what you can do with your body? any part of it?

to hell you don't do that -

'my point stands ' is yer M.O.

People tell me what I can or can't do with "my body" all the time, especially when it is involves another person's body also.


Did you really not know that? Are you stupid? Blinded by ideology?

are you stupid enough to think i meant the false equivalency of not sticking a needle in yer arm or tweaking on a pipe to say uhhhhh....

not being allowed to get a vasectomy when you want one?

god damn... how'z about throwing yer ass in jail if you do get one against the deep state orders that you can't?

I understand perfectly what you meant. You made a the claim that a person should have complete autonomy over their own body. Actually you said "woman" but I don't see what gender has to do with your point.


My point is that when what a person wants to do with their body, impacts on another person's body, society makes laws.


I was not thinking of drugs. I was actually thinking of the young and attractive woman I saw last night, very sexily dressed. I would have liked to see what was under her top. But that would have impacted HER body and her rights and would have been wrong. Morally and LEGALLY.

Thus rules against it. Which I fully support. Even though it undermines my "autonomy".


(i'm assuming that she would not been willing to show an middle aged guy of her own free will. Though I have been taking pretty good care of myself recently so...well, I digress)

i said 'woman' because the discussion is about abortion.

drugs impact society & are detrimental to society as a whole.

a personal & final decision to end a pregnancy is not.

if anything, it's the opposite if you wanna consider poverty & child abuse as a mitigating factor in households where children aren't wanted.

& adopting out is definitely a possible psychological detriment to the WOMAN forced to carry for 9 months.

Well, discussing the impact is a different discussion. You made the claim that the "woman" has "autonomy" and thus society has no right to "tell her what to do".


If we are moving on to discussing the impact of possible actions, that is making the argument that her decision is the right one and thus should be allowed.


Yet, you did not conceded the previous point.... So... wait a moment. I've seen this before.


You made your point, I refuted it, and now you want to just jump to another point, with the full intent that if I refute that one, you will return to your previous, ALREADY REFUTED POINT, as though it was new and fresh.


It is called Circular Debating and it is a tactic one uses, WHEN THEY KNOW THAT THEY ARE WRONG.


You know you are in the wrong here, and that you cannot defend your position based on it's actual merits. So you play dishonest troll games.


View attachment 406458

i did no such thing. follow the bouncing ball:

female is pregnant.

female gets the final decision because female is pregnant.

abortion is the females' option if the final decision - which is the females' decision to make & has to be since it is the females' body that will carry full term for 9 months, endure the pain of birth, & then be responsible for that pregnancy for a minimum of 18 years.

my point stands.

So, you support abortion right up to the point of birth? Kid can ready to pop in twenty minutes and it doesn't matter?

 

[j-mac]

Oh there is standing there....Look, If I am the male in the fight to save the unborn life that I helped create, then, while true that the woman has to carry the child, it is the father that will be supporting that child...So, do I have a say? You're damned right I do...

No.

Yes

 

[playtime]

Yep .... so much for all the ' smaller less intrusive gov'ment' rhetoric if it involves a females' innards or who people love.

Even the most ardent of "small government" Conservatives will agree that the government has a legitimate role to play in protecting the lives and rights of children who can not speak for, nor defend themselves.

playtime is such a bitch, the way she pretends that there is no other perspective than her own.

^^^ most ironic post today ^^^

I address differences of opinion and/or policy. I don't pretend that they don't exist, like you just did, you brainless moron.

bullshit.

my point stands.

You pretended that your position on abortion was the only possible position, and then judged other based on your closed mind, ignoring their completely valid perspectives.


That was you being an asshole.


I don't do that to you.

when it comes to abortion - there IS only one position possible.

a woman should have full autonomy.

any other position is NOT valid, because there can only be one final decision.

you think someone else should be able to tell YOU what you can do with your body? any part of it?

to hell you don't do that -

'my point stands ' is yer M.O.

People tell me what I can or can't do with "my body" all the time, especially when it is involves another person's body also.


Did you really not know that? Are you stupid? Blinded by ideology?

are you stupid enough to think i meant the false equivalency of not sticking a needle in yer arm or tweaking on a pipe to say uhhhhh....

not being allowed to get a vasectomy when you want one?

god damn... how'z about throwing yer ass in jail if you do get one against the deep state orders that you can't?

I understand perfectly what you meant. You made a the claim that a person should have complete autonomy over their own body. Actually you said "woman" but I don't see what gender has to do with your point.


My point is that when what a person wants to do with their body, impacts on another person's body, society makes laws.


I was not thinking of drugs. I was actually thinking of the young and attractive woman I saw last night, very sexily dressed. I would have liked to see what was under her top. But that would have impacted HER body and her rights and would have been wrong. Morally and LEGALLY.

Thus rules against it. Which I fully support. Even though it undermines my "autonomy".


(i'm assuming that she would not been willing to show an middle aged guy of her own free will. Though I have been taking pretty good care of myself recently so...well, I digress)

i said 'woman' because the discussion is about abortion.

drugs impact society & are detrimental to society as a whole.

a personal & final decision to end a pregnancy is not.

if anything, it's the opposite if you wanna consider poverty & child abuse as a mitigating factor in households where children aren't wanted.

& adopting out is definitely a possible psychological detriment to the WOMAN forced to carry for 9 months.

Well, discussing the impact is a different discussion. You made the claim that the "woman" has "autonomy" and thus society has no right to "tell her what to do".


If we are moving on to discussing the impact of possible actions, that is making the argument that her decision is the right one and thus should be allowed.


Yet, you did not conceded the previous point.... So... wait a moment. I've seen this before.


You made your point, I refuted it, and now you want to just jump to another point, with the full intent that if I refute that one, you will return to your previous, ALREADY REFUTED POINT, as though it was new and fresh.


It is called Circular Debating and it is a tactic one uses, WHEN THEY KNOW THAT THEY ARE WRONG.


You know you are in the wrong here, and that you cannot defend your position based on it's actual merits. So you play dishonest troll games.


View attachment 406458

i did no such thing. follow the bouncing ball:

female is pregnant.

female gets the final decision because female is pregnant.

abortion is the females' option if the final decision - which is the females' decision to make & has to be since it is the females' body that will carry full term for 9 months, endure the pain of birth, & then be responsible for that pregnancy for a minimum of 18 years.

my point stands.

So, you support abortion right up to the point of birth? Kid can ready to pop in twenty minutes and it doesn't matter?

nope. & i never said i did.

 

[Correll]

Yep .... so much for all the ' smaller less intrusive gov'ment' rhetoric if it involves a females' innards or who people love.

Even the most ardent of "small government" Conservatives will agree that the government has a legitimate role to play in protecting the lives and rights of children who can not speak for, nor defend themselves.

playtime is such a bitch, the way she pretends that there is no other perspective than her own.

^^^ most ironic post today ^^^

I address differences of opinion and/or policy. I don't pretend that they don't exist, like you just did, you brainless moron.

bullshit.

my point stands.

You pretended that your position on abortion was the only possible position, and then judged other based on your closed mind, ignoring their completely valid perspectives.


That was you being an asshole.


I don't do that to you.

when it comes to abortion - there IS only one position possible.

a woman should have full autonomy.

any other position is NOT valid, because there can only be one final decision.

you think someone else should be able to tell YOU what you can do with your body? any part of it?

to hell you don't do that -

'my point stands ' is yer M.O.

People tell me what I can or can't do with "my body" all the time, especially when it is involves another person's body also.


Did you really not know that? Are you stupid? Blinded by ideology?

are you stupid enough to think i meant the false equivalency of not sticking a needle in yer arm or tweaking on a pipe to say uhhhhh....

not being allowed to get a vasectomy when you want one?

god damn... how'z about throwing yer ass in jail if you do get one against the deep state orders that you can't?

I understand perfectly what you meant. You made a the claim that a person should have complete autonomy over their own body. Actually you said "woman" but I don't see what gender has to do with your point.


My point is that when what a person wants to do with their body, impacts on another person's body, society makes laws.


I was not thinking of drugs. I was actually thinking of the young and attractive woman I saw last night, very sexily dressed. I would have liked to see what was under her top. But that would have impacted HER body and her rights and would have been wrong. Morally and LEGALLY.

Thus rules against it. Which I fully support. Even though it undermines my "autonomy".


(i'm assuming that she would not been willing to show an middle aged guy of her own free will. Though I have been taking pretty good care of myself recently so...well, I digress)

i said 'woman' because the discussion is about abortion.

drugs impact society & are detrimental to society as a whole.

a personal & final decision to end a pregnancy is not.

if anything, it's the opposite if you wanna consider poverty & child abuse as a mitigating factor in households where children aren't wanted.

& adopting out is definitely a possible psychological detriment to the WOMAN forced to carry for 9 months.

Well, discussing the impact is a different discussion. You made the claim that the "woman" has "autonomy" and thus society has no right to "tell her what to do".


If we are moving on to discussing the impact of possible actions, that is making the argument that her decision is the right one and thus should be allowed.


Yet, you did not conceded the previous point.... So... wait a moment. I've seen this before.


You made your point, I refuted it, and now you want to just jump to another point, with the full intent that if I refute that one, you will return to your previous, ALREADY REFUTED POINT, as though it was new and fresh.


It is called Circular Debating and it is a tactic one uses, WHEN THEY KNOW THAT THEY ARE WRONG.


You know you are in the wrong here, and that you cannot defend your position based on it's actual merits. So you play dishonest troll games.


View attachment 406458

i did no such thing. follow the bouncing ball:

female is pregnant.

female gets the final decision because female is pregnant.

abortion is the females' option if the final decision - which is the females' decision to make & has to be since it is the females' body that will carry full term for 9 months, endure the pain of birth, & then be responsible for that pregnancy for a minimum of 18 years.

my point stands.

So, you support abortion right up to the point of birth? Kid can ready to pop in twenty minutes and it doesn't matter?

nope. & i never said i did.

Well, if the issue, is as you present it, one of autonomy of the woman and her body, and the "fetus" doesn't count for shit and society has no right to say shit, and the man can go fuck off,

your argument allows no room for any legitimacy of any other voice in this issue.


So, how can it NOT be ok right up to the moment of Birth?

 

[Monk-Eye]

" It Is What It Is "

* Supply And Demand *

And by cynically placing abortion centers in black areas is racism...you support that.

If that is where health care centers are needed by demand from the populace , that is where they should go , even if that happens to be in black areas .

My basic demeanor is non aggression , to do no harm , while improving those around me based upon my willful intents , but non violence is the standard of law whether the religion of secular humanism likes it or not .

 

[playtime]

Yep .... so much for all the ' smaller less intrusive gov'ment' rhetoric if it involves a females' innards or who people love.

Even the most ardent of "small government" Conservatives will agree that the government has a legitimate role to play in protecting the lives and rights of children who can not speak for, nor defend themselves.

playtime is such a bitch, the way she pretends that there is no other perspective than her own.

^^^ most ironic post today ^^^

I address differences of opinion and/or policy. I don't pretend that they don't exist, like you just did, you brainless moron.

bullshit.

my point stands.

You pretended that your position on abortion was the only possible position, and then judged other based on your closed mind, ignoring their completely valid perspectives.


That was you being an asshole.


I don't do that to you.

when it comes to abortion - there IS only one position possible.

a woman should have full autonomy.

any other position is NOT valid, because there can only be one final decision.

you think someone else should be able to tell YOU what you can do with your body? any part of it?

to hell you don't do that -

'my point stands ' is yer M.O.

People tell me what I can or can't do with "my body" all the time, especially when it is involves another person's body also.


Did you really not know that? Are you stupid? Blinded by ideology?

are you stupid enough to think i meant the false equivalency of not sticking a needle in yer arm or tweaking on a pipe to say uhhhhh....

not being allowed to get a vasectomy when you want one?

god damn... how'z about throwing yer ass in jail if you do get one against the deep state orders that you can't?

I understand perfectly what you meant. You made a the claim that a person should have complete autonomy over their own body. Actually you said "woman" but I don't see what gender has to do with your point.


My point is that when what a person wants to do with their body, impacts on another person's body, society makes laws.


I was not thinking of drugs. I was actually thinking of the young and attractive woman I saw last night, very sexily dressed. I would have liked to see what was under her top. But that would have impacted HER body and her rights and would have been wrong. Morally and LEGALLY.

Thus rules against it. Which I fully support. Even though it undermines my "autonomy".


(i'm assuming that she would not been willing to show an middle aged guy of her own free will. Though I have been taking pretty good care of myself recently so...well, I digress)

i said 'woman' because the discussion is about abortion.

drugs impact society & are detrimental to society as a whole.

a personal & final decision to end a pregnancy is not.

if anything, it's the opposite if you wanna consider poverty & child abuse as a mitigating factor in households where children aren't wanted.

& adopting out is definitely a possible psychological detriment to the WOMAN forced to carry for 9 months.

Well, discussing the impact is a different discussion. You made the claim that the "woman" has "autonomy" and thus society has no right to "tell her what to do".


If we are moving on to discussing the impact of possible actions, that is making the argument that her decision is the right one and thus should be allowed.


Yet, you did not conceded the previous point.... So... wait a moment. I've seen this before.


You made your point, I refuted it, and now you want to just jump to another point, with the full intent that if I refute that one, you will return to your previous, ALREADY REFUTED POINT, as though it was new and fresh.


It is called Circular Debating and it is a tactic one uses, WHEN THEY KNOW THAT THEY ARE WRONG.


You know you are in the wrong here, and that you cannot defend your position based on it's actual merits. So you play dishonest troll games.


View attachment 406458

i did no such thing. follow the bouncing ball:

female is pregnant.

female gets the final decision because female is pregnant.

abortion is the females' option if the final decision - which is the females' decision to make & has to be since it is the females' body that will carry full term for 9 months, endure the pain of birth, & then be responsible for that pregnancy for a minimum of 18 years.

my point stands.

So, you support abortion right up to the point of birth? Kid can ready to pop in twenty minutes and it doesn't matter?

nope. & i never said i did.

Well, if the issue, is as you present it, one of autonomy of the woman and her body, and the "fetus" doesn't count for shit and society has no right to say shit, and the man can go fuck off,

your argument allows no room for any legitimacy of any other voice in this issue.


So, how can it NOT be ok right up to the moment of Birth?

you have a really bad habit of putting words in the mouths of posters you disagree with, to justify your own poorly educated ideology.

<pfffft>

you speak as if that is the norm & it happens all the time.


Abortions Later in Pregnancy
Published: Dec 05, 2019

Key Takeaways

Abortions at or after 21 weeks are uncommon, and represent 1% of all abortions in the US. Typically, these procedures cost well over $1,000, excluding the cost of travel and lost wages. They normally require treatment over multiple days, and are only performed by a subset of all abortion providers. Reasons individuals seek abortions later in pregnancy include medical concerns such as fetal anomalies or maternal life endangerment, as well as barriers to care that cause delays in obtaining an abortion. Roe v. Wade made the concept of viability critical to the regulation of abortion, particularly when it comes to abortions later in pregnancy. Viability is not set at a specific date in the pregnancy, rather multiple factors play into the determination of viability, including gestational age, fetal weight and sex, and medical interventions available. Many states have passed a range of laws that restrict access to abortions later in pregnancy, by either placing gestational age limits on abortion and/or by banning clinicians from performing certain procedures.

Introduction
Abortions occurring at or after 21 weeks gestational age are rare. They are often difficult to obtain, as they are typically costly, time-intensive and only performed by a small subset of abortion providers. Yet these abortions receive a disproportionate amount of attention in the news, policy and the law, and discussions on this topic are often fraught with misinformation; for example, intense public discussions have been sparked after several policymakers have theorized about abortions occurring “moments before birth” or even “after birth.” In reality, these scenarios do not occur, nor are they legal, in the U.S. Discussion of this topic is further obscured due to the terms sometimes used to describe abortions later in pregnancy– including “late-term,” “post-viability,” “partial birth,” “dismemberment” and “born-alive” abortions—despite many medical professionals criticizing and opposing their use. This fact sheet explains why individuals may seek abortions later in pregnancy, how often these procedures occur, how the concepts of viability and fetal pain play into this topic, and the various laws which regulate access to abortions later in pregnancy.
Abortions Later in Pregnancy

 

[j-mac]

" It Is What It Is "

* Supply And Demand *

And by cynically placing abortion centers in black areas is racism...you support that.

If that is where health care centers are needed by demand from the populace , that is where they should go , even if that happens to be in black areas .

My basic demeanor is non aggression , to do no harm , while improving those around me based upon my willful intents , but non violence is the standard of law whether the religion of secular humanism likes it or not .

Do no harm? Like killing unborn babpies?

 

[Correll]

Yep .... so much for all the ' smaller less intrusive gov'ment' rhetoric if it involves a females' innards or who people love.

Even the most ardent of "small government" Conservatives will agree that the government has a legitimate role to play in protecting the lives and rights of children who can not speak for, nor defend themselves.

playtime is such a bitch, the way she pretends that there is no other perspective than her own.

^^^ most ironic post today ^^^

I address differences of opinion and/or policy. I don't pretend that they don't exist, like you just did, you brainless moron.

bullshit.

my point stands.

You pretended that your position on abortion was the only possible position, and then judged other based on your closed mind, ignoring their completely valid perspectives.


That was you being an asshole.


I don't do that to you.

when it comes to abortion - there IS only one position possible.

a woman should have full autonomy.

any other position is NOT valid, because there can only be one final decision.

you think someone else should be able to tell YOU what you can do with your body? any part of it?

to hell you don't do that -

'my point stands ' is yer M.O.

People tell me what I can or can't do with "my body" all the time, especially when it is involves another person's body also.


Did you really not know that? Are you stupid? Blinded by ideology?

are you stupid enough to think i meant the false equivalency of not sticking a needle in yer arm or tweaking on a pipe to say uhhhhh....

not being allowed to get a vasectomy when you want one?

god damn... how'z about throwing yer ass in jail if you do get one against the deep state orders that you can't?

I understand perfectly what you meant. You made a the claim that a person should have complete autonomy over their own body. Actually you said "woman" but I don't see what gender has to do with your point.


My point is that when what a person wants to do with their body, impacts on another person's body, society makes laws.


I was not thinking of drugs. I was actually thinking of the young and attractive woman I saw last night, very sexily dressed. I would have liked to see what was under her top. But that would have impacted HER body and her rights and would have been wrong. Morally and LEGALLY.

Thus rules against it. Which I fully support. Even though it undermines my "autonomy".


(i'm assuming that she would not been willing to show an middle aged guy of her own free will. Though I have been taking pretty good care of myself recently so...well, I digress)

i said 'woman' because the discussion is about abortion.

drugs impact society & are detrimental to society as a whole.

a personal & final decision to end a pregnancy is not.

if anything, it's the opposite if you wanna consider poverty & child abuse as a mitigating factor in households where children aren't wanted.

& adopting out is definitely a possible psychological detriment to the WOMAN forced to carry for 9 months.

Well, discussing the impact is a different discussion. You made the claim that the "woman" has "autonomy" and thus society has no right to "tell her what to do".


If we are moving on to discussing the impact of possible actions, that is making the argument that her decision is the right one and thus should be allowed.


Yet, you did not conceded the previous point.... So... wait a moment. I've seen this before.


You made your point, I refuted it, and now you want to just jump to another point, with the full intent that if I refute that one, you will return to your previous, ALREADY REFUTED POINT, as though it was new and fresh.


It is called Circular Debating and it is a tactic one uses, WHEN THEY KNOW THAT THEY ARE WRONG.


You know you are in the wrong here, and that you cannot defend your position based on it's actual merits. So you play dishonest troll games.


View attachment 406458

i did no such thing. follow the bouncing ball:

female is pregnant.

female gets the final decision because female is pregnant.

abortion is the females' option if the final decision - which is the females' decision to make & has to be since it is the females' body that will carry full term for 9 months, endure the pain of birth, & then be responsible for that pregnancy for a minimum of 18 years.

my point stands.

So, you support abortion right up to the point of birth? Kid can ready to pop in twenty minutes and it doesn't matter?

nope. & i never said i did.

Well, if the issue, is as you present it, one of autonomy of the woman and her body, and the "fetus" doesn't count for shit and society has no right to say shit, and the man can go fuck off,

your argument allows no room for any legitimacy of any other voice in this issue.


So, how can it NOT be ok right up to the moment of Birth?

you have a really bad habit of putting words in the mouths of posters you disagree with, to justify your own poorly educated ideology.
...

I asked you a fucking question and then asked you to explain your answer.

That is not me putting words in your mouth.


The arguments you used, do not allow ANY for any other voice, other than the woman in question, to have any legitimacy.


What other voice at what point has the right to say jack shit to the woman about "what to do with her body"?

 

[Penelope]

Just how "authoritarian" is ripping an unborn baby out of the womb and murdering her/him?

ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ. Its none of your fucking business.

Its everyone's business according to those who want to control women.

The sexes are equal. If a man can be a female now, then we can have a say in the matter.

So you saying God made mistakes?

 

[playtime]

Yep .... so much for all the ' smaller less intrusive gov'ment' rhetoric if it involves a females' innards or who people love.

Even the most ardent of "small government" Conservatives will agree that the government has a legitimate role to play in protecting the lives and rights of children who can not speak for, nor defend themselves.

playtime is such a bitch, the way she pretends that there is no other perspective than her own.

^^^ most ironic post today ^^^

I address differences of opinion and/or policy. I don't pretend that they don't exist, like you just did, you brainless moron.

bullshit.

my point stands.

You pretended that your position on abortion was the only possible position, and then judged other based on your closed mind, ignoring their completely valid perspectives.


That was you being an asshole.


I don't do that to you.

when it comes to abortion - there IS only one position possible.

a woman should have full autonomy.

any other position is NOT valid, because there can only be one final decision.

you think someone else should be able to tell YOU what you can do with your body? any part of it?

to hell you don't do that -

'my point stands ' is yer M.O.

People tell me what I can or can't do with "my body" all the time, especially when it is involves another person's body also.


Did you really not know that? Are you stupid? Blinded by ideology?

are you stupid enough to think i meant the false equivalency of not sticking a needle in yer arm or tweaking on a pipe to say uhhhhh....

not being allowed to get a vasectomy when you want one?

god damn... how'z about throwing yer ass in jail if you do get one against the deep state orders that you can't?

I understand perfectly what you meant. You made a the claim that a person should have complete autonomy over their own body. Actually you said "woman" but I don't see what gender has to do with your point.


My point is that when what a person wants to do with their body, impacts on another person's body, society makes laws.


I was not thinking of drugs. I was actually thinking of the young and attractive woman I saw last night, very sexily dressed. I would have liked to see what was under her top. But that would have impacted HER body and her rights and would have been wrong. Morally and LEGALLY.

Thus rules against it. Which I fully support. Even though it undermines my "autonomy".


(i'm assuming that she would not been willing to show an middle aged guy of her own free will. Though I have been taking pretty good care of myself recently so...well, I digress)

i said 'woman' because the discussion is about abortion.

drugs impact society & are detrimental to society as a whole.

a personal & final decision to end a pregnancy is not.

if anything, it's the opposite if you wanna consider poverty & child abuse as a mitigating factor in households where children aren't wanted.

& adopting out is definitely a possible psychological detriment to the WOMAN forced to carry for 9 months.

Well, discussing the impact is a different discussion. You made the claim that the "woman" has "autonomy" and thus society has no right to "tell her what to do".


If we are moving on to discussing the impact of possible actions, that is making the argument that her decision is the right one and thus should be allowed.


Yet, you did not conceded the previous point.... So... wait a moment. I've seen this before.


You made your point, I refuted it, and now you want to just jump to another point, with the full intent that if I refute that one, you will return to your previous, ALREADY REFUTED POINT, as though it was new and fresh.


It is called Circular Debating and it is a tactic one uses, WHEN THEY KNOW THAT THEY ARE WRONG.


You know you are in the wrong here, and that you cannot defend your position based on it's actual merits. So you play dishonest troll games.


View attachment 406458

i did no such thing. follow the bouncing ball:

female is pregnant.

female gets the final decision because female is pregnant.

abortion is the females' option if the final decision - which is the females' decision to make & has to be since it is the females' body that will carry full term for 9 months, endure the pain of birth, & then be responsible for that pregnancy for a minimum of 18 years.

my point stands.

So, you support abortion right up to the point of birth? Kid can ready to pop in twenty minutes and it doesn't matter?

nope. & i never said i did.

Well, if the issue, is as you present it, one of autonomy of the woman and her body, and the "fetus" doesn't count for shit and society has no right to say shit, and the man can go fuck off,

your argument allows no room for any legitimacy of any other voice in this issue.


So, how can it NOT be ok right up to the moment of Birth?

you have a really bad habit of putting words in the mouths of posters you disagree with, to justify your own poorly educated ideology.
...

I asked you a fucking question and then asked you to explain your answer.

That is not me putting words in your mouth.


The arguments you used, do not allow ANY for any other voice, other than the woman in question, to have any legitimacy.


What other voice at what point has the right to say jack shit to the woman about "what to do with her body"?

abortion should stay legal up to the point of viability. & then it's case by case as described in the previous post that is sourced. is that clear enough?

that is already the law. is that clear enough for you?


up until that point - NO other voice makes the FINAL decision.

what part of FINAL don't you understand? there can only be one decision ...

either terminate or proceed. who the fuck do you think should have that authority? if the female wants to abort & if there's a partner doesn't ... you think she should be forced to carry to term?

are you insane? yaaaaaaaa............ no need to answer that. i already know the answer.

it really can't get any clearer than that.