Jump to content

Recommended Posts

40 minutes ago, Scout said:

Not if there is a health condition complicating the last trimester.  

I have know of a lot of pregnancies that had complications.  

I have a friend (older than me) who lost a baby to the rH factor 

complications that existed back then and were not mandatorially

tested for.   I am aware of sepsis cases.  I know a woman who

had to deliver her dead baby at 7-1/2 months.  No woman 

with a heart can judge another on this issue and no MAN should. 

 

 under extreme conditions termination should be allowed/ baby is dead etc.

 

if there is a medical emergency and a chance that a c- section is possible would you say to save the baby if that is possible?

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 5.6k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Bump!  Kneeling on a guy until his heart stops is murder.  Abortion is nothing more than the removal of a parasite.  Like say a tapeworm or bot fly larva.

Why cant anybody accept the fact that abortion is murder?!  I just dont get it.

Im sorry, but I cant seem to "get over" the fact that there are people like you advocating for the death of innocent babies.  

20 minutes ago, jerra- said:

 

 under extreme conditions termination should be allowed/ baby is dead etc.

 

if there is a medical emergency and a chance that a c- section is possible would you say to save the baby if that is possible?

a lot of these people are militant pro-aborts who would rather see a nine month old fetus die than the parents take responsibility for their actions.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, jrobin15283 said:

So then why are you using the majority opinion to prove a point?  Obviously the majority opinion can be wrong, so why are you using it as a justification for you argument?

No, rights for women are NOT going to be withdrawn anymore than slavery or segregation is going to be reversed.  You think you are going to be a reversal, and

I'm telling you it ain't gonna happen.  The USSC is NOT going to reverse Roe v. Wade.  They may restrict something down to 20-24 weeks, but abortion 

will still be available after 20 weeks. 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, jrobin15283 said:

stealing a loaf of bread doesnt result in killing another human being

Glad you agree.....your thief analogy was stupid and meaningless.  

 

But it is common knowledge prolifers care nothing for

the life of a REAL breathing person.  They just want

 to run other people's lives because theirs are so empty.

They care NOTHING for a starving child and want 

to abolish all social programs that help him/her. 

The hypocritical "pro-lifer".  

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, jerra- said:

 

 under extreme conditions termination should be allowed/ baby is dead etc.

 

if there is a medical emergency and a chance that a c- section is possible would you say to save the baby if that is possible?

Absolutely.  IF the mother agrees to it.

I personally oppose them after 5-6 months unless it is for a condition

that was previously unknown.  If I found out I had a severely damaged 

child at 5 months, I would abort.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, SixShooter said:

 

You're talking about a tiny fraction of cases.

 

The vast majority of abortions are for "oops I don't need this" and you know it.

The vast majority of abortions are performed on a fetus the size of an olive.  So that photo you posted earlier, was 5-10 times BIGGER than the average fetus that is aborted. 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, jrobin15283 said:

a lot of these people are militant pro-aborts who would rather see a nine month old fetus die than the parents take responsibility for their actions.

She is lying.  Very few have that opinion.

Rule #1:  Pro-lifers always lose the debate - that is why they have

to start lying. 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Scout said:

The vast majority of abortions are performed on a fetus the size of an olive. 

These clowns are not really pro-life at all.

They want women to become pregnant as God's punishment for screwing around. They see nothing wrong with recreational sex by men, but cannot abide women doing it. They are not pro-life: they are "forced birthers". No matter  what laws are passed a rich woman can simply have an abortion outside of her state or even the country.

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, XavierOnassis said:

These clowns are not really pro-life at all.

They want women to become pregnant as God's punishment for screwing around. They see nothing wrong with recreational sex by men, but cannot abide women doing it. They are not pro-life: they are "forced birthers". No matter  what laws are passed a rich woman can simply have an abortion outside of her state or even the country.

 

There was a nun who said it best:

ig%20screenshot.JPG?itok=WmhMn6LN

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Scout said:

Absolutely.  IF the mother agrees to it.

I personally oppose them after 5-6 months unless it is for a condition

that was previously unknown.  If I found out I had a severely damaged 

child at 5 months, I would abort.  

 

i agree with you mostly,  if the baby can be saved in good condition, and if the mother does not want it, adoption should be an option.

Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, jerra- said:

 

i agree with you mostly,  if the baby can be saved in good condition, and if the mother does not want it, adoption should be an option.

Childbirth can be dangerous, far more than an early abortion.

Just let the woman decide. It is her body. It is NOT your body or the government's body

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, XavierOnassis said:

Childbirth can be dangerous, far more than an early abortion.

Just let the woman decide. It is her body. It is NOT your body or the government's body

Answer my questions you dumb fucking whore!

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Scout said:

Glad you agree.....your thief analogy was stupid and meaningless.  

 

But it is common knowledge prolifers care nothing for

the life of a REAL breathing person.  They just want

 to run other people's lives because theirs are so empty.

They care NOTHING for a starving child and want 

to abolish all social programs that help him/her. 

The hypocritical "pro-lifer".  

 

No, its common knowledge that pro choicers are so depraved that they would allow a nine month old fetus to be killed before holding anyone accountable for their actions.  Regardless of any analogy you or I used, the TRUTH of the matter is that abortion is a barbaric practice, and you have no real argument in defense of it.  You keep bringing up the Supreme Court as if that somehow is the end-all be-all for what is right and what is wrong.  The point is that even if Roe v. Wade was NEVER overturned, abortion would STILL be WRONG.  You have said nothing substantive that actually responds to HOW abortion is moral, other than (to use the your terminology) what a bunch of "old white guys" decided 50 years ago. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Scout said:

The vast majority of abortions are performed on a fetus the size of an olive.  So that photo you posted earlier, was 5-10 times BIGGER than the average fetus that is aborted. 

 

So?  An NFL quarterback is 5-10 (or more) times bigger than a newborn.  Size is irrelevant.

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, XavierOnassis said:

Childbirth can be dangerous, far more than an early abortion.

Just let the woman decide. It is her body. It is NOT your body or the government's body

 

talking about a baby after a c section- no longer in the mother.

Link to post
Share on other sites
52 minutes ago, XavierOnassis said:

So, were you planning to ask a woman to have a C-section performed on her when she did not want to give birth? What is it that you are proposing?

So lets get this clear:  do you support non medically necessary late term abortions?

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, XavierOnassis said:

So, were you planning to ask a woman to have a C-section performed on her when she did not want to give birth? What is it that you are proposing?

 

in a medical emergency after a certain time a c section would be the safest way to have the baby taken out.

Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, jerra- said:

 

i agree with you mostly,  if the baby can be saved in good condition, and if the mother does not want it, adoption should be an option.

 

I think adoption is a wonderful option and wish more people would choose it.

People do not want to adopt the children that are currently available.

I wonder what we should do about that?  

 

Back to my statement that I wish more people would choose adoption:

94% of babies born to teenage mothers are kept by that immature

mother.  People need to figure out some way to get those

babies into the arms of more mature parents.  But I do not

see it happening.  

 

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, XavierOnassis said:

These clowns are not really pro-life at all.

They want women to become pregnant as God's punishment for screwing around. They see nothing wrong with recreational sex by men, but cannot abide women doing it. They are not pro-life: they are "forced birthers". No matter  what laws are passed a rich woman can simply have an abortion outside of her state or even the country.

  A woman gets pregnant by her own choices that SHE makes.

  A lot of men don't give a fuck IF a woman gets pregnant.  The worse that happens to a man is that he has to pay support for the child for the next 18 years or so.

  Women have a lot more to lose that man has to lose.

  I don't believe that a woman should go on welfare UNTIL she discloses the name of the father/s of her child/children and the state should attach the man's checks for as long as he has to pay child support.

  IF there are no child support payments ordered by a court, the state should take the non-custodial parent to court and make sure the state attaches the non-custodial parent's check.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Scout said:

 

I think adoption is a wonderful option and wish more people would choose it.

People do not want to adopt the children that are currently available.

I wonder what we should do about that?  

 

Back to my statement that I wish more people would choose adoption:

94% of babies born to teenage mothers are kept by that immature

mother.  People need to figure out some way to get those

babies into the arms of more mature parents.  But I do not

see it happening.  

 

so we are supposed to support killing that child?  I am sure we can find more mature solutions to those problems.

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Scout said:

 

I think adoption is a wonderful option and wish more people would choose it.

People do not want to adopt the children that are currently available.

I wonder what we should do about that?  

 

Back to my statement that I wish more people would choose adoption:

94% of babies born to teenage mothers are kept by that immature

mother.  People need to figure out some way to get those

babies into the arms of more mature parents.  But I do not

see it happening.  

 

Another thing: why do you wish more people would choose adoption?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...