Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
And you will never get our consent to force 40 weeks of pregnancy, the risk of life-threatening conditions and a good chance of what is considered major surgery (not to mention a most expensive 18 years after) on a woman because you want to save the life of an embryo/fetus you will not in any significant way support if it passes the point of viability. Period.
Continue to cry for those poor, innocent fetuses with the rest of the big talkers, though. You know what they say- "Words speak louder than actions."
Wait...
I am aware that you pro-choicers are lacking in conscience about human life. Tell me something I don't know. I already reiterated that when the mother's life is in danger that would be one instance where I would advocate for an abortion. So why are you even mentioning that?
More importantly, completely ignoring the fact that there are 40,000 more unwanted children put into the adoption per a year then there are couples who want to adopt them.
Also ignoring the fact that there are 1.4 MILLION abortions a year.
Please inform me who is going to pay for another 1.4 million kids who are being put up for adoption?
An excellent point. Or the resources, the medical bills for all of these births. We got slammed with out-of-pocket costs for my first son's birth and I had good insurance-- where will the money come from? Doctors, nurses, and other hospital staff have to be paid.
I am aware that you pro-choicers are lacking in conscience about human life. Tell me something I don't know. I already reiterated that when the mother's life is in danger that would be one instance where I would advocate for an abortion. So why are you even mentioning that?
It came up because earlier in the thread clb10 issued the following challenge, and I gave an example of what I believe is a medically justifiable abortion:
Quote:
Originally Posted by clb10
Still not answering when it is o.k. during the pregnancy to murder the growing human fetus.
I sense a strong conflict within the progressive thought Borg about the cosmetic notion of human rights and the cold reality of the liberal joy of killing human fetuses.
I suppose I'll never get an answer from the progressive "movement" as long as this internal conflict exists.
More importantly, completely ignoring the fact that there are 40,000 more unwanted children put into the adoption per a year then there are couples who want to adopt them.
Also ignoring the fact that there are 1.4 MILLION abortions a year.
Please inform me who is going to pay for another 1.4 million kids who are being put up for adoption?
Perhaps the Conservatives should get on the contraception band wagon. Instead of telling people that sex is evil, that contraceptives are Evil, say "you shouldn't have sex, but if you do, do it the right way." I mean... there is no way THAT could keep birth rates down, is there?
This is true, and doesn't even consider the thousands of children who are mixed race or disabled and languishing in the foster care system. Why don't people who waste all day protesting at one of the few abortion clinics still functioning adopt these kids, and truly make a difference? BTW, I had an ectopic pregnancy due to endometriosis; I lost an ovary and fallopian tube, and nearly died. You can bet that I'd have opted to have an abortion had I known that I was pregnant, rather than have that experience.
I am aware that you pro-choicers are lacking in conscience about human life. Tell me something I don't know. I already reiterated that when the mother's life is in danger that would be one instance where I would advocate for an abortion. So why are you even mentioning that?
Because you say abortion is "murder"......how does abortion change because the woman's life is in danger????
Time to repost for all those getting hung up on the last menstrual period business. Let me elaborate, once a woman is pg, her due date is calculated from the last menstural period b/c that is usually a verifiable date. All 20 week pregnancies are actually 18 weeks from conception.
I'm not sure what has actually changed in Arizona regarding abortion limits, unless the state had absolutely no limits on abortion until the legislation passed or reduced it from the more common 22-week limit in other states, which I'm pretty sure is measured from LMP.
All that said, if the limit has been decreased to 20 weeks LMP, it effectively ends abortion as an option for the diagnosis of fetal defect (e.g., neural tube defects & trisomy), which are most often identified and/or confirmed late in the second trimester by u/s & amnio, and have a ~90% termination rate. I recently saw a report --sorry, no link, have to look for it-- indicating that 200 women in Arizona had abortions after 20 weeks last year. The timing of these abortions suggests to me that most if not all were performed for fetal defect. Brewer cites increasing danger of late abortion in defense of the legislation, but late second-trimester terminations are usually inductions, not D&Es, meaning they are no more dangerous than a normal vaginal delivery, especially given every OB in the world it seems pushes pitocin to speed things up.
So, to connect the dots, the part of the legislation that codifies dating of pregnancy from LMP has done effectively nothing to reduce the "convenience" abortions so many of you are railing about. That Brewer did by ending PP funding. However, I suspect all of this is a clear sign to her pro-life constituents that she would support a personhood amendment, so stay tuned.
Last edited by randomparent; 05-07-2012 at 11:09 AM..
The main goal of the anti-abortion crowd is not to protect the unborn but to force women back into the role of sex toys, baby makers, mothers and house maids. The weak men in control of the anti-abortion movement cannot tolerate the idea of women being in control of their own bodies and their own fate. The mere thought that women are not slaves of men and/or the church is simply intolerable.
“Protecting the unborn” is just one method in removing a woman’s right to be a FREE individual.
IMHO - Several churches claim a woman will go to Hell if she has an abortion.
I contend she will get there faster if she is forced to have and raise an unwanted child.
The former is a possibility and the latter a certainty.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
they are hand in hand. put up or shut up as they say or walk the walk is another that comes to mind
