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.
First of all, abortion is legal. But since you are against it.... why aren't you proactive in finding homes for the hundreds of thousands of kids in foster care looking for homes. Why not be an advocate for them. No one seems to care about the children already here looking for homes.
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.
Honestly, if I'm ready to go then it should be my decision...no one else's. What is life when you are bed ridden and pee on yourself. How about respecting those who choose to not live like that.
Where your life is concerned, it should be your decision. Doesn't bother me if you want to kill yourself.
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.
"Nobody is in favor of letting any mother die"
Who put you in charge to make such a claim?
MANY people would prefer the child live if it became a choice etween the 2.
Your "I know everything" attitude, only shows how little you REALLY know.
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.
It can easily be claimed it's "for the heath of the mother" - doctors won't override the claims a woman makes about her mental / emotional state.
I doubt many pregnancies develop life threatening conditions in the last month to justify murdering the baby - it can always be taken by c-section - If the woman wants the child. What sane clearly thinking woman woman would decide to kill her child if there's an option?
Not surprising Hillary would take that position. Obama said he's for withding care for a child that survives
abortion because to allow the baby to live goes against the wishes of the mother.
Hillary is in full support of late term partial birth abortions. She said so, the baby has no rights at all. PP owns the democrat party with all the money they throw at it. Plus she will push to have tax payers pay for abortions, any and all.
Doesn't anyone think it's rather strange that a group that gets MILLIONS in public $$$$ donates anything to a political campaign?
We give them public $$$$$$$$$$$$ so they can then turn around and give it to politicians.
Other than the first line, those are all good things. There should be some restrictions on partial birth and late term abortions, but not an outright ban.
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.
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.
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.
I think we should extend the time frame in which the baby can be killed to the first couple of years in specific cases. There are lots of scenarios where killing a young baby in a quick and painless way would be the most moral course of action.
I've never been to law school, but I assume not. Why would attorneys or attorneys-in-training need to talk about that?
Moral philosophers, however, do talk about that.
You have just taken yourself out of any rational discussion.<bold> Bye bye...
How late are you exactly talking, because after a certain point they do, indeed induce labor.
Doctors are not performing 9 month abortions.
Thank you.
Quote:
Originally Posted by pknopp
I NEVER once asked that. Not once. I asked why the fetus had to be killed.
The baby will be delivered alive if that is possible. The only time that doesn't happen is if there are severe abnormalities with the baby. Born with no brain, etc ~ things that would lead to a short and painful life.
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.
You got hoodwinked by Trump again.
"Late-Term Abortions Don't 'Rip' Babies Out Of Wombs -- And They Exist For A Reason"
Quote:
Jen Gunter, an OBGYN who trained in late-term abortions, pointed out on Twitter, “There is no such thing as a ninth month abortion.” Those who seek late-term abortions are seeking them before a pregnancy reaches full term but often and unfortunately after they have discovered in the second or third trimester some problem with the fetus or danger to the mother.
Quote:
nearly always when the fetus cannot live outside the womb and typically when the mother’s health is in danger, the fetus has a serious abnormality, or both. Such a procedure is not conducted lightly: the fetus has a fatal defect and will not survive, or the mother is at risk of death herself.
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...
