ABORTION

The difference, giddyup, is that the courts of this country have ruled that abortion is not murder.

 

If there is one thing Trump's success has proven it's that there are not nearly enough abortions yet, clearly MANY that should have been aborted slipped between the cracks. We need to step up our game for the sake of the species.

 

The uterus belongs to the woman. A woman isn't just a vessel to bring babies to the world. It is her choice if she will become a mother or not and if she wants to carry out the pregnancy or not. Therefore an abortion is also her choice. /END.

 

I have clearly stated that my views on Abortion are my opinion and that this is not a provable argument regarding when life begins. There is no science that can answer a philosophical question.

Law is based on the facts, the facts are unclear on human life.

Those who claim that abortion is murder are guilty of projecting personal opinions as facts.

 

what about the unborn child's uterus? who does that belong to?

 

How do/did judges determine when life is to be protected?

 

Once the child is no longer out of sight, this line of argument breaks down.

Post birth, we don't give mothers the choice to decide at what stage of development it is permissible to murder her child.

Pre-birth, when we can't see it (but it is very much living and growing), we let the mother kill it.

If the womb were transparent, abortion would certainly be illegal.

 

there's no child.

 

You have the right to use your penis as you like and a woman is allowed to use her uterus as she likes. Or not use it. The end.

If the womb were made transparent maybe we would have the technology for misogynists like yourself to have the power to give birth so they wouldn't have to abuse and enforce women to . Until that time I guess you have to suck it up that a woman can decide if she becomes a mother or not.

 

Does the woman have the right to use the baby's penis/uterus/heart/lungs as it wants?

Also, don't write 'the end' after a point. Sounds like you are discouraging discourse.

 

There's no baby. A baby is born. An embryo isn't.
A baby can be taken away by you from an unfit mother and you help feed it.
Can you take an embryo by a painless and easy procedure from a womans' uterus? No?
Ok come back to me when you can.

THE END.

 

whether or not something is born/alive is dependent on whether you can move it easily and painlessly? wtf. Sounds like all we need to do is get better at the science/surgery and then that fetus will be alive in your eyes. Might be in 5-10 years. get rdy malakas.

This is as weird as barbra boxer saying life doesn't begin until the baby leaves the hospital.

 

I am ready.
So there won't be a minority of misogynistic men that think they can enforce their own morals on half the worlds' population with serious physical emotional and life altering consequences against their own will.
So let's hope it happens.

 

not half the world. the entire world. Men (and women) try to enforce their 'no murdering' morals on everyone. not just women.

 

Yeah, that's how society works. You create a host of individual problems that are solved societally. Like the very fact that you need to spread your vapid thoughts requires power as a utility, the internet to be built on top of university research, telecommunications fibers etc.

But let's not even go there. Let's not even go into disputing your farcical notion of "individual responsibility" for societal design. Why do you think Swiss women are 2x, or perhaps even 4x more individually responsible than American women?

Are those factors replicable?

And why do you think Latin American women are 5x more irresponsible despite the heavy shaming/criminalization you seem to favor?

 

Now that we are down the rabbit hole of defining murder as the death of cell types that demonstrate viability for life, do we shoot stem cell researchers, and stone masturbators?

 

FIFY.