Pro-Life Activists Expose "Gendercide" Abortions

No, I'm talking about how the fetus is completely connected to the mother's body and relies upon it for everything it needs to survive, including the environment in which it resides.

There are no hoops to jump through. You falsely assume that your position is the correct one and that I am trying to justify my deviation. How arrogant.

 

Penn and Teller have an aptly named show, since half of what they say really is bull(*)(*)(*)(*).

 

I didn't say it was, but it does show how the logic can easily be twisted that way.

Whether it's by the state or by the feds, making abortion illegal at the zygote stage is ridiculous.

 

The First Amendment covers free speech, so yes.

 

A felony for speaking, standing and protesting.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=emqcEDH1Jc0


Obama did this for the same reason Johnson enacted the Fairness Doctrine.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J2uJ4_aDWtc

Universities with histories of denying free speech. Brandeis, Bucknell, Tufts, Johns Hopkins, Colorado, Michigan State, St. Augustin College, Yale, Harvard, Widener College, Syracuse, University of Cinncinati

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OXyIHglT6XI

The Hate Crimes Law……..

Private citizen

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jhaq_D68RX4

England pastor

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Htqksv-9Nik

Australia

Sweden

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MHfASeNV2UQ

 

It is using the woman's body to survive…a protective place…but it is not a part of the woman. It has its own circulatory system…heart…all systems of the body. In fact Louise Brown the worlds first test tube baby was not conceived in her mother….but in a Petri dish. The mother had nothing to do with the making of Louise …only to nurture and provide a safe place to grow.

The unborn is not a part of the woman.

 

What's your stance on the morning after pill?

 

Her position is likely that it's "murder". Its quite irrational.

 

Again and again we have been told by the pro-abortion posters that abortions are not done for the sake of convenience. The lie has now been given to that. Abortions are being performed for the inconvenient fact that the unborn child is a girl and not a boy.

There is a special place in hell for people who would kill an unborn child because it is the wrong sex.

 

Originally Posted by Junkieturtle

No, I'm talking about how the fetus is completely connected to the mother's body and relies upon it for everything it needs to survive, including the environment in which it resides.

There are no hoops to jump through. You falsely assume that your position is the correct one and that I am trying to justify my deviation. How arrogant.

Using your faulty reasoning, parents should be able to kill their children at least up to the age of five since the child is completely dependent on them for food and the environment in which it lives. How unbelievably arrogant of you to think that someone should have the right to take someone else's life because it would otherwise be inconvenient.

 

Where did Louise grow from an embryo to a born human child? How did she survive during those times? You act like the womb is just a comfy chair the fetus lays around in for 9 months till it's ready to be born.

If the fetus was independent of the mother, why do the foods a mother eats, the liquids she drinks, the substances she puts in her body, and the physical effects she may endure also affect what's in her womb? They don't affect the child directly after it's born, as you would expect, yet this alleged independent entity is completely dependent on the mother before birth. If it wasn't, it would be far easier and less controversial, though likely more expensive, to just move the fetus out of the mother if she doesn't want it there. Sounds pretty absurd I know, but this is basically what you're implying when you try and tell me the fetus is an independent entity that isn't a part of the woman.

 

Abortions aren't exactly convenient. At least, not ones that you get later in pregnancy.

You could say abortion is convenient very early on, but past that, it's definitely not an experience most would consider convenient if they had to go through it.

Abortions are performed for any number of reasons, but I don't see how it matters. That's not something for the state to concern itself with.

 

You could say the same thing about all food and shelter a child receives until adulthood.

The FACT IS: a child, even in the womb, IS a SEPERATE BODY OF ITS OWN...

 

Legally, at what stage should that begin? A zygote is hardly much of a body, for example.

 

No you couldn't. Anyone can provide that food and shelter(meaning, it doesn't have to be the mother), and that food and shelter being provided is not occurring inside someone's body.

Please, we can disagree on the morality of abortion, or what factors go into a person being a "person", but we should at least be able to agree on the physiology of a pregnancy(because there's nothing abstract, subjective, or ambiguous about it). The fetus is a connected dependent part of the mother, that would not exist or function without it. There's really no getting around that without being purposefully dishonest.

 

Tell that to the guy who is going to jail for two years just for saying parents should be able to spank their children. Your post would be so much more meaningful if you looked around you once in awhile.

 

Abortion is "baby murder"? A fetus is not a baby, therefor a more accurate term would be "fetus murder". How far should we go, should we attempt to keep every spirm alive because not doing that would be "spirm murder"? You anti abortion people are crazy, in trying to get abortions banned you ignore that many women have complications that would most certainly spell death for them if they don't have an abortion. Nothing wrong with not giving girls that get raped access to abortions?
Nothing wrong with forcing teens who make the wrong decisions to have a kid? What kind of life is the kid going to have being raised by a (probably uneducated) teenager? What kind of life will the teen have?

A fetus has the potential to become a person, but it is NOT a person.

 

Like a Bible-thumping idiot who thinks he is a "cured gay" gets in somebody's face to try to convert him, and is going to just go away when the target tells him to...

Get real.

 

So another right winger with zero objective evidence concocted another fake video to use as "proof." And we should care why?

 

At conception, of course. He/she is a HUMAN LIFE at that point, obviously.

 

What a crock of crap. O'Keefe's video was ABSOLUTELY TRUE. The only thing that wasn't was his dressing up in pimp threads in the intro.
Desperate Leftninnies have been trying to pretend that that, somehow, makes the SHAMEFUL, CRIMINAL actions of the PP employee "not count".

The PP employee said and did EXACTLY what the recording showed.

As does THIS recording show.

There is NO "objectivity" when it comes to EUGENICS, at least, for the civilized among us.
It is every but as hideous NOW as it was when Josef Mangele first put it into practice...and Planned Parenthood's founder actively promoted it....

 

Prolly already said earlier, but I'm not gonna read 400+ posts, many of which are just liberal diarrhea recycled.

Dems shot down restricting this gendercide.

OK. Let's find a simple test for homosexuality pre-disposition in a fetus. And then lets start letting the only suck they ever get being a surgical vacuum cleaner.

That'll change things up in a big hurry. Real big hurry.

<spit>

 

You can bet on that; if potential parents start offing their unborn to prevent homosexual births, SUDDENLY, "fetuses" will become "humans", in Leftninny Liespeak...

 

And yet, the fetus is also its OWN , SEPERATE LIFE,and body. There's no getting around that without heing purposefully dishonest.