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.
I'm very sorry but don't you know and haven't you heard of a morning after pill?
That can be used the day after a rape or are you saying that women realize 6 month after a rape that it was sex the loved and agreed to!
They are other forms of birth control than abortion.
We also have something like being smart who and when you have sex. Killing a baby who wasn't at fault for choosing to be growing inside a woman's body and then to be slaughtered because the mom has the right to change her mind when the fetus/baby is 6 month and in the last term prior to birth.
Why do pregnant women call it a baby shower and not a NO right to live shower unless the baby is born.
Hillary is in favor of murder.
I'm not against all abortions but I favor life and prevention of pregnancy if the woman is not ready.
Morning after pill is a solution for any rape victim and if the woman is not seeking doctors help than it is not rape unless the woman was held against her will.
But that still doesn't mean the baby has to be killed during the last term of the pregnancy.
So your research of this issue is based on figures of speech.
Well plenty of late term and those numbers you posted are low for the late term.
I know as I once used to march for life.
But still imo ONE life gone is ONE too much.
How does being a protester make you an authority on medical facts?
Quote:
According to the CDC, 91 percent of abortions occur during the first 13 weeks of pregnancy. Late-term abortions, which occur after a woman is 20 weeks along, make up just 1.3 percent of all abortions. Roe v. Wade stipulates that abortions are legal up until the 24th week of pregnancy, meaning that late-term abortions, which are usually carried out for medical reasons, very rare.
One woman on TV said well it will be surgery so no problem for the baby but she wasn't well I formed as the babies organs will be harvested and sold for money by Planned Parenthood and most abortions are not surgeries.
Why are liberals against educating women to prevent getting pregnant and when someone is raped to provide the morning after pill to avoid any abortion unless the mothers life is in danger.
All this talk about abortion is a moot point and only plays on emotions. One shouldn't be a one issue voter. Abortion is a non issue.
Yeah...People are very emotional with this subject, and irrational. I never heard anybody be in favor, not even people who are fully for abortion "late" in the pregnancy,think it's ok to abort a full term baby.
Yeah...People are very emotional with this subject, and irrational. I never heard anybody be in favor, not even people who are fully for abortion "late" in the pregnancy,think it's ok to abort a full term baby.
That's because no one does. Late term abortions are rare and only done out of medical necessity, which Clinton very clearly outlined in her response at the last debate. They are always heartbreaking, tragic situations where there can be no good outcome for either or both the mother or fetus. They are not undertaken lightly, nor are they a form of birth control by calloused, uncaring women, as the anti-choicers try to assert.
The bottom line is that no one in this thread is qualified to make an assessment of anyone else's medical condition. Which is why it is the business of absolutely no one outside of a doctor and their patient.
Quote:
Originally Posted by bentlebee
Why are liberals against educating women to prevent getting pregnant and when someone is raped to provide the morning after pill to avoid any abortion unless the mothers life is in danger.
Did you seriously type this? You do understand that it is not liberals who are against sex ed in schools, right? You do understand that all of the opposition to the morning after pill comes from the rightwing, right?
Nobody is in favor of letting any mother die if that is the choice a doctor has to make during a pregnancy so that is not what we are discussing and Trump has been clear on that in the past.
Clinton wants to let women choose even if it means killing a baby that can live if the birth will occur all of a sudden .
What if a woman hormones act up or a fight with baby daddy and the pregnant woman out of spite wants to get the baby gone than Hillary says "it's a women's right to kill and slaughter the baby"!
We were shocked sitting and watching Hillary butter the words.
Where's the links to this horrible declaration of hers?
There isn't hundreds of thousands of kids in foster care available for adoption. Why the dishonesty? Most kids in foster care are not available for adoption. They are waiting the courts to decide when they can be returned to their parents.
yes there are thousands, and thousands of eligible foster kids to be adopted.
RvW allows the state to step in and say no after viability.
Of course, but that's not what we're talking about. Your claim was that, in states that allow post-viability abortions, physicians don't have the right to be selective about which abortions they perform. That is absolutely untrue.
Quote:
Originally Posted by pknopp
No. I'm not sure where I was not clear. No one has the right to take anothers life outside of direct self defense.
Why not? What if doing so prevents massive suffering?
Exactly... If the mother will, in a doctor's opinion most likely die then a decision has to be made to protect the mother. I think a requirement should be in place that if it's far enough along that the child is even remotely viable then it should be delivered and given a chance to live.
Woah, I think you should re-read my post. I didn't say anything like that. I was referring to partial birth abortion, not post-viability abortion. Viability is irrelevant.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jimj
I get that sometimes things just happen, condoms break, the pill is not perfect etc. With that being said, there should be some kind of limit on how many times the same person can abort "on demand" as in not for health reasons.
Why?
Quote:
Originally Posted by jimj
I also think that supporting Planned Parenthood with public money should be put up for a vote since we're paying for it AND they should be subject to a forensic audit as well as continuing audits if they do end up receiving public funds so we are assured they are using the millions of our dollars in the manner they claim.
The government spends trillions of dollars that never goes to a public vote. Why should PP spending be different?
You have just taken yourself out of any rational discussion.<bold> Bye bye...
Why? If you disagree, disagree with good reasoning
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.
If the mother will, in a doctor's opinion most likely die then a decision has to be made to protect the mother. I think a requirement should be in place that if it's far enough along that the child is even remotely viable then it should be delivered and given a chance to live.
<bold> Bye bye...
