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.
We know you need to keep changing the subject away from abortion because you are losing the argument for abortion.
Janelle, what do you think the effect of ingesting contaminated water, breathing polluted air, eating food that is contaminated, or being exposed to industrial toxic waste has on a fetus?
Is it pro-life to allow toxic agents in our environment that cause severe birth defects and miscarriages?
Janelle, what do you think the effect of ingesting contaminated water, breathing polluted air, eating food that is contaminated, or being exposed to industrial toxic waste has on a fetus?
Is it pro-life to allow toxic agents in our environment that causes severe birth defects and miscarriage?
I'm glad to see they are developing treatments that help the baby before it's born. Hopefully that will give families who find themselves faced with this a few more options.
Only if you are stupid. Because you would have to be stupid to believe that 1. a woman is going to go through eight months of pregnancy and then change her mind, 2. a woman is going to pay $25,000 - $30,000 for a late term abortion rather than simply induce labor and pay $5,000 - $6,000, 3. a woman is going to want the infant killed, rather than simply put up for adoption, 4. that a doctor would risk his license to murder a helpless infant.
Strawman. Irrelevant to the point I made. Yes it will be rare but it doesn't mean the law doesn't allow it. As you know.
So, New York now becomes the 20th state to define health the way a 1973 ruling did. Where is the data of all these easy peasy late term abortions?
Who suggests there are many?
The simple question remains: Do you think it should be legal to terminate a late term baby that is perfectly healthy for non life threatening reasons of the mother? There is no question that this is allowable under the law.
Whether it will be frequent is completely irrelevant. Even if it's only 1% of the 1.3% of abortions performed each year past 21 weeks, ie, 0.00013% of all abortions in America each year, its still 130 babies being killled.
I'm an atheist, have 3 kids, and have confronted and comforted my wife (then girlfriend) through an abortion. I'm not pro-life or extremist. I simply think the answer to the above question is so easy; No. I think the vast majority of people agree.
I think those who support the law don't actually think the above should be legal but are prepared to take the risk/trade off because they think abortion in general is at threat.
Both sides question the others intent, which is not a good starting point for a real discussion.
So quick to judge every woman who has ever had an abortion, yet you still sit in your pews and praise the God and follow the leaders that let your priests continue raping actual children (that have been born and are right there for you to help) right under your noses....
You are just another "save the fetus, screw the child" advocate. Maybe there would be less abortion if people like yourself gave two craps about the actual child. You know, once it is born and actually living? Instead, you don't want to help the single mothers, and would rather call them promiscuous and stupid. You don't want to help those in foster homes or otherwise in the states care. You want to sit here and cry about abortions, but don't give a rats behind about the child once it actually becomes a child. Your are a hypocrite and a forced birther, not pro-life.
That's right. And again, the assumption being with some that all who are born are headed for a good upbringing and great life. Some have unwanted pregnancies due to unwanted sex, too. Women should not be the only one blamed.
I have seen it is like trying to talk to a brick wall. You know, there is no reasoning with some, since as said, many grow up developing mental issues.
Janelle, what do you think the effect of ingesting contaminated water, breathing polluted air, eating food that is contaminated, or being exposed to industrial toxic waste has on a fetus?
Is it pro-life to allow toxic agents in our environment that cause severe birth defects and miscarriages?
Really? Were you taught that, growing up? Well, get ready, because the Democrats are going to be in the lead again soon.
And since it was brought up, the MOST EVIL is what has been in the W H now for too long, having created havoc and being a detriment to all.
Quote:
Originally Posted by sickofnyc
If not for the Democratic party you would be eating tainted food, drinking polluted water, breathing toxic air and have zero social safety nets and most of all babies born to families that cannot afford healthcare would not have any at all. What about the WIC and the SNAP programs and those free breakfast and school lunches along with early education to give these children a head start? Are you at all astute enough to realize that?
Hey...how do feel about Trumps policy of ripping those already born children away from their families at the border?
SAVE THE FETUS/SCREW THE CHILD
That's right, but some don't comprehend this or choose to overlook reality for the sake of remaining rooted in and devoted to an outmoded and unrealistic ideology.
The simple question remains: Do you think it should be legal to terminate a late term baby that is perfectly healthy for non life threatening reasons of the mother?
Absolutely not. You'd be hard pressed to find someone who did
Quote:
There is no question that this is allowable under the law.
I'm not am attorney. I'm not convinced that is what it says. The definition of health they are referring to is from 1973 (and an 8 week fetus) so surely it's had time to play out in other states that say health and not physical health. So no, I do not have enough information to say that. I'm trying to get it but all I get in return is AHHHHH Baby Killer from people that should know the issues.
Quote:
Whether it will be frequent is completely irrelevant. Even if it's only 1% of the 1.3% of abortions performed each year past 21 weeks, ie, 0.00013% of all abortions in America each year, its still 130 babies being killled.
Agree. Any is not ok.
Quote:
I'm an atheist, have 3 kids, and have confronted and comforted my wife (then girlfriend) through an abortion. I'm not pro-life or extremist. I simply think the answer to the above question is so easy; No. I think the vast majority of people agree.
I think those who support the law don't actually think the above should be legal but are prepared to take the risk/trade off because they think abortion in general is at threat.
Both sides question the others intent, which is not a good starting point for a real discussion.
I'm not using a risk.reward scenario. This leads me to doubt others are.
Originally Posted by sickofnyc View Post
If not for the Democratic party you would be eating tainted food, drinking polluted water, breathing toxic air and have zero social safety nets and most of all babies born to families that cannot afford healthcare would not have any at all. What about the WIC and the SNAP programs and those free breakfast and school lunches along with early education to give these children a head start? Are you at all astute enough to realize that?
If this is an advertisement to sell Radical Democrat policies, you have failed miserably. Reads like a sound byte for Socialism.
You have apparently been fed the lie, and swallowed, that the Democrats(politicians) are for the people. The only people they are for is themselves.
Stop giving all the taxpayer money to other nations' peoples and use it for Americans in true need.(Thank you President Trump)
Children are not turned away when they need health care. Why can't you leftist get that?
As for Head Start, a head start into the indoctrination of Socialism is toxic.
Strawman. Irrelevant to the point I made. Yes it will be rare but it doesn't mean the law doesn't allow it. As you know.
Why not just discuss the facts?
Not at all irrelevant. The facts, again, are that it is stupid to believe that 1. a woman after eight months of pregnancy, of eight months of choosing to be pregnant, is suddenly going to change her mind and decide that she doesn't want to have the baby, 2. that a woman is then going to opt for a late-term abortion that costs $25,000-$30,000, rather than go ahead with a delivery that will cost $5,000-$6,000, 3. that a woman in that situation is going to opt to kill a baby rather than simply put it up for adoption, and 4. that a doctor is going to risk his license to practice in order to kill a helpless infant.
Those are FACTS. Which clearly you cannot refute.
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.
Some have unwanted pregnancies due to unwanted sex, too. Women should not be the only one blamed. 
