"Abortion has always existed and always will exist"

Yeah so you didn't watch the video. Are you saying you only favor abortion if the mother's life is at risk? If not, don't try to hide behind it.

 

FoxHastings said: ↑
There is no person dismembered in abortion.

A fetus may be dismembered (late term abortion) to save the life/health of the woman it's in...….unless , of course, you prefer she die...

If you had bothered to read through a few threads here or my posts you would see I don't hide behind anything.

Talk about "hiding"...you didn't address anything in the post of mine you quoted. (or post 29 )

I do NOT "favor" abortion either way.

I favor women having the right to their own bodies just like everyone else....and so I favor women making their own decisions....just as you and I do....

 

So you didn't watch the video.

Sure I did. It's interesting how referring to an unborn person as a "fetus" is seen as somehow sanitizing the act and rendering it acceptable.

Fetus
n.
In humans, the unborn young from the end of the eighth week after conception to the moment of birth, as distinguished from the earlier embryo.

Then you favor abortion, do you not? You're not making a distinction between a person's body and the body of another person inside of them, who they could simply carry to term and adopt away rather than behaving like degenerate narcissists and killing the child even if it means literal acts of dismemberment and tearing apart of functioning organs which it does after the embryonic stage.

Why exactly should a woman have a "right" to dismembering an unborn child in her body because she engaged in sex acts carelessly? Because woman? Because I am woman hear me roar?

 

No need.

Uh, so how is calling a fetus a fetus "sanitizing " it?

If an adult is called an adult is that "sanitizing" something?

No, I made it quite clear """I favor women having the right to their own bodies just like everyone else....and so I favor women making their own decisions....just as you and I do...."""

In pregnancy there is only one person.

If there is another person using the woman's body to sustain it's life she has every right to kick it out...NO one has the right to use another person's body to sustain their life.

I don't and you don't...so why are you trying to give a fetus more rights than anyone else?

LOL! SIMPLY ? Obviously you have no idea what 9 months of pregnancy involves.

Here's the list:

Temporary and permanent physical damage to the woman's body.

Pain

The possible loss of life.

The setbacks in :

FINANCES ( medical bills, time off work, etc.)
Education
Career (and even possible job loss)

Hyperbolic emotional crap .

Because she's a person with rights, the same rights everyone else has...

Question that you seem to be "hiding" from

Why do you think women should be punished for having sex?

Is sex a bad thing to you?

Do you think it wise to force women to have children they either just don't want or can't afford?

Do you want to pay for all these unwanted children?

 

Uncomfortable hearing a frank discussion by an OB/GYN regarding the process of dismemberment?

Avoiding use of words like "unborn" which humanize.

Yes they do - they have a right to not get pregnant if they don't want to be.

Because a person isn't born yet, it doesn't mean they're not a person.

Oh! Using. I had no idea an unborn child was equivalent to a bad squatting roommate that isn't paying their part of the rent and should be rightly kicked out for raiding the fridge.

That's quite an odd and radical statement.

Yeah so... Unborn kids aren't unwanted loiterers or campers in public parks. They are the natural consequence of unprotected sex including that by immature, self-involved, narcissistic females that think the world revolves around them and who like so many spoiled children, want someone to rescue them from the consequences of their actions and so they can hit the club next week and not face the crimping in their lifestyle by a pregnancy.

The question is why you refer to an unborn child as if he were a squatter on private property in lieu of holding females responsible for their conduct and asking why they are so crass as to refuse to give birth and then have the child adopted away.

The question is also why you think treating an unborn child as a squatter means it's OK to dismember them.

Then they can keep their legs snapped shut or take appropriate precaution. Are the females capable of adult-level reasoning and conduct or are they just mindless walking vaginas with a set of legs that uncontrollably fly open?

There are ample services for poorer women to get pre-birth screenings, not counting social supports.

Factually stating what happens in the act of abortion after 8 weeks isn't "hyperbolic emotional crap" except perhaps to someone with a deficit in both ethics and empathy that doesn't want to address the actual ACT of abortion that they're legitimizing for immature, narcissistic people to use to escape life consequences.

Perhaps next you'll tell us that pointing out that speeding kills people means that whoever says that is just "anti-driving" "anti-fun," etc.

 

If it was to save the life/health of the woman then it's fine with me....it's a medical procedure that is sometimes necessary...

So an "unborn" dog is human?

Fetus is the term used for a fetus....

YOU conveniently left out …..If an adult is called an adult is that "sanitizing" something? CAN'T ANSWER?

Well, not according to righties who don't want health insurance companies to pay for birth control.


They have a right to their own bodies, a right you have but want to deny to others.

Yup, it does.....to be a legal person one has to be born.

Oh, then could you explain WTF the fetus IS doing inside that woman for 9 months?

If it isn't using anything of the woman's then it should be able to be taken out of the woman, set on a shelf, and grow on it's own....

Your denigration of women is quite misogynistic...but that isn't unusual in Anti-Choicers.

Because women do NOT have to die giving birth….<Rule 4>

It's a waste of time to argue with someone who thinks all women are filthy dogs...…


Abortion has always existed and always will exist and YOU can't do a thing about it


Why do you think women should be punished for having sex?

Is sex a bad thing to you?

Do you think it wise to force women to have children they either just don't want or can't afford?

Do you want to pay for all these unwanted children?

 

I specifically stated the reference to convenience abortions when women are sexually irresponsible

In the context of a person - as it's what we're speaking of, not dogs, it is in fact an unborn person. Yelling in all caps in bold doesn't change that.

Oh do tell, "you righties." Where is this ideological lockstep that you're so in tune with which is based on factual accuracy and not political animus? It's only a few Christian companies that don't want to pay, furthermore, birth control is cheap. Nobody is going to collapse and die if they have to pay for a box of rubbers or a month of pills.

I was referring to medicaid services for low income pregnant women.

I'm not the one denying others. Rather, those who are gutting and dismembering the unborn because of the inconvenience of the mother who is apparently struggling with common sense associated with when her legs fly open.

I was referring to the dictionary. Whether or not the unborn is considered a person varies from state-to-state.

You may want to calm down and refrain from yelling in bold and all caps. The fetus is in her because she opened her legs and got knocked up. Unborn children are not "squatters," they didn't crawl inside her seeking a host, attaching themselves via umbilical cord to suck her nutrients. They are there due to HER behavior.

Why are you trying to assert that unborn humans are equivalent to squatters in an abandoned home?

Oh I see - even though I am a woman but I hold other women responsible for their sexual behavior and the consequences of it, I am "misogynist." Why are you so hot under the collar?

Thus far,

1) Unborn children are equivalent to homeless encampments that should be dismantled
2) Anyone who disagrees hates women

Lapsing into deeper personal attacks, skewing my comments which are clearly aimed at females who are dismembering their offspring due to inconvenience of carrying full term and adopting out apparently to you equals I "support" women "die giving birth."

Let's recap:

1)Unborn kids equal homeless squatters, kill them all!
2) Anyone who disagrees hates women
3) Anyone who disagrees with treating the unborn like squatters is to "support" women "die."

I'm a woman, so how does this compute? I see other women behaving childishly and trying to escape the consequences of their poor choices by dismembering kids? That's ALL, isn't it?

So have the moral and physical consequences.

Human behavior has consequences. Actions have consequences. Nature's consequences are not "punishment," and there's no such a right to not suffer the consequences for one's choices. Women are not little children and are not exempt from consequences.

Appealing to greed to cover up dismemberment due to personal inconvenience? Countless couples are waiting for children to adopt. Even if a kid grew up in an orphanage, a bad start in life is better than NO start in life. What an immoral argument to make : "He may be unwanted, he may have a bad start in life, so let's just dismember him."

In sum,

1)Unborn kids equal homeless squatters, kill them all!
2) Anyone who disagrees hates women
3) Anyone who disagrees with treating the unborn like squatters is to "support" women "die."
4) Women should be specially treated as having a right to escape the consequences of their behavior
5) It's OK to kill an unborn kid because mom "don't wanna" carry to term and adopt it away
6) It's asking too much to expect women be responsible for their conduct and choices
7) Anyone tho disagrees hates sex and is evil.

Amirite?

 

While you are wearing out your keyboard on an abortion forum, there are thousands of unwanted children that will never see the inside of a loving home. We may agree on abortion being wrong, but the difference between you and me is that you want everyone else to shoulder the burden of your opinion.

At first, I knew nothing about you, but I did ask you several times what you are doing (Actions, not babble) and so far, it appears that entering text on a forum is the extent of your concern for human life.

Abortion is legal and that will not change. If you want to see change, it will have to come from you.

 

You can claim that abortion is homicide if it helps you sleep at night but that doesn't mean it will ever end


The UVVA did NOT deem the fetus a legal person and you have never shown it has....

 

Same with guns. Neither objects nor practices can be 'uninvented.'

Which, in both cases, speaks not at all to the dynamic of choice vs law beyond the wisdom (or lack thereof) of making unenforcible laws (just as someone is always going to provide guns, someone is always going to provide abortions).

Whether you can see any benefit of gun rights or abortion rights (as just two examples in the paradigm), they both heavily impact and intertwine human freedom of choice.

I respect your negative view on abortion as it parallels mine. But it would be folly to restrict it with laws. The imagery and history you've provided here are excellent examples of how abortion can be fought or resisted in a voluntary scale. We should support any and all efforts to encentivize people to find alternatives. We should not force them to give birth and/or raise children.

 

The UVVA absolutely did deem the fetus a person by acknowledging that killing one is a homicide and by identifying the child in utero at any stage of development as capable of being a homicide victim. Logic try it!

Abortion is a homicide and it is completely irrelevant whether or not everyone will ever stop committing them. We don’t legalize gun murders just b cause we can’t stop them all. Logic! Get some!

 

Yes, there are states who do that using the UVVA...but that does not confer the status of legal person on the fetus.

NO, there is NO state that deems the fetus a person. NONE.

No, I never said that so you must have pulled out ofo some dark orifice.

No, it's to draw attention to things some may have missed ( ro some want to miss )

.


I never said they were...WHO ARE YOU ARGUING WITH ??

You aren't special either and don't get to call women such vile names and denigrate them without being called a misogynist...your descriptions of women is quite enough to qualify for misogynist.

Throughout your posts you have shown ""Dislike of, contempt for, or ingrained prejudice against women."""

NO, you described them in very vile insulting terms..

NO, it is NOT how "we" all live in the adult world.....most of us mind our own business and don't try to play god...

No, it isn't and I didn't use it as one...

YOU are NOT the Ruler of Conduct for the Entire World....get off your pedestal...calling women vile names IS misogynistic.

NO one is dismembering kids...that's overly emotional hyperbole...you should calm down...No kids are involved in abortion...fetuses are...

Yes, you are because first it isn't your job to expect anything from anyone....and second women have been having unwanted pregnancies for thousands of years....they shouldn't be vilified and punished because THEY got stuck with pregnancies.

You first said, ""So have the moral and physical consequences.""
I said, ""So? That hasn't changed the FACT that abortions have always occurred and always will.""

And now you answer with ""So will wife beating and rape. And?""


WTF does that have to do with what I posted, nothing.

WHO or WHAT and WHERE is this "nature" thing that you think rules over every aspect of our lives???!!

WHERE are "nature's " laws??? Where are they written down...and WHY TF should we have to follow them??

Where is the LAW that says we can't fight nature? There a tornado coming so YOU don't take shelter?!!! WOW! That wouldn't be too smart...

SHOW PROOF THAT I EVER SAID , """we should aid narcissistic, childish, catty females with poor reproductive habits and self-control issues in avoiding the consequences of their actions""

I never said that but ALL Anti-Choicers have to "MISINTERPRET"" purposely what others say or they have NOTHING.

 

"""Slavery was also WRONG...it took away the right of people to their own bodies, EXACTLY what Anti-Choicers want to do to women.""

 

I never said that you said those things verbatim. I was summing up several remarks and a general attitude. Where have you shown we shouldn't aid such people? Indeed, you've been actively advocating for it, calling it "a right," etc.

Btw, I'd suggest a brush-up lesson in the use of quotation marks.

 

That’s called making things up to suit a narrative, and it’s intellectually disingenuous.

 

How is it slavery when a woman willfully throws her thighs open with reckless abandon as if she were a field mattress, gets a pump and dump, and thinks she has a moral "right" to have it dismembered? Is criticizing her demands slavery? Is this your argument here? Just because something is legal on paper doesn't make it moral, and laws can and are changed.

What is it with the excessive quotation marks?

 

YOU: You're the one saying we should aid narcissistic, childish, catty females with poor reproductive habits and self-control issues in avoiding the consequences of their actions.



SHOW PROOF THAT I EVER SAID , """we should aid narcissistic, childish, catty females with poor reproductive habits and self-control issues in avoiding the consequences of their actions""

I never said that but ALL Anti-Choicers have to "MISINTERPRET"" purposely what others say or they have NOTHING.

 

No these are your EXACT words( and please learn what quotation marks are for along with other punctuation and you won't have to go off topic to hide your lack of answers).

"""You're the one saying we should aid narcissistic, childish, catty females with poor reproductive habits and self-control issues in avoiding the consequences of their actions."""


The quotation marks show that those are your exact words.


YOU HAVE NO PROOF I EVER POSTED THAT....but claimed I did anyway...

 

I was summing up YOUR several remarks and a general attitude when I referred to your REMARKS as misogynistic....and they were...

 

Nope. You are incorrect!!!!!!

 

Empress said: ↑
I was summing up several remarks and a general attitude.

Great response......and true...

 

SHOW PROOF THAT I EVER SAID , """I support women should have to die giving birth""

I never said that but ALL abortion lovers have to "MISINTERPRET"" purposely what others say or they have NOTHING.

 

Uh, why should I have to provide proof when you never did? BUT I WILL.






Want proof?


YOU: ""The question is also why you think treating an unborn child as a squatter means it's OK to dismember them.""





I answered : "Because women do NOT have to die giving birth….<Rule 4>


You have been screaming about dismemberment all through the thread.

Fetuses are dismembered in later term abortions to save the life of the woman....YOU ARE AGAINST THAT and so it's obvious you do not care if women die from pregnancy....


There's MY proof, where 's yours ??????????????

 

Maybe if you had not added your personal view to his statement your summary would be more accurate.

 

Nope it was 100% accurate with the opinion included. Educate yourself.