@whodey saidIF you want to reimpose criminal penalties on women for having abortions and/or doctors for performing them, you should have the honesty to admit the same and not pretend to support a "compromise" that in reality gives up nothing in return for the above.
Ok, then how about saying the beat of a very immature cardiovascular system?
Happy?
But before we define what a heart is, shouldn't we first define what is.............is?
I think Bill Clinton was working on that when asked if he perjured himself. Define is.
Did he ever get around to doing that? If not, can you do it for him?
The right's obsession with the Clintons remains rather bizarre.
@whodey saidNot necessarily.
So that is 4 posters here OK with terminating the life of a viable infant one day before birth, any others?
To use a video supporting abortion days before anticipated birth in a campaign to support a ban on abortion days after conception is not valid.
When the extremes are at the center of the debate, then I know that the baby has gone out with the bathwater.
@mchill saidmcHill McHill, McHill......Dontyou see, dont you see, you libs are all abut ; what other people think'. You say ' the majority of american people want to keep abortion legal'. But where are you , McHill? What will you tell your 3 kids at the Thanksgiving table? I am not talking about abortion here, I am asking you to be a man and decide if you think it is OK to end that life. It could be the life of your best friend's granddaughter . I am asking you to be your own man and decide if it is Ok to sto a beating heart and two eyes that could see if there were light.
Whodey - You're going to have to accept the fact that the majority of American citizens and registered voters want to keep abortion legal. You can protest, get angry, and shake your fist all you want, but Roe v Wade is the law of the land, and that's not going to change - for you or any of the folks that think otherwise.
I am not a bible thumper like one of our brethren, I am just asking you to be your own man. The Majority of American Citizens? C'mon. That majority are also socialists. You certainly would not tell those kids, at the Thansgiveing table, to become dependents, would you?
@no1marauder saidHey, Marauder.....imagine, for a moment, if you will, my introducing you , and your mate King David, to my daughter, and to my wife,... and to my son, for that matter. Take 2 seconds, think of that. ......................I thought so.
There is no "heart" to "beat" at the point where most of the unconstitutional State laws recently passed draw the line, generally at 6 weeks of pregnancy:
From there, the issue is what that “heartbeat” actually is. “At six weeks, the embryo is forming what will eventually develop into mature systems. There’s an immature neurological system, and there’s a very immature ...[text shortened]... ion, why would you say it can be "killed" until it shows some electrical activity in a certain area?
Can think of nothing worse.
The post that was quoted here has been removedWhodey, if this helps, I vote to allow a child to live (no death sentence from Duchess, et al (is this a socialist trait, to administer judgement?)......to live. if the child has a heart (is that precious in itself)beat, and could sense light ** if a flashlight was aimed at its eyes.
Of course, if that is not the case, just squash the ..uhh, uhh,,, entity? Mass? glob? Go Duchess, do you libs carry signs that say kill all that are unborn? What language do you speak? And dont even THINK about coming to my family dinner in Magnolia, Arkansas with my children around the table. IF you were there, would it be poison, or a shotgun?
Hey, Whodey's troll-ism may be 'lying ' to you, but it aint murderous, which are you and your ilk,......Oops, got personal as do Kajet, Sonhouse, Suzi et al
@no1marauder saidThe Court ruled that the woman’s liberty right (right to control whether or not she is pregnant) is stronger than the state’s interest in the fetus’ life up until a certain point in the pregnancy.
That is inaccurate:
The Court ruled that the woman’s liberty right (right to control whether or not she is pregnant) is stronger than the state’s interest in the fetus’ life up until a certain point in the pregnancy. That point is the “point of viability” - when the fetus could survive on its own outside of the womb. After the point of viability, the state’s interest i ...[text shortened]... e.justia.com/cases/federal/us/410/113/ at pp. 164-65
Whodey is perfectly aware of all this.
Yes, that came soon after. However, it was originally only legal within the first 90 days,
@no1marauder saidIt's a personal moral preference.
That is considerably less protection for a women's bodily sovereignity than Roe v. Wade provides.
By "support" do you mean to say that you would not object to laws banning abortion after the fourth month of pregnancy or do you state that line as a personal moral preference?
If an abortion is needed later than four months for medical reasons, or there is deformity of the fetus, then I am okay with that also.
@averagejoe1 saidYou would not live long enough to introduce me to anyone liar boy.
Hey, Marauder.....imagine, for a moment, if you will, my introducing you , and your mate King David, to my daughter, and to my wife,... and to my son, for that matter. Take 2 seconds, think of that. ......................I thought so.
Can think of nothing worse.
@whodey saidAmazing. Godwin's law says that you lost the argument with your OP.
https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2019/08/sickening-crowd-cheers-when-beto-orourke-voices-support-for-day-before-birth-abortion-video/
So Beto gets up and says he supports abortion one day before birth and the crowd cheers?
These national socialists are a scary bunch but history repeats itself, unfortunately.
Democrats are wasting their time supporting Beto anyways.
Need I yet again remind you that Nazis were fascists and therefore have more in common with the Republican Party than the Democrats?
"Some men you just can't reach."
@averagejoe1 saidGod forbid they should see the light of reason.
Hey, Marauder.....imagine, for a moment, if you will, my introducing you , and your mate King David, to my daughter, and to my wife,... and to my son, for that matter. Take 2 seconds, think of that. ......................I thought so.
Can think of nothing worse.
@whodey saidSix weeks? Are you kidding me?
I'm on record here stating that a fair compromise would be the heart beat bill.
Women have a period of time to take measures before a heart beat develops.
Thank God for home pregnancy tests, but the fact remains that many woman do not know they are pregnant within six weeks. This is only further evidence that you don't give a flying crap about "unborn babies" (whatever that is). What you care about is restricting a woman's right to her own body.
@whodey saidPlease, and for the last time, use correct terminology.
So that is 4 posters here OK with terminating the life of a viable infant one day before birth, any others?
Infants and babies are called such only AFTER they are born.
Before that, they are embryos and fetuses.
Calling a fetus an "unborn baby" is merely appealing to the mental midgets out there who are afraid (moar fear, right whodey?) of having their own babies killed. That is not, and never has been, what abortion is about. But, seriously, you never have let facts get in your way, have you?