Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
Old 05-20-2019, 03:33 PM
 
Location: Middle of nowhere
24,260 posts, read 14,229,657 times
Reputation: 9895

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by newtovenice View Post
I repeat: The law does not require that woman GET pregnant.
Having a drivers license doesn't require you get in a wreck, but if you do you can seek medical attention.

Consent to sex is not consent to pregnancy. No one can use another persons body as life support against their will.

If I can evict a person living in my house even if I invited them in, why can't I evict a fetus that I did not invite in that is living in my body? Under these laws I have more right to who lives in my house than I do who lives in my body.

 
Old 05-20-2019, 03:40 PM
 
21,382 posts, read 7,964,394 times
Reputation: 18156
Quote:
Originally Posted by jjrose View Post
Having a drivers license doesn't require you get in a wreck, but if you do you can seek medical attention.

Consent to sex is not consent to pregnancy. No one can use another persons body as life support against their will.

If I can evict a person living in my house even if I invited them in, why can't I evict a fetus that I did not invite in that is living in my body? Under these laws I have more right to who lives in my house than I do who lives in my body.
Yes it is. Absolutely. 100%.

It's biology. You invited the baby in when you decided to have sex. You fully understand where the baby "lives." It lives in its mom. Again, biology. Don't want a baby? Don't have sex. Again, BIOLOGY.

And if you still don't understand that sex makes babies, I see no reason to engage you further. It's dishonest as you do not understand basic biological facts and are arguing scenarios that are not applicable. /shrug/ Can't help you if you remain ignorant. That's your choice.

Simply stunning that I have to keep repeating: Sex makes babies.
 
Old 05-20-2019, 03:41 PM
 
42,732 posts, read 29,913,446 times
Reputation: 14345
Quote:
Originally Posted by newtovenice View Post
Motherhood is not punishment and babies are not weapons of torture.
I suspect that whether it is punishment or not is largely a matter of perspective. Pregnancy can be torture. Morning sickness, swelling, back pain, frequent urination, nausea, difficulty walking, pregnancy isn't easy.
 
Old 05-20-2019, 03:44 PM
 
21,382 posts, read 7,964,394 times
Reputation: 18156
Quote:
Originally Posted by DC at the Ridge View Post
I suspect that whether it is punishment or not is largely a matter of perspective. Pregnancy can be torture. Morning sickness, swelling, back pain, frequent urination, nausea, difficulty walking, pregnancy isn't easy.
"Not easy" and "punishment" are two different things.
 
Old 05-20-2019, 03:52 PM
 
Location: Middle of nowhere
24,260 posts, read 14,229,657 times
Reputation: 9895
Quote:
Originally Posted by newtovenice View Post
Yes it is. Absolutely. 100%.

It's biology. You invited the baby in when you decided to have sex. You fully understand where the baby "lives." It lives in its mom. Again, biology. Don't want a baby? Don't have sex. Again, BIOLOGY.

And if you still don't understand that sex makes babies, I see no reason to engage you further. It's dishonest as you do not understand basic biological facts and are arguing scenarios that are not applicable. /shrug/ Can't help you if you remain ignorant. That's your choice.

Simply stunning that I have to keep repeating: Sex makes babies.
No it's not.

Consent to smoking is not consent to cancer, and if you get cancer you are not required to keep it and not get treatment.

Consent to walking down the street is not consent to getting mugged, but it may happen.

Consent to eating out is not consent to getting food poisoning, but it may happen and you can get treatment for it.

Consent to sex is not consent to getting a STI, but it may happen, and you can get medical treatment for it.

Simply stunning that you can't understand that consent to one thing does not mean you consent to any possible outcome of doing that thing.
 
Old 05-20-2019, 03:58 PM
 
8,168 posts, read 3,133,964 times
Reputation: 4501
Quote:
Originally Posted by AguaDulce View Post
Women should be able to make choices about what happens to their bodies.
I agree with you on that.
 
Old 05-20-2019, 04:07 PM
 
15,102 posts, read 8,655,002 times
Reputation: 7454
Quote:
Originally Posted by zzzSnorlax View Post
It actually is not, it is defined as "cessation of blood circulation and breathing". There is no mention of heartbeat precisely because of the ambiguity re artificial hearts/future technological advancements that we were talking about earlier.
Baloney. Cessation of blood circulation is simply another way of declaring heart failure, since that is the organ responsible for blood circulation.

Quote:
What's more "clinical death" and "legal death" are 2 completely different concepts, with only "legal death" having legal ramifications upon your rights.


Since this debate is centered in the realm of legislation, the legal definitions are the definitions that must be defaulted to. The medical definitions are irrelevant, .......
STOP. The context of MY POINT has nothing whatsoever to do with legislation, nor in the myriad of circumstances one might be declared “legally dead”. Jesus Key Riest ...

The CONTEXT is simply the point of what constitutes “living” by examining the criteria for what constitutes death .... i.e., heartbeat/no heartbeat ... from a purely “clinical” aspect, not a legal determination which can occur in the mere absence of a person for a given length of time, be they clinically dead, or drinking freaking margaritas in Mexico.

Sorry, but this rather lame attempt to conflate and confuse the issues is quite transparent.
 
Old 05-20-2019, 04:18 PM
 
15,102 posts, read 8,655,002 times
Reputation: 7454
Quote:
Originally Posted by jjrose View Post
No it's not.

Consent to smoking is not consent to cancer, and if you get cancer you are not required to keep it and not get treatment.

Consent to walking down the street is not consent to getting mugged, but it may happen.

Consent to eating out is not consent to getting food poisoning, but it may happen and you can get treatment for it.

Consent to sex is not consent to getting a STI, but it may happen, and you can get medical treatment for it.

Simply stunning that you can't understand that consent to one thing does not mean you consent to any possible outcome of doing that thing.

Simply stunning that you’d compare the act of procreation and motherhood (which you owe your very existence to) to contracting an STD, Cancer or food poisoning. Good grief!!!

You obviously don’t recognize the depravity in doing so, but I’m sure many others wont miss it. Best be thankful YOUR mother didn’t think this way.

But lets be VERY CLEAR ..... actions and choices do have consequences, in spite of your unwillingness to take responsibility and own them. This cavalier and dismissive attitude regarding the value of life is another choice that may deliver to you consequences you wont enjoy, or be able to abort so easily.

Last edited by GuyNTexas; 05-20-2019 at 04:33 PM..
 
Old 05-20-2019, 04:25 PM
 
7,420 posts, read 2,715,564 times
Reputation: 7783
Quote:
Originally Posted by newtovenice View Post
[It's biology. You invited the baby in when you decided to have sex. You fully understand where the baby "lives." It lives in its mom. Again, biology. Don't want a baby? Don't have sex. Again, BIOLOGY.

And if you still don't understand that sex makes babies, I see no reason to engage you further. It's dishonest as you do not understand basic biological facts and are arguing scenarios that are not applicable. /shrug/ Can't help you if you remain ignorant. That's your choice.

Simply stunning that I have to keep repeating: Sex makes babies.
And what you are ignorantly failing to hear is yourself. You are dictating what a woman's role and purpose is. You know, that belief that has everything to do with judging a woman's behavior, and nothing to do with the value of life.

Simply stunning, I'll agree! Days and days of your twisting word tactics and deliberate stubbornness and illogical dismissiveness. Perhaps you keep going on and on because you have childishly done your shrug thing and put most pro-choice folks on ignore!

In summary:
A "right to life" doesn't imply a right to use someone else's body to sustain a life.
Women do not have a "responsibility" to have children, and certainly don't assume such a responsibility by virtue of deciding to have sex.
Outlawing abortion is very dangerous, both for women and their children and families.
Adoption still requires women to carry a baby to term and then give birth, both of which are also inherently dangerous.
Abortions, on the other hand, are quite safe.
Banning abortion violates a woman's right to control her own body.
Roe v Wade is the law of the land...for over 45 years. And 75% of Americans support it. Done.

Peace be with you!

Last edited by corpgypsy; 05-20-2019 at 04:56 PM..
 
Old 05-20-2019, 05:00 PM
 
Location: Georgia, USA
37,129 posts, read 41,330,362 times
Reputation: 45221
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lieneke View Post
"Like you've been told ...", abortion at 20 weeks gestation is 2 weeks shy of a viable premie.
Intact survival without handicaps is virtually unheard of at 22 weeks.

Quote:
Originally Posted by GuyNTexas View Post
While most females within the animal community ferociously protect their offspring, often to the death, I know of no other species that kills its own children with such enthusiasm ...
You might want to check that one out.
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.


Closed Thread


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top