Partial Birth Abortion Ban Passes

[TEXgrl]

this is the kind of shit i'm talking about.

Question: when does it become a life?
Answer: when it is convenient for the woman.

before you people jump down my fucking throat; hear me out.

i recently read about a case in which a guy murdered a pregnant woman, and guess how many counts of murder he was charged with? that's right, 2.

that is fucking bullshit. it is a life in some instances but not a life in others. make up your minds.

i posted above this post, i'm in favor of 1st trimester abortions. 3rd trimester abortion should not be legal, i agree. 2nd trimester is questionable.

i didn't jump on you, just chimed in on the thread....with my opinion, last i checked, i still have the right to do that.

 

[atlantabiolab]

par·a·site ( P ) Pronunciation Key (pr-st)
n.
Biology. An organism that grows, feeds, and is sheltered on or in a different organism while contributing nothing to the survival of its host.

What the fuck?!?!? Did you write this up yourself?? This is the layman term, similar to "Human. Others that look like me.", but this is far from the real definition of Parasite. Try and take a look at a real defining of "parasitism" and attempt to understand why a fetus NEVER qualifies as a parasite.

Parasitism
The term parasitism may be defined as a two-species association in which one species, the parasite, lives on or in a second species, the host, for a significant period of its life and obtains nourishment from it. This is a commonly accepted working definition of parasitism and using it we can emphasize several important features of the host-parasite relationship.

1. Parasitism always involves two species, the parasite and the host.

2. Many of these parasitic associations produce pathological changes in hosts that may result in disease.

3. Successful treatment and control of parasitic diseases requires not only comprehensive information about the parasite itself but also a good understanding of the nature of parasites' interactions with their hosts.

4. The parasite is always the beneficiary and the host is always the provider in any host-parasite relationship.

This comes from the University of Pennsylvannia Department of Parasitology, does this surpass your pathetic definition...I think so. By your weak reasoning a whale is a fish, cause it swims in the water. No scientist worth their weight would ever define progeny as parasites, since it infers that progeny are detrimental to a species.

You would do well to stop throwing around the idea that simply because you are a medical professional, that you are the bearer of all knowledge, since you are not living up to your assertions. As if Doctors ever lived up to the level of true scientists.

 

[TEXgrl]

texgrl, i think your being a lil bit of a man hater here arent you? 'ask them to stay around and see what they do' . well honey i think that means the guy youve been laying down with is a piece of shit. its not a damnation on the whole sex. im sure it wasnt meant that way, but it sounded like one of those trashy bitches complaining about men cause they cant get laid.

i'm not a man hater, in all actuallity, i've been married 10 years and have a son.

as for a womans right to choose, i say it doesnt exist. democrats lay that out cause most women are pavlovian dogs, thinking that supporting abortion is hurting men somehow.

please tell me you aren't saying women wanted abortion legal to be able to hurt men? i'm speechless at the stupidity of that remark. who's hating who now?

 

[TEXgrl]

The only one I could see is possibly rape. Since the girl had no choice in the matter. The drug user get her fixed so she can never have kids. The teen she played not she has to pay. Her parents can help her raise it since they did such a wonderful job informing her about sex or she could give it up for abortion.



With the lines so long for couples wanting children I think adoption is a better choice.



I don't put it there it is just a reality. Men don't get pregnant women do. So if I was chick you better believe I would make the dude wear protection. Like I said her right was to say no before they had sex not to kill some baby because she was dumb.



Yes. I was with a few different chicks before I was married and I would always think of the consequences to the chick and to myself even if the chick was saying "cum in me" or some other wild sex talk. I wouldn't. I always thought guys were dumbasses that bust in chicks with out a condom. They should lose their right to have kids too. See I am not one sided.



I sure bet it would slow abortions down. Because then the chick is gambling with her life to instead of just killing her baby.

wow, you seem to have all the answers, email me your name and i'll write your name in the next time i vote.

 

[atlantabiolab]

And pOink, no one said it was a human life when the woman chooses to be; it is the ability to eventually become a human life that counts in this argument. Once again, twisting the facts ever so slightly to suit your argument. But it won't work with me.

Then tell us, what is the definable criteria that give us this non-arbitrary cut off point of when a fetus becomes a "person".

 

[curling]

I guess that shows your ignorance. If I deliver 300 babies a year and I agree with abortion, is it possible I might be in a better position than you or some politician to comment and judge on its necessity and medical and moral implications?

Oh boy another doctor with a God complex.

 

[atlantabiolab]

Oh my God. You did NOT just say that. You are either blinded by your "emotion" on this issue or just unbelievably ignorant and uneducated.

Wow, you showed me the ignorance of my ways. Could you please post that 3rd grade definition of 'Parasite' that you used before, I need a good laugh?

 

[atlantabiolab]

I guess that shows your ignorance. If I deliver 300 babies a year and I agree with abortion, is it possible I might be in a better position than you or some politician to comment and judge on its necessity and medical and moral implications?

No. Please show us where experience is conditional for moral reasoning. So without experience in battle or fighting, a man cannot make the moral judgement to know when he must fight to protect life and property? Is this the type of reasoning used by minority advocates to pass laws preferring said minority, arguing that the majority cannot "understand the 'black, gay, latino, disabled, etc.' experience"?

Experience is not conditional for reasoning, it is only a tool for reasoning, but man does not have to reason at all. There are numerous cases in which it can be shown that experience does not correlate with reasoning. Politics is a great example.

What about rape? Incest? Genetic malformations? Non-viable defects? It's all so black-and-white for those of you who don't deal with this day in and day out. Pure blind ignorance. It's like arguing with SSAlexSS or 2Thick (whose absence of late is a welcome relief to intelligent life everywhere)

The first two are non-consentual therefore the woman has the law on her side to argue for the procedure, but she would have to prove her case, since this is a claim that societal laws have been violated and another is being implicated as being a criminal. I'm sure you can see how allowing this argument non-chalantly opens the flood gates to erroneous charges.

The third needs clarification. Genetic malformations does not define non-viability.

The latter also needs clarification, but is arguably acceptable, since there are conditions where the infant will not survive.

"Pro-Life" (e.g. anti-choice, free will, self-determination, etc...) always bases their arguments on INVALID and ERRONEOUS assumptions like "life begins at conception".

Since you have thrown around your argument that this argument is wrong, then please, with your medical wisdom, tell us why "life" does not begin at conception (I can't wait to hear this, since this is basic biology).

Do me a favor. Anyone AND I MEAN ANYONE post up Webster's (or any other LEGITIMATE) definition of "Parasite".

I already gave you the real definition. For a supposed doctor, your's was pathetic.

 

[MattTheSkywalker]

I'm against abortion because I wouldn;t want it done to me. I'm glad my Mom had me.

However, I am also against the government telling anyone how to do anything with their bodies or their personal lives.

Where did the ideology that thinks the government knows best and should be telling other people what to do come from?

Maybe if we all just left each other's business alone the world would be a better place.

 

[velvett]

Then tell us, what is the definable criteria that give us this non-arbitrary cut off point of when a fetus becomes a "person".

This could be twisted to the benefit of either debater's belief.

1 - Conception?
2 - Full or near full term pregnancy with vaginal or c-section birth?
3 - Survival of a premature delivery?
4 - When you get a social security #? (or the like)


Clearly an eight week old fetus could not live outside the mother's womb but what about between the 16th-20th weeks?
(2nd Trimester and roughly 4 oz (16 weeks) to 1/2 -1 lb (20 weeks)


It could be argued to death and as we all know it has been and will continue to be argued.

Which came first the chicken or the egg?