Current Events > Would you support abortion on demand being the law, in your area?

(+) Yeah! (+)

[LFAQs-redacted-quote]

And he wants to call himself pro-choice while doing all this its a womans choice, except for when he says its not.

Ninjaluver posted...

I have said that every time a woman gets an abortion after the point in which the child develops consciousness, that is murdering a person.

So these women are murderers of children now, are they?

[LFAQs-redacted-quote]


No. I literally don't need to provide more evidence that there are more women who seek abortion at a certain date for arbitrary reasons. I understand that you would like me to do that, but I don't need to. It's not necessary for the moral argument I'm making given the lack of opposing evidence from your end.

I have never argued that many women seeking this abortion after this period have not done so out of medical necessity. I have only argued that I have not seen data that states that there are more women who seek this out of medical necessity than women who seek this for another reason. That's it.

Nobody in this topic has been able to argue why my position is not the morally correct one. At best, you could say that people like yourself have argued why it should not be legislatively mandated without evidence. I would agree that it if I saw evidence showing what I'm requesting, it probably shouldn't be legislatively mandated. I haven't seen that evidence. It just hasn't been shown to me. Even if it were, I would still be correct from a moral position.

So youre making baseless assertions and accusing women of being baby killers now.

That doesnt sound very pro choice to me

Nobody has been able to argue your position is not the morally correct one? Except for the part where numerous users have pointed out what you want is harmful to women and violates their bodily autonomy.

[LFAQs-redacted-quote]


I quoted it in that post. I'm not sure how else to convey the information that I'm asking you to respond to....I guess I'll just copy-paste it into this post? Please respond as I have responded to your many posts.

"My understanding of the word neonate, correct me if I'm wrong, is a child that has already been birthed and is less than 28 weeks. Is that what you meant?

If that's the case, what separates a child who has just been birthed an hour ago from the "being" that is 1 hour or 1 day from birth? What magical event happens in that timeframe that turns the being into a child?"

Captain morally correct over here calling women baby murderers. There has to be some irony in there somewhere.

[LFAQs-redacted-quote]


Wait. Hold on. I was typing out a full response to your post but then I got to the bolded part. This part renders everything else pointless if I am understanding it correctly. Therefore, I will give you an opportunity to correct yourself before I proceed.

What do you mean when you say. "No one cares about the morally correct option.?" because I very much do care and in fact that is all I have been arguing for this entire time.

Ninjaluver posted...

Wait. Hold on. I was typing out a full response to your post but then I got to the bolded part. This part renders everything else pointless if I am understanding it correctly. Therefore, I will give you an opportunity to correct yourself before I proceed.

What do you mean when you say. "No one cares about the morally correct option.?" because I very much do care and in fact that is all I have been arguing for this entire time.

All while morally being in the wrong! Its astounding. You want to harm women and violate the most fundamental human right that gives way to other basic human rights for a virtually nonexistent hypothetical, by fear mongering and appeal to emotion.

And none of it based in any supporting facts.

And in doing so also supports the violation of bodily autonomy of women by government decree. Thats a pretty high bar there, at least in my book.

Maybe he should stick to loving ninjas and leave women alone.

it should categorically be ruled out when it's very far advanced unless it is an emergency.

if it's allowed, at least one person at 8 1/2 months will do it. People do other stupid things too.

[LFAQs-redacted-quote]

This is why people who dont understand medicine shouldnt have an opinion about how to involve themselves in other peoples healthcare.

sigh, emergency/necessary/zero chance to live.

Just not because actually I don't want to have a baby after all but that decision took really long.

Rai_Jin posted...

it should categorically be ruled out when it's very far advanced unless it is an emergency.

if it's allowed, at least one person at 8 1/2 months will do it. People do other stupid things too.

Knowing that the vast majorities of doctor wouldn't kill a baby at that period for a bening reason, do you make the tradeoff that the mother might die due to the law?

Rai_Jin posted...

sigh, emergency/necessary/zero chance to live.

Just not because actually I don't want to have a baby after all but that decision took really long.

Who waits for several months of a progress that's both physically and mentally draining and then thinks "Actually nah I don't want this anymore"? So many people keep arguing this but utterly fail to give any indication that this is happening.

What isn't so lacking in evidence is women who are suffering purely because they need a medical procedure but have to deal with unnecessary delays because some ignorant legislators believe that women get abortions for shits and giggles. No matter how you try to justify it, even "just" banning late term abortions causes significantly more harm than it prevents.

We shouldnt have legislation that in reality harms/kills women and violates bodily autonomy, based on the imaginary and outlandish hypotheticals of pregnant women who want to kill their babies just before birth with the help of some crazed doctors.

It boggles the mind.

I mean if somebody is saying it's necessary, I wouldn't expect a doctor not to agree, but from the reactions I guess that happens.

Also it just sounds almost the same in my mind, discovering it's necessary, proof it's necessary.

Rai_Jin posted...

it should categorically be ruled out when it's very far advanced unless it is an emergency.

if it's allowed, at least one person at 8 1/2 months will do it. People do other stupid things too.

I live in a US location where abortion has been unrestricted since 1971, and that has not yet happened even once.

Rai_Jin posted...

I mean if somebody is saying it's necessary, I wouldn't expect a doctor not to agree, but from the reactions I guess that happens.

Also it just sounds almost the same in my mind, discovering it's necessary, proof it's necessary.

the doctor wont agree because the govt will take away their license to practice, or worse, and women have died when they couldve been saved. Its barbaric

[LFAQs-redacted-quote]


Why did you cut out and then not respond to the second part of the post? This cannot be more obviously deliberate. I will not proceed until you answer this basic question as your entire argument hinges on the answer.

Once again:

"If that's the case, what separates a child who has just been birthed an hour ago from the "being" that is 1 hour or 1 day from birth? What magical event happens in that timeframe that turns the being into a child?"

DnDer posted...

Don't be disingenuous.

There are many kinds of abortion. Some are surgical procedures, and some are just two pills.

What game are you playing? A miscarriage is also technically an abortion yes But Obviously I am not talking about that kind either, so giving that as a response is pointless. There are many different types of abortions, i think it was more than clear I was referring to an induced surgical procedure, which afaik is not undertaken at a pharmacy.

DnDer posted...

This was just an absurd hypothetical that doesn't even really have a proper framework because you're dancing around something with language, probably because you're afraid of being modded for it.

That's why I didn't even address it in replying to the last post. It's that dismissable.

So women pressured into abortions is only hypothetical? It doesn't happen at all? It's not something doctors are instructed to be aware of?
What are you talking about? Are you saying that my desire to keep a doctor for induced surgical abortions due to situations like outside pressure is absurd hypothetical?

No you don't want to discuss because you think I've got a hidden agenda against whatever hidden language you claim I'm not speaking of. Shall i play the same game? I think you're afraid to discuss the situations when women are pressured into abortions for fear modded language might spew forth.

How droll. What a stupid game to play. If all you're going to reply is with an equivalent "ur REALLY saying u hate all black people" then don't reply. You don't want to discuss, only accuse.

DnDer posted...

What wording, from the people who are saying, "on demand," needs to be clarified? What wording are people want abortion accessible using that are making it inaccessible to minorities?

Literally said the minority of women who get pressured....

Wait, why am I explaining this? You KNOW what I meant.

DnDer posted...

A woman goes to a doctor. She says, "I want an abortion." She gets one.

Yes, more ignorance.

Notice how I said a minority of women get pressured into abortion?
Notice how I said they should be protected?

...."no questions asked " is what you're saying for 100% of cases. You aren't willing to discuss that minority, probably by this point because you think I'm against all abortion or hate all women or think its a majority of women or some rubbish.

Ok you can't be engaged with. Fine I won't reply either.

What a meltdown. Jesus.

Take the clown act back on the road, maybe youll have better luck in the next town.

KitKats posted...

What a meltdown. Jesus.

Take the clown act back on the road, maybe youll have better luck in the next town.

"Lol triggered"

Ok chief.

I'm in canada, and there are literally zero laws restricting abortion aside from the normal ones surrounding informed consent. You can abort whenever the fuck you want. Been that way since 88 with zero negative consequences whatsoever.

This is not a complicated issue. It's an issue where one side has science, logic, basic understanding of high school level biology and the entire medical profession backing it, and the other side has feelings and domestic terrorism.

Same thing with legalized cannabis. None of the bad things that were supposed to happen did.

[LFAQs-redacted-quote]


I'm going to repeat my question until you actually answer it. I will not proceed until you answer my question as your entire position hinges on the answer:

"If that's the case, what separates a child who has just been birthed an hour ago from the "being" that is 1 hour or 1 day from birth? What magical event happens in that timeframe that turns the being into a child?"