FoxHastings said: ↑ Repeating,(and repeating and repeating) There IS a cut off. It HAS been determined. AGAIN, abortions over 23 weeks ( viability) are illegal. Then maybe they shouldn't be discussing things they have no knowledge of ...just a thought....maybe they should learn something about the subject???? , There doesn't HAVE to be one....it was just a compromise with those who didn't want abortion at all....seems THEY can't compromise at all. If there was nothing making abortion limited to pre-viability do you REALLY think women would go through the "joys" of pregnancy for 8-9 months for the "fun" of getting an abortion? NO, mentally sound women do NOT do that. It is all those....but it is NOT a "person" with rights... I have told many Anti-Choicers that they may call it anything they want, baby, child, teenager, bun, watermelon, princess, but it's still a fetus. They like to give it inaccurate names to get people to think that from conception it looks like the Gerber baby...that's so much more dramatic than using facts/science. No, I obviously did not.
I see you still have a LOT of trouble addressing what my posts really say....…..it can be difficult when one has no facts...
You seem incredibly confused. Personhood , as the abortion supporters define it, begins before birth. Do some research. Otherwise there would be no basis for protection.
FoxHastings said: ↑ Oh, I see the problem. You think the word "rights" is exactly the same as the word "protection" even though they are spelled differently and have different meanings. The fetus has PROTECTION after 23 weeks. It doesn't have RIGHTS until birth. Now find a dictionary and look up those two words. They are spelled differently because they have two different meanings. Who defines personhood beginning BEFORE birth( besides addle brained Anti-Choicers)? Where ? I am not confused, a fetus is not considered a person until birth.... If it was considered a person before birth the woman would still have the right to kill it...and even after 23 weeks
FoxHastings said: ↑ Repeating,(and repeating and repeating) There IS a cut off. It HAS been determined. AGAIN, abortions over 23 weeks ( viability) are illegal. Then maybe they shouldn't be discussing things they have no knowledge of ...just a thought....maybe they should learn something about the subject???? , There doesn't HAVE to be one....it was just a compromise with those who didn't want abortion at all....seems THEY can't compromise at all. If there was nothing making abortion limited to pre-viability do you REALLY think women would go through the "joys" of pregnancy for 8-9 months for the "fun" of getting an abortion? NO, mentally sound women do NOT do that. It is all those....but it is NOT a "person" with rights... I have told many Anti-Choicers that they may call it anything they want, baby, child, teenager, bun, watermelon, princess, but it's still a fetus. They like to give it inaccurate names to get people to think that from conception it looks like the Gerber baby...that's so much more dramatic than using facts/science. No, no where in the above post did I say I base anything on looks...and since it's there for all to see you'll have a hard time proving otherwise no matter how many times you say it
So what is the basis for protection prior to birth then? Why is this supposed non person constitutionally protected??????
Finally....you see the difference between protection and rights! The fetus isn't constitutionally protected, other laws protect it after viability. Protection after viability was a compromise that the SC allowed states to do...
Finally....you see the difference between protection and rights! The fetus isn't constitutionally protected, other laws protect it after viability. Protection after viability was a compromise that the SC allowed states to do... I answered in the post you quoted as anyone can see.... But nothing will convince you, I'm sure. What is it you want ? pregnant women locked in cages like animals in the zoo so you can walk by and laugh at their imprisonment for being pregnant? Watch them give birth? It should be on public display since Anti-Choicers want the government to own pregnant women....and we are the government so every aspect of their pregnancy should be publicly on display, right?? When you have some facts or a real argument , get back to me....so far you have nothing.... Abortion is legal, deal with it
What do I want? I want these women to act responsibly and not commit homicide against children in utero. Nothing more.
Well, it doesn't look like you'll get what you want..... However, it's not as simple as "nothing more", there are repercussions/consequences/complications to banning abortions........and it looks like Anti-Choicers either don't think of them or can't they face them.....or don't give a rat's asp about women.
Want away, adults will do whatever they please without your permission No, I do not want them to commit homicides and, like all your other statements, you have NO proof that I do.. Women who abort when they don't want or can't afford a kid ARE acting responsibly......if you don't approve they don't care Of course you do....a stance that doesn't require thought or facts is always easier.
And I want people to be rational and understand the word homicide and not use it incorrectly because it is an emotional word ...all people do not act responsible and suffer consequences...men don’t know about that , they have the luxury of walking away
Nope!!!! Homicide isn’t a legal term, it is a regular everyday word. And it’s definition includes any killing of one human being by another. So abortion fits. End of story!
Obviously way higher than yours...... And it's still legal …...deal with it Women are ignoring you, having abortions as we speak Clearly you're dealing with people who don't give a rat's butt about what you call abortion..... What don't you get about it does not matter what you call it? OH, Look, Mommy, an Anti-Choicer thinks they FINALLY have a POINT! Wow....NOT.
Talking over a posters points while running around claiming " You are in way over your head" is not an argument for much. You are the one in over your head... every time you come across an argument that conflicts with your belief you run to the playground to stick head deep in the sandbox of denial. Now is your chance to back up your silly claim that a zygote is a living human with something other than logical fallacy. So how is it that this single human cell is a living human when other single human cells are not ? What makes the zygote so "special" ?
