Defund Planned Parenthood.

And that will not change - legislation or no legislation

However what WILL change and is changing is your maternal and infant mortality rate. America is one of the only countries in the world where maternal mortality is on the rise

 

Really?

Are you going to advocate banning C-sections then?

 

They are BEGGING for newborn babies for adoption, there are long waiting list, can take YEARS. And this is not Romania.

 

Well yes there is it's that particular and unique human beings zygote stage cells from the primordial until the start of specialization and distinction. Just another stage of that life that last about 6 days. But I'm trying to get what you are saying, that up until 6 days abortion is OK but once the specialization begins it is not? What's the distinction? These are just stages of life of the human being. And yes as we grow and specialize and more cell specialization and organization into tissues and organs all that means is just that you are made up of more cells now and the are getting more and more specialized. And you will get a lot bigger throughout your life. But your life started at conception, and you were a unique never before existed human being from that point. You are who you are from the first cell. You won't be anyone else, you won't be something else, you are you.

 

I'm a big supporter of self defense. Even from an innocent threat.

Its very rare that a mother can sacrifice herself for her unborn child. Usually both live or both die in complicated pregnancies.

But in the rare case, one person has the right to kill the person threatening his/her life, even if unintentionally.

 

What then is the criteria for threat? Pregnant women are basically walking clots as far as thrombus risk goes. Lost a young mum a few weeks back from this very issue

 

As I said look at what happened in Romania. There are millions of abortions each year would not take long to flood the market. But it is not really scarcity holding up adoptions it is clearance. If you truly want to adopt there is ALWAYS the overseas option of giving a child an opportunity they would not otherwise have

 

And its not related to abortion. Abortion is essentially unrestricted.

And the increasing MMR is partly - maybe even largely - due to reporting.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5001799/
The US began reporting MMR as its own mortality index in 2003. Not all states started reporting in 2003, and many states implemented their own methods of reporting MMR. The US has not released an official MMR since 2007 because of the inconsistencies of the reporting.

MMR does seem to be increasing, but the data is uncertain. Its very clear there is a race component, also lifestyle issues (obesity and hypertension and smoking) are factors. Access to (and use of) pre-natal care is a component.

But abortion is not a factor.

 

Most abortions are had by women who are married and already have children.

 

The same as the criteria of threat from a born human.

People are killed by strangers driving cars much more often than by their own children, but you aren't allowed to start shooting them.

 

So you want to kill American children to save Romanian children? Was that your point?

 

In America?
Says who?

I've never heard this. And I seriously doubt it.

 

This is not Romania. This is here with thousands of couples begging for new born babies to adopt. It is absurd to say we should instead kill those babies because they are unwanted.

 

So back to defunding PP and shifting that money to women's health clinics who do not kill babies.

 

FoxHastings said: ↑
Let me know when you convince parents to be perfect and arrive at your fantasy Utopia...

.


You don't think it's your job then why are you talking about it?

Why? It's not your job

No, most people care about that but

A. Take care of their own lives first since THAT is their business and
B. realize that humans are not perfect, human nature will not change and life isn't some Disney princess movie meant for 8 year olds..

 

FoxHastings said: ↑
Then that should give you a Big Clue that there are NO perfect parents and telling them they should be is spitting in the wind.

Why do you think everyone is "bad"? !!!

Are you actually saying that if a person isn't perfect they are "bad" WOW! That IS sad...

Did you come from some strict religious background??

 

1...A B C ??

Shouldn't it be 1, 2, 3, ?

As silly as """C. UnwantedUnwanted pregnancies were significantly less common."""


Less common when?

Women have had unwanted pregnancies since pregnancy was invented....WTF are you talking about???

 

SO WHAT!


Women are NOT obligated to provide kids for other people...

 

.

For women, too?? Or just you?

Then it isn't a threat.

Exactly and the only way for a woman to stop the harm being done to her is to kill the fetus....self defense, which you stated you support.

REMINDER: Self defense does not play into it UNLESS the fetus is deemed a legal person.

 

Just a brief redirect.

We do NOT Federally fund Planned Parenthood.

They are reimbursed for services rendered (which do NOT include abortions) just like any other healthcare provider.

THAT is the extent of "funding"

 

You don't get to determine whether a woman carries a pregnancy to term.

 

The claim was otherwise THAT'S WHAT.

 

When did you think I said I did?

 

Oh my God I can't believe this post. First off save the attempt at demonization for someone who is a liberal. I am not. If it wasn't for the religious right idiocy over the abortion debate the Dems would have a whole lot tougher time at the polls.

Second - I just went through your fallacy - "Assuming a single human cell is child" - and gave arguments supporting my position.

Not only did you just continue on repeating the same fallacy - as if repetition of premise constitutes proof of claim - you completely fail to address any of the arguments made in support of my position ?

Then you go on to say "the unborn child" is a fact that is not in dispute. That is the whole basis of the dispute. What a crock of blind nonsense.

Restating "a zygote is a child" over and over like some robot .. is not proof of claim. Perhaps a liberal will not give you sympathy but I feel sorry for such a sad incapability of logic and rational thought.

I will dumb it down to a kindergarten level for you. An argument consists of 2 things.

1) Statement of claim or premise
2) evidence or reasoning that proves that claim true - or at minimum supports that claim.

Restating your premise is not an argument for anything.

Every human cell has the same "unique" human DNA as the zygote. This does not magically turn a heart cell into a living human nor does uniqueness have anything to do with weather or not a human cell is a living human.

There are 5 main scientific perspectives on "when human life begins". Genetic, Metabolic, Embryological, Neurological, Ecological - never mind a host of other Philosophical perspectives - Never mind claiming that a human being exists. Note that the claim that "human life begins here" is not claiming the entity is a living human. A human brain cell is human life - as is a sperm.

So if subject matter experts disagree even on when human life begins - how big a pot of nonsense is it for you to claim "this fact is not in dispute" in claiming that a living human exists at conception ?

Of the 5 main scientific perspectives - only one proposes that "human life" begins at conception - The Genetic ... again this is not the same as claiming a living human exists but obviously you can't claim a living human exists if human life is not said to exist.

In order to claim defacto "a living human exists" you would first have to refute the other perspectives.

Where is this refutation ? You do not even have an argument for your perspective never mind a refutation to the others.

FACT - Experts Disagree - as stated previously.

 

Fallacious gibberish - assumed premise fallacy. Repeating your premise "a living human exists at the zygote stage" over and over is not proof of claim.

What part of this is so difficult for you to understand.

I never said once specialization begins it is not ? I already told you what the distinction between these to stages of the process of creating a human being was.

The rest of your post - not included - just continues repeating your premise over and over.

For the umpteenth time - An argument consists of 2 things

1) Statement of claim/premise
2) Evidence or rational that shows or explains why your claim is true.

Repeating you claim over and over is not proof of claim.