Women have the right to control their own bodies.

[BS Filter]

No. this misses the point.

The point is that a zygote is not a ‘person’ entitled to Constitutional protections.

You just don't have any respect for the Constitution, the rule of law, and the right to privacy.

A zygote is a human life. Go to hell.

More specifically, a human being in the zygote stage of life is A HUMAN BEING.

It's sad that most leftardz need that level of specificity. . . But they do.

A seed is not a flower, is not a vegetable, is not a tree. It's a seed. The container of the instructions to create the end result, but it is a seed.

Uhhmmm

Since you are so obviously challengled by logic.

I will try to dumb it down for you.

An organism is an organism.

An organism that is human in origin (the organism that is the product of human reproduction) is a HUMAN organism.

Brain cells firing yet?

And?

This in no manner justifies forcing women to give birth against her will through force of law.

I get it. You have no respect for human life.

 

[Coyote]

Nope. That child is alive way before birth. What an idiot. That has to be the most ignorant post ever on this forum.

Even the Bible states that life begins when the lungs fill with oxygen.....

Give me the reference.

OMG.

You far right wing radical extremists proclaim you're christians yet you don't know what's in the bible.

Have you ever read that book? Or are you like the rest of you far right wing radical extremists and just use that book as a weapon against anyone who doesn't agree with you?

The very first book of the bible, genesis 2:7 tells you when your god believes life begins.

When the first breath of air is taken through the nose.

You really are pathetic.

Genesis 2:7 Then the LORD God formed man from the dust of the ground and breathed the breath of life into his nostrils, and the man became a living being.

Yet a long line of so called Christians that have no idea what is in the Bible.

Lol. The left is continually trying to teach Christians what the Bible says. Hilarious. Your arrogance is only surpassed by your ignorance.

Fortunately, the right doesnt own Jesus.

 

[BS Filter]

Even the Bible states that life begins when the lungs fill with oxygen.....

Give me the reference.

OMG.

You far right wing radical extremists proclaim you're christians yet you don't know what's in the bible.

Have you ever read that book? Or are you like the rest of you far right wing radical extremists and just use that book as a weapon against anyone who doesn't agree with you?

The very first book of the bible, genesis 2:7 tells you when your god believes life begins.

When the first breath of air is taken through the nose.

You really are pathetic.

Genesis 2:7 Then the LORD God formed man from the dust of the ground and breathed the breath of life into his nostrils, and the man became a living being.

Yet a long line of so called Christians that have no idea what is in the Bible.

Lol. The left is continually trying to teach Christians what the Bible says. Hilarious. Your arrogance is only surpassed by your ignorance.

Fortunately, the right doesnt own Jesus.

You don't know who Jesus is. You don't believe the Bible.

 

[Moonglow]

Give me the reference.

OMG.

You far right wing radical extremists proclaim you're christians yet you don't know what's in the bible.

Have you ever read that book? Or are you like the rest of you far right wing radical extremists and just use that book as a weapon against anyone who doesn't agree with you?

The very first book of the bible, genesis 2:7 tells you when your god believes life begins.

When the first breath of air is taken through the nose.

You really are pathetic.

Genesis 2:7 Then the LORD God formed man from the dust of the ground and breathed the breath of life into his nostrils, and the man became a living being.

Yet a long line of so called Christians that have no idea what is in the Bible.

Lol. The left is continually trying to teach Christians what the Bible says. Hilarious. Your arrogance is only surpassed by your ignorance.

Fortunately, the right doesnt own Jesus.

You don't know who Jesus is. You don't believe the Bible.

They have managed to confuse the entire relationship with Jesus and his Dad over the last two thousand years, that is correct.

 

[Chuz Life]

No. this misses the point.

The point is that a zygote is not a ‘person’ entitled to Constitutional protections.

You just don't have any respect for the Constitution, the rule of law, and the right to privacy.

A zygote is a human life. Go to hell.

More specifically, a human being in the zygote stage of life is A HUMAN BEING.

It's sad that most leftardz need that level of specificity. . . But they do.

A seed is not a flower, is not a vegetable, is not a tree. It's a seed. The container of the instructions to create the end result, but it is a seed.

Uhhmmm

Since you are so obviously challengled by logic.

I will try to dumb it down for you.

An organism is an organism.

An organism that is human in origin (the organism that is the product of human reproduction) is a HUMAN organism.

Brain cells firing yet?

And?

This in no manner justifies forcing women to give birth against her will through force of law.

You are such a simpleton. Aren't you.

If a woman is pregnant, the only way for her tp become un pregnant is for her to give birth.

No force is necessary.

Abortions are simply a matter of intentionally (forcibly) killing the child in the process.

 

[Beyond]

The abortion issue brainwashes to make people not see the value of kids

Then the gay fad comes


Then birth control

All because of greed wanting the women to work for them and not their children

Nature gives a woman much better health if she has kids compared to no kids

That is natural law of pain telling the woman she is in error

The worst health a woman gets comes from abortion

That is natural law telling her she is doing wrong

Not true, carrying a pregnancy to full term and giving birth has more health risks than having an abortion.

 

[Beyond]

Well... You'd need to be pretty dense to think "not being bother with the child" is the generally the basis of such a decision.

You are mentally deficient to not understand what that means. When a woman aborts a child for convenience then that is exactly what she is doing. Killing the child because she doesn't want to be bothered with it. Doesn't want to change diapers or have the child cramp her style or make it harder for her to go to beauty school or whatever. Maybe she doesn't want to tell her parents that she was a shithead for getting knocked or maybe thinking her boyfriend would be pissed.

96% of abortions are done for the sake of convenience and that is despicable and morally reprehensible.

I took it to mean what it stated. Your inability to express your meaning is the deficiency, if what you stated was not your meaning.

You are really having difficulty understanding what abortion is all about, aren't you?

Typical for a Moon Bat. Always confused about Economics, History, the Constitution, Climate Science Ethics and Biology.

Not understanding what abortion really is encompasses two subject failures.

So doe this post mean what it says or is there some other meaning I'm supposed to cunjure up from it?

You are confused about abortion, aren't you? Typical for a Moon Bat.

I'll make it simple for you. It is killing a child.

Any more confusion?

Why do so many so called "prolifers" replace logic with insults? The contempt they show for humans demonstrates their drive is for control over others rather than any concern for humanity.

 

[Beyond]

A human child should have the right not be killed by its mother just because the mother doesn't want to be bothered with the child.

Only immoral and stupid Liberals don't understand that.

Well... You'd need to be pretty dense to think "not being bother with the child" is the generally the basis of such a decision.

Well, that specific reason is not it, but the most common reasons are:

The reasons most frequently cited were that having a child would interfere with a woman's education, work or ability to care for dependents (74%); that she could not afford a baby now (73%); and that she did not want to be a single mother or was having relationship problems (48%).

Reasons U.S. Women Have Abortions: Quantitative and Qualitative Perspectives

I can't see that those reason qualify as "can't be bothered".

Interfere with education/ability to work = ability to acquire the basics for a half decent life, in this society. Any failure in this respect would be imposed on any children.

Ability to care for dependents = which may include any existng children and definately include any child produced by the pregnancy.

Single parenthood/relationship porblems = Concern about bringing a child into a chaotic life.

None of these things qualify as "can't be bothered", they are real concerns every parent should take into account when choosing to have children.

 

[22lcidw]

A human child should have the right not be killed by its mother just because the mother doesn't want to be bothered with the child.

Only immoral and stupid Liberals don't understand that.

Well... You'd need to be pretty dense to think "not being bother with the child" is the generally the basis of such a decision.

Well, that specific reason is not it, but the most common reasons are:

The reasons most frequently cited were that having a child would interfere with a woman's education, work or ability to care for dependents (74%); that she could not afford a baby now (73%); and that she did not want to be a single mother or was having relationship problems (48%).

Reasons U.S. Women Have Abortions: Quantitative and Qualitative Perspectives

I can't see that those reason qualify as "can't be bothered".

Interfere with education/ability to work = ability to acquire the basics for a half decent life, in this society. Any failure in this respect would be imposed on any children.

Ability to care for dependents = which may include any existng children and definately include any child produced by the pregnancy.

Single parenthood/relationship porblems = Concern about bringing a child into a chaotic life.

None of these things qualify as "can't be bothered", they are real concerns every parent should take into account when choosing to have children.

Much of this because of the destruction of hetero marriage and the insanity of extremist feminism. Many of these women sold a bill of goods as they ended up with jobs that many men can not stand or worse collect of the taxpayer to keep their families going. Added costs for days off and weeks off and more time then that is staggering. Adding extra employees in overpaid privileged jobs has raised the cost of surviving for those who are not privileged. Artificial equality based on pure taxation that is a house of cards based on a fiat currency that depends on massive debts to keep the economy going.

 

[Vandalshandle]

A human child should have the right not be killed by its mother just because the mother doesn't want to be bothered with the child.

Only immoral and stupid Liberals don't understand that.

Well... You'd need to be pretty dense to think "not being bother with the child" is the generally the basis of such a decision.

Well, that specific reason is not it, but the most common reasons are:

The reasons most frequently cited were that having a child would interfere with a woman's education, work or ability to care for dependents (74%); that she could not afford a baby now (73%); and that she did not want to be a single mother or was having relationship problems (48%).

Reasons U.S. Women Have Abortions: Quantitative and Qualitative Perspectives

I can't see that those reason qualify as "can't be bothered".

Interfere with education/ability to work = ability to acquire the basics for a half decent life, in this society. Any failure in this respect would be imposed on any children.

Ability to care for dependents = which may include any existng children and definately include any child produced by the pregnancy.

Single parenthood/relationship porblems = Concern about bringing a child into a chaotic life.

None of these things qualify as "can't be bothered", they are real concerns every parent should take into account when choosing to have children.

Much of this because of the destruction of hetero marriage and the insanity of extremist feminism. Many of these women sold a bill of goods as they ended up with jobs that many men can not stand or worse collect of the taxpayer to keep their families going. Added costs for days off and weeks off and more time then that is staggering. Adding extra employees in overpaid privileged jobs has raised the cost of surviving for those who are not privileged. Artificial equality based on pure taxation that is a house of cards based on a fiat currency that depends on massive debts to keep the economy going.

Right. Before same sex marriage and feminism, poverty did not exist~~~~

 

[M14 Shooter]

 

[Flash]

You are mentally deficient to not understand what that means. When a woman aborts a child for convenience then that is exactly what she is doing. Killing the child because she doesn't want to be bothered with it. Doesn't want to change diapers or have the child cramp her style or make it harder for her to go to beauty school or whatever. Maybe she doesn't want to tell her parents that she was a shithead for getting knocked or maybe thinking her boyfriend would be pissed.

96% of abortions are done for the sake of convenience and that is despicable and morally reprehensible.

I took it to mean what it stated. Your inability to express your meaning is the deficiency, if what you stated was not your meaning.

You are really having difficulty understanding what abortion is all about, aren't you?

Typical for a Moon Bat. Always confused about Economics, History, the Constitution, Climate Science Ethics and Biology.

Not understanding what abortion really is encompasses two subject failures.

So doe this post mean what it says or is there some other meaning I'm supposed to cunjure up from it?

You are confused about abortion, aren't you? Typical for a Moon Bat.

I'll make it simple for you. It is killing a child.

Any more confusion?

Why do so many so called "prolifers" replace logic with insults? The contempt they show for humans demonstrates their drive is for control over others rather than any concern for humanity.

Evidently, like most stupid immoral Moon Bats, you failed to understand that abortion is killing children.

Pathetic.

 

[Flash]

A human child should have the right not be killed by its mother just because the mother doesn't want to be bothered with the child.

Only immoral and stupid Liberals don't understand that.

Well... You'd need to be pretty dense to think "not being bother with the child" is the generally the basis of such a decision.

Well, that specific reason is not it, but the most common reasons are:

The reasons most frequently cited were that having a child would interfere with a woman's education, work or ability to care for dependents (74%); that she could not afford a baby now (73%); and that she did not want to be a single mother or was having relationship problems (48%).

Reasons U.S. Women Have Abortions: Quantitative and Qualitative Perspectives

I can't see that those reason qualify as "can't be bothered".

Interfere with education/ability to work = ability to acquire the basics for a half decent life, in this society. Any failure in this respect would be imposed on any children.

Ability to care for dependents = which may include any existng children and definately include any child produced by the pregnancy.

Single parenthood/relationship porblems = Concern about bringing a child into a chaotic life.

None of these things qualify as "can't be bothered", they are real concerns every parent should take into account when choosing to have children.

The reason why women their kill their children 96% of the time is selfishness of not wanting to live up to the responsibility of taking care of the children. Can't be bothered. Your list is all different manifestations of that selfishness.

Sorry but Can't Be Bothered is not a good reason to kill a child. Like the Nazis didn't want to be bothered with the Jews.

 

[Flash]

 

[Flash]

A human child should have the right not be killed by its mother just because the mother doesn't want to be bothered with the child.

Only immoral and stupid Liberals don't understand that.

Well... You'd need to be pretty dense to think "not being bother with the child" is the generally the basis of such a decision.

Well, that specific reason is not it, but the most common reasons are:

The reasons most frequently cited were that having a child would interfere with a woman's education, work or ability to care for dependents (74%); that she could not afford a baby now (73%); and that she did not want to be a single mother or was having relationship problems (48%).

Reasons U.S. Women Have Abortions: Quantitative and Qualitative Perspectives

I can't see that those reason qualify as "can't be bothered".

Interfere with education/ability to work = ability to acquire the basics for a half decent life, in this society. Any failure in this respect would be imposed on any children.

Ability to care for dependents = which may include any existng children and definately include any child produced by the pregnancy.

Single parenthood/relationship porblems = Concern about bringing a child into a chaotic life.

None of these things qualify as "can't be bothered", they are real concerns every parent should take into account when choosing to have children.

Much of this because of the destruction of hetero marriage and the insanity of extremist feminism. Many of these women sold a bill of goods as they ended up with jobs that many men can not stand or worse collect of the taxpayer to keep their families going. Added costs for days off and weeks off and more time then that is staggering. Adding extra employees in overpaid privileged jobs has raised the cost of surviving for those who are not privileged. Artificial equality based on pure taxation that is a house of cards based on a fiat currency that depends on massive debts to keep the economy going.

Right. Before same sex marriage and feminism, poverty did not exist~~~~

Before abortions became widespread because of the filthy ass Supreme Court making it a "Constitutional Right" that a woman could kill her child for the sake of convenience many more parents lived up to their responsibility to their children. There were back door abortions but nothing like the million we see every year now.

Liberalism makes it easy to run away from personal responsibility. If you get drunk and knocked up and don't want to be bothered with a child then all you have to do is run down to Planned Parenthood and they will kill your child for you with the blessing of the filthy government. Despicable, isn't it?

 

[Flash]

Most of the time Planned Parenthood will kill your child for you so you don't have to be bothered with it and they won't charge you anything.

Great deal. Murder your child and you don't even have to pay.

PP can sell the body parts to make a profit so you don't get burdened with the cost. Life is good, isn't it?

 

[Beyond]

A human child should have the right not be killed by its mother just because the mother doesn't want to be bothered with the child.

Only immoral and stupid Liberals don't understand that.

Well... You'd need to be pretty dense to think "not being bother with the child" is the generally the basis of such a decision.

Well, that specific reason is not it, but the most common reasons are:

The reasons most frequently cited were that having a child would interfere with a woman's education, work or ability to care for dependents (74%); that she could not afford a baby now (73%); and that she did not want to be a single mother or was having relationship problems (48%).

Reasons U.S. Women Have Abortions: Quantitative and Qualitative Perspectives

I can't see that those reason qualify as "can't be bothered".

Interfere with education/ability to work = ability to acquire the basics for a half decent life, in this society. Any failure in this respect would be imposed on any children.

Ability to care for dependents = which may include any existng children and definately include any child produced by the pregnancy.

Single parenthood/relationship porblems = Concern about bringing a child into a chaotic life.

None of these things qualify as "can't be bothered", they are real concerns every parent should take into account when choosing to have children.

Much of this because of the destruction of hetero marriage and the insanity of extremist feminism. Many of these women sold a bill of goods as they ended up with jobs that many men can not stand or worse collect of the taxpayer to keep their families going. Added costs for days off and weeks off and more time then that is staggering. Adding extra employees in overpaid privileged jobs has raised the cost of surviving for those who are not privileged. Artificial equality based on pure taxation that is a house of cards based on a fiat currency that depends on massive debts to keep the economy going.

When someone declares that being treated as chattel is a loss for women, I really don't see how I can find enough common ground for discussion.

 

[Beyond]

A human child should have the right not be killed by its mother just because the mother doesn't want to be bothered with the child.

Only immoral and stupid Liberals don't understand that.

Well... You'd need to be pretty dense to think "not being bother with the child" is the generally the basis of such a decision.

Well, that specific reason is not it, but the most common reasons are:

The reasons most frequently cited were that having a child would interfere with a woman's education, work or ability to care for dependents (74%); that she could not afford a baby now (73%); and that she did not want to be a single mother or was having relationship problems (48%).

Reasons U.S. Women Have Abortions: Quantitative and Qualitative Perspectives

I can't see that those reason qualify as "can't be bothered".

Interfere with education/ability to work = ability to acquire the basics for a half decent life, in this society. Any failure in this respect would be imposed on any children.

Ability to care for dependents = which may include any existng children and definately include any child produced by the pregnancy.

Single parenthood/relationship porblems = Concern about bringing a child into a chaotic life.

None of these things qualify as "can't be bothered", they are real concerns every parent should take into account when choosing to have children.

The reason why women their kill their children 96% of the time is selfishness of not wanting to live up to the responsibility of taking care of the children. Can't be bothered. Your list is all different manifestations of that selfishness.

Sorry but Can't Be Bothered is not a good reason to kill a child. Like the Nazis didn't want to be bothered with the Jews.

If you want to get pregnant and give birth, go right ahead, but you have no say in what others do with their bodies.

 

[Flash]

A human child should have the right not be killed by its mother just because the mother doesn't want to be bothered with the child.

Only immoral and stupid Liberals don't understand that.

Well... You'd need to be pretty dense to think "not being bother with the child" is the generally the basis of such a decision.

Well, that specific reason is not it, but the most common reasons are:

The reasons most frequently cited were that having a child would interfere with a woman's education, work or ability to care for dependents (74%); that she could not afford a baby now (73%); and that she did not want to be a single mother or was having relationship problems (48%).

Reasons U.S. Women Have Abortions: Quantitative and Qualitative Perspectives

I can't see that those reason qualify as "can't be bothered".

Interfere with education/ability to work = ability to acquire the basics for a half decent life, in this society. Any failure in this respect would be imposed on any children.

Ability to care for dependents = which may include any existng children and definately include any child produced by the pregnancy.

Single parenthood/relationship porblems = Concern about bringing a child into a chaotic life.

None of these things qualify as "can't be bothered", they are real concerns every parent should take into account when choosing to have children.

The reason why women their kill their children 96% of the time is selfishness of not wanting to live up to the responsibility of taking care of the children. Can't be bothered. Your list is all different manifestations of that selfishness.

Sorry but Can't Be Bothered is not a good reason to kill a child. Like the Nazis didn't want to be bothered with the Jews.

If you want to get pregnant and give birth, go right ahead, but you have no say in what others do with their bodies.

"Mommy, Mommy please don't kill me, I promise not to be a bother to you"

 

[Dana7360]

Even the Bible states that life begins when the lungs fill with oxygen.....

Give me the reference.

OMG.

You far right wing radical extremists proclaim you're christians yet you don't know what's in the bible.

Have you ever read that book? Or are you like the rest of you far right wing radical extremists and just use that book as a weapon against anyone who doesn't agree with you?

The very first book of the bible, genesis 2:7 tells you when your god believes life begins.

When the first breath of air is taken through the nose.

You really are pathetic.

Genesis 2:7 Then the LORD God formed man from the dust of the ground and breathed the breath of life into his nostrils, and the man became a living being.

You don't understand the difference between a spirit life and physical life. Adam was created perfect and when he sinned, he died spiritually. The Bible also says God formed you in the womb. So when did you become a Bible believer?

No, I think that passage is VERY CLEAR. Breath is life, according to the Bible. God formed Adam in his own image and when the formation was COMPLETE, God breathed LIFE into him.

There is also a reference in Exodus 21:

Exodus 21:22 - ASV - And if men strive together, and hurt a woman wi...

If God considered the death of the fetus to be "murder", why is the punishment a fine?

The reason why God breathed life into Adam is because adam was the first being created. I dont think that scripture is saying first breath is the beginning of life, just that Adam was formed from the dust of the ground and unless God breathed life into him, Adam would have been lifeless because there was nobody else to give him life.

Every person born since then has been given life by their mother.

Please point to the scripture that says what you claim.

No place in the bible says anything of what you claim so what you're doing is rewriting the bible to be what you want it to be.

Where you there when your god breathed the breath of life into adam's nose? Did your god specifically tell you what you claim?

By the way, people who hear other beings talk to them that aren't there are usually seeing a doctor for their mental problem of hearing things that aren't there.

You can twist the Bible all you want. You can make assumptions all you want.

It's not fact.

The fact is what the bible actually says. Not what you want it to say.