What are your views on abortion?

So, you're not against abortion?

 

I'm pro life after the first trimester but not for religious reasons. I believe that is an individual person and society should protect that person from a violent death.

I can vote for a pro choice candidate with no problems but there are hardly any pro choice politicians around. A few northeast republicans I suppose.

Democrats are not pro choice they are 100% PRO ABORTION!

As early as 14 weeks you can determine sex just from an ultrasound. A heart beat can be detected at 6 weeks. Individual fingers and toes by 11 weeks.

 

In what way? Can you give an example?
BTW, the only people I ever saw trying to pass legislation to tighten abortion laws were Republicans. The only people who think abortion should be banned are Republicans...the only people who run on "banning abortion" are Republicans..

So what?





No one is a legal person until birth.

 

Yeah, but that is not a valid way for determining life. You can determine the sex of a corpse as well and cattle have heartbeats too.

 

God is not an argument.

 

So your point is what? I was not being scientific. There is a human there not a cow.

Reading comprehension issues? Democrats are PRO ABORTION! Not pro choice. I said nothing about them banning abortion.

 

No, there is a potential human there. But, like most Anti-Abortionists, you cannot tell the potential from the actual.

I am Pro Abortion and do not take the label as an insult. However, I am not a Democrat. I prefer to be called Pro Life though because I value life -- The woman is the only life in the equation.

 

God does not argue.

God commands... and woe to those who disobey.

.

 

This is not the religion sub, brother.

 

I am, but abortion has nothing to do with a woman doing whatever she wants with her own body. If cancer treatment was banned, would that be preventing people from doing what they want with their own body?

 

In your opinion.

 

It has everything to do with the woman's right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. Rights can only apply to actual human beings and thus the fetus she carries has no rights.

 

LAUGHABLE analogy!

 

When does it become a human?

 

No that is the only way in which it can be. "The unborn" have no rights because they are not independent beings and the dead have no rights because they no longer need them.

Only people who can pursue their values can havr rights and since a fetus lacks agency, it is simply foolish to demand the woman sacrifices her rights for the fetus she is unwillingly carrying.

 

What suddenly changes after the first trimester?

 

When the cord is cut. But, drawing lines is not really an important aspect of this matter. Abortions are usually performed very early anyways.

 

This is all your opinion!

 

This is such a bad argument that it is even named as a fallacy, namely the line-drawing fallacy.

 

That is not an argument. But, I suppose you lack the capacity to defend your own position.

 

So then a baby can be aborted outside the womb while still attached to the cord?

Irrelevant.

 

You seemed to be stating it as FACT, rather than opinion.

 

Ah, more of the line-drawing fallacy.

 

My opinion is rooted in the nature of reality and it is thus very much a fact. If all you have to say in your defence is "muh, that's just, like, your opinion... man" you have lost the debate.

 

So then Roe v Wade engaged in a line-drawing fallacy by specifying trimesters?