It is hypocritical to use religion and the Bible to justify opposition to abortion.

[Sheldon]

sojourner said: ↑
American law. There is no law that allows a fetus to either inherit or to be a beneficiary. Pretty good indicator that the fetus is not an autonomous person.

Interesting point.

It's a valid point, but since it is a legal one, and the anti-choicers whole argument is that the law is wrong, I'm not sure how much traction it will get. For me it comes down to bodily autonomy being an essential human right, and since we would not in any other circumstance entertain preserving a life, by using someone else's body against their express wishes, I see no moral argument for making a special case when it involves an insentient blastocyst or foetus?

 

[Sheldon]

LOL cherry picking

LOL evasion.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

@9-10ths_Penguin , @sojourner , @Sheldon

ok... conclusion.

You three are pro-abortion which you have every right to think that way. You offered your points countering mine and visa-versa.

No one has really debunked my position that it is a human being in that at 20 oz it can survive on its own. So I think I can hold to my position just as much as you can hold onto yours.

Why do you think a person should be compelled to provide their body to support another "person" when that "person" doesn't need them?

If a "20 oz fetus" can survive on its own, what possible justification could you have for forcing the pregnancy to continue?

In any society where bodily autonomy is valued, the pregnant person would have the right to end the pregnancy at any point. Viability would just be the point when the approach switches from abortion to inducing a live birth.

That is what makes America great--freedom of speech.

You and your misogynist friends are trying to undermine freedom in your country.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

It's a valid point, but since it is a legal one, and the anti-choicers whole argument is that the law is wrong, I'm not sure how much traction it will get.

Oh, I agree.

It's one more example of how anti-choicers never treat the fetus as a person except when they're trying to make a woman suffer. They hate it when you point this out. It makes them do a whole song and dance to change the subject.

For me it comes down to bodily autonomy being an essential human right, and since we would not in any other circumstance entertain preserving a life, by using someone else's body against their express wishes, I see no moral argument for making a special case when it involves an insentient blastocyst or foetus?

I entirely agree.

 

[Subduction Zone]

@9-10ths_Penguin , @sojourner , @Sheldon

ok... conclusion.

You three are pro-abortion which you have every right to think that way. You offered your points countering mine and visa-versa.

No one has really debunked my position that it is a human being in that at 20 oz it can survive on its own. So I think I can hold to my position just as much as you can hold onto yours.

That is what makes America great--freedom of speech.

.
Do you realize that at that late stage you are talking about less than 1% of abortions?

Even if Roe v Wade is overturned most of those fetuses will still be aborted. Do you know why?

 

[sojourner]

@9-10ths_Penguin , @sojourner , @Sheldon

ok... conclusion.

You three are pro-abortion which you have every right to think that way. You offered your points countering mine and visa-versa.

No one has really debunked my position that it is a human being in that at 20 oz it can survive on its own. So I think I can hold to my position just as much as you can hold onto yours.

That is what makes America great--freedom of speech.

1) I’m not “pro-abortion.”
2) at 20 weeks, the fetus hadn’t even formed pain receptors. A fetus isn’t considered viable until a month later at the earliest.

 

[sojourner]

@9-10ths_Penguin , @sojourner , @Sheldon

ok... conclusion.

You three are pro-abortion which you have every right to think that way. You offered your points countering mine and visa-versa.

No one has really debunked my position that it is a human being in that at 20 oz it can survive on its own. So I think I can hold to my position just as much as you can hold onto yours.

That is what makes America great--freedom of speech.

No, what makes America great is how we treat people. Fetuses aren’t people.

 

[Sheldon]

LOL cherry picking

Spoiler: baby in the womb

View attachment 63770

Spoiler: This is NOT a baby

View attachment 63772

It's not a baby if it is still in the womb and topologically attached, and I had a toy action man that could grip my finger like that, that didn't make it human of course, the second photo is no longer part of the woman's body, so it's irrelevant, and neither of those is a blastocyst, do they even fall within the stage of when the law allows a termination?

Late term abortions are a tiny minority, and generally are performed out of medical necessity where the life of the woman is at immediate risk. Are you saying you think these should not be perform? Even late term foetuses are still not babies of course.

 

[Heyo]

ok... conclusion.

You three are pro-abortion which you have every right to think that way. You offered your points countering mine and visa-versa.

No one has really debunked my position that it is a human being in that at 20 oz it can survive on its own. So I think I can hold to my position just as much as you can hold onto yours.

With that conclusion we could even come to a compromise and not have to keep our different positions.
What about "no elective abortion after the 20th week"?

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

LOL cherry picking

Spoiler: baby in the womb

View attachment 63770

Spoiler: This is NOT a baby

View attachment 63772

If abortions at that late stage are what you're trying to avoid, isn't it hypocritical of you to fight against early-term medical abortions?

 

[Subduction Zone]

With that conclusion we could even come to a compromise and not have to keep our different positions.
What about "no elective abortion after the 20th week"?

I would be fine with that. You could even push it to 24 weeks, but that is getting very close to when a fetus can feel pain. Of course the true colors will be shown. It is not about "saving a viable baby". It is merely trying to regulate one's activities in the bedroom. That is shown by some states shifting their aim to birth control now.

I guess if a man is not "getting any" he may think that no one else should "get any" either.

 

[Kenny]

1) I’m not “pro-abortion.”
2) at 20 weeks, the fetus hadn’t even formed pain receptors. A fetus isn’t considered viable until a month later at the earliest.

Actually, no.

The youngest to survive is at 21 weeks.
AMAZING: Youngest surviving preemie in the world, born at 21 weeks, is going home

There might be an earlier one weighing a total of 11.9 oz.

As medical capacity increases, I believe the earlier that can survive.

So we have a person at 21 weeks for sure and maybe earlier.
It's a person

 

[Kenny]

It's not a baby if it is still in the womb and topologically attached, and I had a toy action man that could grip my finger like that, that didn't make it human of course, the second photo is no longer part of the woman's body, so it's irrelevant, and neither of those is a blastocyst, do they even fall within the stage of when the law allows a termination?

Late term abortions are a tiny minority, and generally are performed out of medical necessity where the life of the woman is at immediate risk. Are you saying you think these should not be perform? Even late term foetuses are still not babies of course.

a picture is worth a thousand words.

 

[Sheldon]

So we have a person at 21 weeks for sure and maybe earlier.
It's a person

After it's born see, and ceases to be part of the woman's body.

 

[Sheldon]

a picture is worth a thousand words.

Indeed...

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Actually, no.

The youngest to survive is at 21 weeks.
AMAZING: Youngest surviving preemie in the world, born at 21 weeks, is going home

There might be an earlier one weighing a total of 11.9 oz.

As medical capacity increases, I believe the earlier that can survive.

So we have a person at 21 weeks for sure and maybe earlier.
It's a person

So why would you want to compel someone to stay pregnant after 21 weeks? You're arguing that at that point, they're no longer needed to preserve the life of the fetus, so what's the reason?

Is it just misogyny?

 

[sojourner]

Actually, no.

The youngest to survive is at 21 weeks.
AMAZING: Youngest surviving preemie in the world, born at 21 weeks, is going home

There might be an earlier one weighing a total of 11.9 oz.

As medical capacity increases, I believe the earlier that can survive.

So we have a person at 21 weeks for sure and maybe earlier.
It's a person

Notice the operative word: “born.” Only after its born is it an autonomous person.

 

[Kenny]

Notice the operative word: “born.” Only after its born is it an autonomous person.

Only as autonomous as everyone taking care of the baby. Feeding, making sure he/she is healthy, cleaning, dressing, protecting et al.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Actually, no.

The youngest to survive is at 21 weeks.
AMAZING: Youngest surviving preemie in the world, born at 21 weeks, is going home

There might be an earlier one weighing a total of 11.9 oz.

As medical capacity increases, I believe the earlier that can survive.

So we have a person at 21 weeks for sure and maybe earlier.
It's a person

Guess what? Even if it is a person it is not "murder". It is an eviction.

 

[Sheldon]

Notice the operative word: “born.” Only after its born is it an autonomous person.

I've been trying to explain that for a few posts now, it doesn't seem to be sinking in.