LOL...and you deny being disingenuous. That's rich.
So...you're stating that there is absolutely no circumstance in which you, personally, would opt for an abortion. As I originally said, I'm quite certain I could present you a situation where you undoubtedly would...but I'll spare you and others the grisly details.
I do, however, find it interesting that you, who I believe have no children of your own, have no problem passing moral judgement on others who are faced with extremely difficult situations and decisions.
It's a shame we can't give ole Dan a uterus, and then have him be on the other end of the "stick".
Or for that matter, any other vocal MAN on this matter supporting limitation of the FEMALE'S rights.
Oh how I hope Dan and everyone like him, reaps what they sow.
A FEMALE doesn't have the RIGHT to kill another human being.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Unless, according to you, that "human being" is less than 168 days old.
Plus, the anti-choice movement has no problem with people of means still having the ability to gain access to abortion services, but, of course, it won't refer to that situation as murder.
Republicans have new idea to fix labor shortage: Loosen child labor laws
Experts in adolescent development worry about the long-term effects of stress on overworked teens
LOL...and you deny being disingenuous. That's rich.
So...you're stating that there is absolutely no circumstance in which you, personally, would opt for an abortion. As I originally said, I'm quite certain I could present you a situation where you undoubtedly would...but I'll spare you and others the grisly details.
I do, however, find it interesting that you, who I believe have no children of your own, have no problem passing moral judgement on others who are faced with extremely difficult situations and decisions.
It's a shame we can't give ole Dan a uterus, and then have him be on the other end of the "stick".
Or for that matter, any other vocal MAN on this matter supporting limitation of the FEMALE'S rights.
Oh how I hope Dan and everyone like him, reaps what they sow.
A FEMALE doesn't have the RIGHT to kill another human being.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Unless, according to you, that "human being" is less than 168 days old.
Plus, the anti-choice movement has no problem with people of means still having the ability to gain access to abortion services, but, of course, it won't refer to that situation as murder.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Just one more example of many of their blatant hypocrisy.
A FEMALE doesn't have the RIGHT to kill another human being.
Is a fetus a human being? When does life start? At the cellular level? The second the egg is fertilized? At what point does a fetus become a sentient being?
Too my sensibilities it is the second he/she pops out, the umbilical cord is cut and the baby takes its first breath.
This is a tough, personal call and only the mother has a right to make the choice that is best for her and her baby. No one else.
The Rs are pathetic. As soon as a baby is born they could care less about its future and welfare unless they have INC at the end of their name on the birth certificate. Their actions toward people speak louder than their hollow words.
A FEMALE doesn't have the RIGHT to kill another human being.
Is a fetus a human being? When does life start? At the cellular level? The second the egg is fertilized? At what point does a fetus become a sentient being?
Too my sensibilities it is the second he/she pops out, the umbilical cord is cut and the baby takes its first breath.
This is a tough, personal call and only the mother has a right to make the choice that is best for her and her baby. No one else.
The Rs are pathetic. As soon as a baby is born they could care less about its future and welfare unless they have INC at the end of their name on the birth certificate. Their actions toward people speak louder than their hollow words.
The question you posed is a question that has no real "answer". Some will say that life begins at conception. Some radicals will say that life doesn't begin until the child is separated from the mother. I think the vast majority of Americans would say that there is some point in the middle where the child's rights and mother's rights need to both be considered. I don't know if there would be a large enough consensus to determine what that point in the middle should be. In almost 40 states, a baby has rights according to the legal system when someone hurts or injures a child in the uterus.
A FEMALE doesn't have the RIGHT to kill another human being.
Is a fetus a human being? When does life start? At the cellular level? The second the egg is fertilized? At what point does a fetus become a sentient being?
Too my sensibilities it is the second he/she pops out, the umbilical cord is cut and the baby takes its first breath.
This is a tough, personal call and only the mother has a right to make the choice that is best for her and her baby. No one else.
The Rs are pathetic. As soon as a baby is born they could care less about its future and welfare unless they have INC at the end of their name on the birth certificate. Their actions toward people speak louder than their hollow words.
The question you posed is a question that has no real "answer". Some will say that life begins at conception. Some radicals will say that life doesn't begin until the child is separated from the mother. I think the vast majority of Americans would say that there is some point in the middle where the child's rights and mother's rights need to both be considered. I don't know if there would be a large enough consensus to determine what that point in the middle should be. In almost 40 states, a baby has rights according to the legal system when someone hurts or injures a child in the uterus.
The troubling thing is our values on abortion are more in line with that of China or North Korea than the rest of the developed world. Does life start at conception, the quickening (movement), or birth? Viablilty is a sliding scale as medical prowess improves. It seems like we are arguing ensoulment when much of society believes the answer to that is never and our brains are simply organic computers. The old Clinton phrase of "safe, legal, and rare" is tremendously outdated. Why should it be rare if it is legal and it is not rare at all. For decades we have averaged a million abortions annually with only a population of about 65 million fertile women. Admittedly most people that have an abortion will have more than one but the number is still astounding. Some argue the wealthy get their abortions and the poor are saddled with children, the data doesn't reflect that. Only 13.5% of Americans live below the poverty line but almost half of abortions are on that segment of the population. I don't even want to go to the doctor to clear scar tissue from past baloon sinuplasty, I couldn't imagine opting for invasive surgery for contraception. Nobody is concerned with what people are doing with their body, they are concerned with the body growing in that body. How can the same people that throw baby showers not see the hypocracy of dehumanizing the pre-born?
LOL...and you deny being disingenuous. That's rich.
So...you're stating that there is absolutely no circumstance in which you, personally, would opt for an abortion. As I originally said, I'm quite certain I could present you a situation where you undoubtedly would...but I'll spare you and others the grisly details.
I do, however, find it interesting that you, who I believe have no children of your own, have no problem passing moral judgement on others who are faced with extremely difficult situations and decisions.
It's a shame we can't give ole Dan a uterus, and then have him be on the other end of the "stick".
Or for that matter, any other vocal MAN on this matter supporting limitation of the FEMALE'S rights.
Oh how I hope Dan and everyone like him, reaps what they sow.
A FEMALE doesn't have the RIGHT to kill another human being.
Nor does a male! But we are not talking about another human being. We are discussing a fetus before it becomes a human being, living inside a woman's womb.
Did you know, that women can miscarriage? Or, a woman can die while pregnant, and the fetus dies as well? In fact, there are many things that can cause that fetus to never make it to becoming a "human being". Such a loaded word for scientific talk, but then you are such a dishonest discusser of topics.
As a nurse/emt/fireman/pilot/whatever....you should understand all this.
LOL...and you deny being disingenuous. That's rich.
So...you're stating that there is absolutely no circumstance in which you, personally, would opt for an abortion. As I originally said, I'm quite certain I could present you a situation where you undoubtedly would...but I'll spare you and others the grisly details.
I do, however, find it interesting that you, who I believe have no children of your own, have no problem passing moral judgement on others who are faced with extremely difficult situations and decisions.
It's a shame we can't give ole Dan a uterus, and then have him be on the other end of the "stick".
Or for that matter, any other vocal MAN on this matter supporting limitation of the FEMALE'S rights.
Oh how I hope Dan and everyone like him, reaps what they sow.
A FEMALE doesn't have the RIGHT to kill another human being.
Nor does a male! But we are not talking about another human being. We are discussing a fetus before it becomes a human being, living inside a woman's womb.
Did you know, that women can miscarriage? Or, a woman can die while pregnant, and the fetus dies as well? In fact, there are many things that can cause that fetus to never make it to becoming a "human being". Such a loaded word for scientific talk, but then you are such a dishonest discusser of topics.
As a nurse/emt/fireman/pilot/whatever....you should understand all this.
You have no sympathy for someone that suffers a miscarriage? A fetus is an in utero human being.
LOL...and you deny being disingenuous. That's rich.
So...you're stating that there is absolutely no circumstance in which you, personally, would opt for an abortion. As I originally said, I'm quite certain I could present you a situation where you undoubtedly would...but I'll spare you and others the grisly details.
I do, however, find it interesting that you, who I believe have no children of your own, have no problem passing moral judgement on others who are faced with extremely difficult situations and decisions.
It's a shame we can't give ole Dan a uterus, and then have him be on the other end of the "stick".
Or for that matter, any other vocal MAN on this matter supporting limitation of the FEMALE'S rights.
Oh how I hope Dan and everyone like him, reaps what they sow.
A FEMALE doesn't have the RIGHT to kill another human being.
Nor does a male! But we are not talking about another human being. We are discussing a fetus before it becomes a human being, living inside a woman's womb.
Did you know, that women can miscarriage? Or, a woman can die while pregnant, and the fetus dies as well? In fact, there are many things that can cause that fetus to never make it to becoming a "human being". Such a loaded word for scientific talk, but then you are such a dishonest discusser of topics.
As a nurse/emt/fireman/pilot/whatever....you should understand all this.
You have no sympathy for someone that suffers a miscarriage? A fetus is an in utero human being.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
What's your gestation period cutoff after which you believe abortion should no longer be allowed?
