A fertilized embryo is not a human. Where do you people come from?
In practicality, we will always assigns greater value to *something*
The train track question isn’t a fallacy to begin with so your objection makes no sense.
True... but our society should be opposed to saying those of "lesser" value have no right to live.
Your use of it (its equivalent) is a fallacy. See the above line.
It's rather breathtaking that you, of all people, cannot stop to think and recognize this.
It is simply an illustration of value. You are acting like it is supposed to be the only part of an argument against abortion. It isn't. Anti-abortion people never focus on all the arguments against their position together. They just bounce from one reason to the next as each is debunked until they wear out whoever they are arguing with.True... but our society should be opposed to saying those of "lesser" value have no right to live.
Your use of it (its equivalent) is a fallacy. See the above line.
It's rather breathtaking that you, of all people, cannot stop to think and recognize this.
What exactly do you think you are saying to women? You give them less rights than someone not even born yet. Do you not understand your authoritarian blood still runs through you? You want to protect those that don’t exist yet but yet you don’t extend that protection to the living. Do you understand how fucked up that is?
Because it’s a contrived religious argument that exists solely to control women.I think the biggest obstacle is that the anti-abortion movement is a religious movement at its core and logical arguments do little to pierce the belief bubble. Unfortunately, the religion driving it has a history of trying to force their beliefs on others and seems to have no concept of separation of church and state or that many people just don't have the same beliefs. It is a patriarchal / autocratic belief structure that has been sold as a religion imo.
As a side note I did a forum search and found no threads on matriarchal vs. patriarchal societies which would have an interesting take on this whole debate. I also find it interesting that there has been no mention of whether the father of a pregnancy would face any stricter enforcement of child support payments. I see lots of possible consequences being threatened for women, but none for the men.
I just can't imagine where he got that example from. I just wonder.I've never heard of a Train Track Fallacy. Did you just make that up on the spot?
This. Said it before and I'll say it again, it's only ever been about control.Because it’s a contrived religious argument that exists solely to control women.
Is there any line to be drawn before birth when we tell a person that they cannot abort unless it is medically necessary? Very few US states have no restrictions on abortion.
For example in California, you cannot get a Abortion unless it is medically necessary after the fetus has viability. In Colorado you can get a abortion throughout the term of pregnancy.
Let's hear the pros and cons of her rant...
How much of a problem do you think it is that women who are perfectly healthy, as is their pregnancy, are just deciding at the last minute to abort? If it’s not a problem then why does it need to regulated?
How much of a problem do you think it is that women who are perfectly healthy, as is their pregnancy, are just deciding at the last minute to abort? If it’s not a problem then why does it need to regulated?
Exactly. Let's pretend that 1 out of 100 late-term abortions is simply because the woman changed her mind even though that is probably a comically high estimate. You are going to make the other 99% of women going through probably the most traumatic experience of their entire life jump through extra hoops to prove it was necessary? Or put it on the medical professionals, discouraging them from doing everything they can to help in what is likely a very critical situation? The liberal position has always been to leave it to the experts involved to make these decisions. The conservative position is to have the government intrude while simultaneously claiming the mantle of small government.Is there any line to be drawn before birth when we tell a person that they cannot abort unless it is medically necessary? Very few US states have no restrictions on abortion.
For example in California, you cannot get a Abortion unless it is medically necessary after the fetus has viability. In Colorado you can get a abortion throughout the term of pregnancy.
How much of a problem do you think it is that women who are perfectly healthy, as is their pregnancy, are just deciding at the last minute to abort? If it’s not a problem then why does it need to regulated?
No, we just assume that most people having it done that late are doing it out of medical necessity and not just for kicks.So you would draw no line before birth when we tell a person that they cannot abort unless it is medically necessary?
Exactly. Let's pretend that 1 out of 100 late-term abortions is simply because the woman changed her mind even though that is probably a comically high estimate. You are going to make the other 99% of women going through probably the most traumatic experience of their entire life jump through extra hoops to prove it was necessary? Or put it on the medical professionals, discouraging them from doing everything they can to help in what is likely a very critical situation? The liberal position has always been to leave it to the experts involved to make these decisions. The conservative position is to have the government intrude while simultaneously claiming the mantle of small government.
The rest of us know that you keep your own 'special' dictionary and reality of what things are and mean. So yes, those are "live" cells at conception. They are months from viability, but you already know that. You just won't admit it. Because you're a dishonest and disingenuous c*nt.Science says that life begins at conception.
In Colorado you can get a abortion throughout the term of pregnancy.
You would misrepresent the limitations as, "Being free to make the choice all willy-nilly all the way up to 35 weeks!" This isn't anywhere close to true, and you're a jackass for stating it as such. And don't tell me that, "That's not what I said" because that's exactly the notion you are trying to express here.So you would draw no line before birth when we tell a person that they cannot abort unless it is medically necessary?
You would misrepresent the limitations as, "Being free to make the choice all willy-nilly all the way up to 35 weeks!" This isn't anywhere close to true, and you're a jackass for stating it as such. And don't tell me that, "That's not what I said" because that's exactly the notion you are trying to express here.
22 weeks, asshole. That's the cutoff, not, "all the way up to birth".
Don't try to one-up taj with your misrepresentative bullshit, it's not a good look and you'd have a LOT of catching up to do.
California is a Liberal state but they still regulate Abortion after the Fetus has viability. Is how California regulates Abortion not working?
Dog vs Baby
*snip*
Interestingly, I answered your question and you didn’t bother to counter my point, why is that?
How much of a problem do you think it is that women who are perfectly healthy, as is their pregnancy, are just deciding at the last minute to abort? If it’s not a problem then why does it need to regulated?