Why Are Liberals Angry About The Children Separation At The Border, but Support Late Term Abortions? (poll, high school)

[Finper]

10 posts and not one answer to the question...

[thefragile]

Originally Posted by Finper

10 posts and not one answer to the question...

Here's your answer: we don't support late term abortion. But you knew that already.

[Catgirl64]

Originally Posted by Jimmyp25

Well, theres 9 states that dont have any restrictions on abortions. All mostly liberal states Alaska, Colorado, the District of Columbia, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New Mexico, Oregon, and Vermont......

I just dont understand.. You are worried about children at the border, but you support killing babies in the womb?

Alaska is a red state.

[Jimmyp25]

Originally Posted by Catgirl64

Alaska is a red state.

"mostly" and I believe it was bluish , until the oil $$$$$$ came along.

[JAMS14]

Originally Posted by thefragile

Here's your answer: we don't support late term abortion. But you knew that already.

Better answer, no one supports late term abortions. When they are done, and they are extremely rare, they are always done for medical reasons, most often to save the life of the mother or because the child is not viable.

No one is deciding in the ninth month of their pregnancy, gee, I think I'll go get an abortion. And no doctor anywhere in the country would go along with her if she did.

The thing is, the OP knows this. This is just more of the usual nonsense by the forced birth crowd.

[RedZin]

Originally Posted by Jimmyp25

Why Are Liberals Angry About The Children At The Border, but Support Late Term Abortions?


Its makes 0 sense. Is it because the illegals are future voters and the baby cannot vote?

Because late term abortions are usually performed for fetuses that are not going to survive anyway.

Or because the mother is at grave risk of not surviving if she does not abort.

They aren't just casually performed. Very few states allow them at all without solid reasons such as the ones I just mentioned.

Those kids at the border are already living children.

ETA: Nobody I know supports the removal of a viable fetus that could survive outside the womb and killing it. Come on... don't be silly.

[randomparent]

Originally Posted by TigerLily24

Why do people keep starting threads based on false equivalencies?

Because their arguments are weak, so they rely on inflammatory statements to appeal to emotion in garnering support. There are so many logical fallacies in this poster's history, I wouldn't even know where to begin.

[Jimmyp25]

Originally Posted by RedZin

Those kids at the border are already living children.

.

Babies in the womb are living children

[JAMS14]

Originally Posted by Jimmyp25

Babies in the womb are living children

You asked about late term abortions. You were answered (even though you'd have to be a moron to not know), answers which, of course, you completely ignored because they didn't fit your ridiculous narrative.

Now you are moving the goalposts in your own thread to speak of all pregnancies, not just the late term abortions you started this thread to whine about.

That's what people do when they are losing an argument.

[southwest88]

Originally Posted by Jimmyp25

Well, theres 9 states that dont have any restrictions on abortions. All mostly liberal states Alaska, Colorado, the District of Columbia, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New Mexico, Oregon, and Vermont......

I just dont understand.. You are worried about children at the border, but you support killing babies in the womb?

By the logic of Roe v. Wade, a fetus in utero is not a legal person (& not a baby). & therefore an abortion in the first trimester is a decision between the woman & her doctor. & therefore the abortion is not a murder. Roe keys on the viability of the fetus - when it's viable, & is born or delivered, then it's a baby.