• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Judge stops Oklahoma abortion law

TheHat said:
No, that is not what I said. I said the term, is no different in the sense of describing the human life cycle.
Click to expand...

True. But what's that prove?

Do you know what the different stages are within the human life cycle? Fetus and adult are 2 of them. But at no point does calling a baby a "fetus" make it anything less then a baby or a human being.
Click to expand...

A fetus is not a baby, period. A baby is a different part of the life-cycle.

A fetus may or may not be LEGALLY or MORALLY a human being. But you cannot assume it is just because it's a stage in the life cycle.
 
TheHat said:
No, that is not what I said. I said the term, is no different in the sense of describing the human life cycle.

Do you know what the different stages are within the human life cycle? Fetus and adult are 2 of them. But at no point does calling a baby a "fetus" make it anything less then a baby or a human being.
Click to expand...
Actually it does make it less than a baby since it's not one. Just like it's less than an adult, because it's not one. Kind of like how a seed isn't a tree.

embryo /= fetus /= infant /= adult
 
Last edited:
TheHat said:
This "procedure", involves the well being of another individual life, that is on the verge of being killed simply b/c the mother doesn't want to deal with her own actions in life.
Click to expand...

Devil's Advocate:

Guns involve the well-being of another. Are you in favor of the government forcing you to take a gun-safety class and get a psychological profile before you're allowed to purchase one?

edit: And that gun safety class would include statistics on the number of children of gun owners who accidentally kill themselves, to round out the analogy a little
 
Last edited:
misterman said:
No, it's not.

A fetus is a fetus.



It's a fetus. Not a baby. Or a newborn, toddler, adolescent, or adult. A fetus.

Calling it anything else is nothing more than a lame circular argument, or the fallacy of composition.
Click to expand...

Stages of Development: Normal Pregnancy: Merck Manual Home Edition

Stages of Development

A baby goes through several stages of development, beginning as a fertilized egg. The egg develops into a blastocyst, an embryo, then a fetus.....

Development of the Fetus and Placenta

At the end of the 8th week after fertilization (10 weeks of pregnancy), the embryo is considered a fetus. During this stage, the structures that have already formed grow and develop. The following are markers during pregnancy...
Click to expand...

That is the Merck medical site. Argue with them over it.

As you can see, the term "fetus" is just a designated term for a designated time frame of the baby in development.
 
rivrrat said:
ROFL

Anywho, this has nothing to do with the mother changing her mind or not. That is entirely irrelevant. For the last time, it has to do with the government forcing a medical procedure on a woman.


Well, except for the fact that they DO. It was actually a PP clinic that required I have an ultrasound prior to my abortion.

Want to try again?
Click to expand...

Its not irrelevant, its right on que actually. The pro-death crowd knows that ultrasounds are harmful to their bottom lines in their death clinics. Which is why they don't want women seeing them. The former NARAL President said so herself, that ultrasounds are hurting their cause.

CURE | Abortion and the politics of ultrasound

Abortion and the politics of ultrasound
Centers report that anywhere from 62 percent up to 95 percent of women who had intended to abort changed their minds after seeing ultrasound images...
Click to expand...

Once you understand the politics behind the ultrasound, you realize why pro-death people don't want women using them.

The mother IS dealing with her actions and consequences of them. Hence the abortion. :doh
Click to expand...

Yeah, that is one convulated way of looking at it.:doh
 
TheHat said:
As you can see, the term "fetus" is just a designated term for a designated time frame of the baby in development.
Click to expand...

How is the name you choose to use relevant to, well, anything? Call it your squishy for all I care, it doesn't change anything.
 
TheHat said:
Its not irrelevant, its right on que actually. The pro-death crowd knows that ultrasounds are harmful to their bottom lines in their death clinics.
Click to expand...
I don't have a 'bottom line' in any clinic.

Which is why they don't want women seeing them. The former NARAL President said so herself, that ultrasounds are hurting their cause.
Click to expand...
Our 'cause' is reproductive freedom of choice. The only thing that hurts our cause is legislation that limits that freedom of choice. Ultrasounds do nothing of the sort.

Once you understand the politics behind the ultrasound, you realize why pro-death people don't want women using them.
Click to expand...
You mean once I understand the anti-choice's politics around ultrasounds I will then understand why they want the government to force women to have them?

Because no one here is against ultrasounds. Not in any way, shape, or form.


Yeah, that is one convulated way of looking at it.:doh
Click to expand...
How is it convoluted? It's spot on accurate.
 
misterman said:
True. But what's that prove?
Click to expand...

That your not using the terminology properly maybe?

A fetus is not a baby, period. A baby is a different part of the life-cycle.
Click to expand...

A baby, is not a different part of the life cycle. The "baby" goes through the development stages in the womb, when it comes out it is a newborn or infant.
 
I always enjoy how the pro-life crowd paints the pro-choice crowd as having some sort of evil plot where they want to kill babies just for kicks.
 
Deuce said:
Devil's Advocate:

Guns involve the well-being of another. Are you in favor of the government forcing you to take a gun-safety class and get a psychological profile before you're allowed to purchase one?

edit: And that gun safety class would include statistics on the number of children of gun owners who accidentally kill themselves, to round out the analogy a little
Click to expand...

Your devils advocate doesnt play out, b/c it is in no way equivalent to being pregnant and being responsible in the well being of another human being.
 
rivrrat said:
Actually it does make it less than a baby since it's not one. Just like it's less than an adult, because it's not one. Kind of like how a seed isn't a tree.

embryo /= fetus /= infant /= adult
Click to expand...

i provided you the link, try reading it.:2wave:

And the old seed and tree comparison....lol. I didn't realize a baby was dormant in the womb....lol.
 
rivrrat said:
I don't have a 'bottom line' in any clinic.


Our 'cause' is reproductive freedom of choice. The only thing that hurts our cause is legislation that limits that freedom of choice. Ultrasounds do nothing of the sort.


You mean once I understand the anti-choice's politics around ultrasounds I will then understand why they want the government to force women to have them?

Because no one here is against ultrasounds. Not in any way, shape, or form.



How is it convoluted? It's spot on accurate.
Click to expand...

Maybe your not against them, but the folks who want to keep abortion mills running are.

I provided you link about ultrasounds, try reading it.
 
TheHat said:
A baby, is not a different part of the life cycle. The "baby" goes through the development stages in the womb, when it comes out it is a newborn or infant.
Click to expand...
You would think this blatantly obvious. Women talk all the time about how their baby kicks, etc. while in the womb.
 
Deuce said:
I always enjoy how the pro-life crowd paints the pro-choice crowd as having some sort of evil plot where they want to kill babies just for kicks.
Click to expand...

That is Planned Parenthood's #1 money maker. Without abortions, they would go belly up.

Also, it was founded upon eugenics in the 1st place, which by and large, is a pretty nasty business. Just ask the African American population, they are usually the ones who get the easiest acces to abortion mills, as they set up shop in those type of areas.
 
Taylor said:
You would think this blatantly obvious. Women talk all the time about how their baby kicks, etc. while in the womb.
Click to expand...

Now don't go getting all factual on us. We all know how "blobs of cells" kick when they want to.:lol:
 
All this arguing about whether the fetus is or isn't alive has no real baring on this law and its correctness under the laws of the land, because under the law of the land a fetus can not be considered living until I believe the 3rd trimester. You may disagree with that legal standard, but you don't get to pass laws ignoring legal standards simply because you disagree with it.

If someone disagrees with the legal standard that the 2nd amendment IS an individual right you don't get to make laws barring people from owning guns and make an argument for the case based on the fact you disagree with what the actual legal standard is.
 
TheHat said:
Your devils advocate doesnt play out, b/c it is in no way equivalent to being pregnant and being responsible in the well being of another human being.
Click to expand...

Translation: "I'm not going to answer your question because it might expose my inconsistent ideology."

This bill doesn't make abortion illegal, it just makes the process more painful and humiliating and intrusive. You're letting your personal feelings about a legal procedure cloud the issue.

TheHat said:
That is Planned Parenthood's #1 money maker. Without abortions, they would go belly up.

Also, it was founded upon eugenics in the 1st place, which by and large, is a pretty nasty business. Just ask the African American population, they are usually the ones who get the easiest acces to abortion mills, as they set up shop in those type of areas.
Click to expand...

You're swapping cause and effect. Socio-economic factors make the African American population more likely to want an abortion, and setting up abortion clinics in those areas is purely the market responding to a demand. Equating abortion with eugenics is yet another transparent attempt to create an emotional response.

I should also point out that abortion brings in very little of Planned Parenthood's revenue.
 
Last edited:
Deuce said:
I always enjoy how the pro-life crowd paints the pro-choice crowd as having some sort of evil plot where they want to kill babies just for kicks.
Click to expand...

LOL I know. :rofl

TheHat said:
i provided you the link, try reading it.:2wave:

And the old seed and tree comparison....lol. I didn't realize a baby was dormant in the womb....lol.
Click to expand...
I read it. It offered me nothing.

TheHat said:
Maybe your not against them, but the folks who want to keep abortion mills running are.
Click to expand...
No, they are not. What all of us who value liberty, choice, and limited government intervention are against is the government forcing someone to have an entirely unnecessary medical procedure done.

I provided you link about ultrasounds, try reading it.
Click to expand...
I read it, it offered me nothing of value.

TheHat said:
That is Planned Parenthood's #1 money maker. Without abortions, they would go belly up.
Click to expand...
No, it is not. Abortion services account for 3%.
 
Last edited:
Zyphlin said:
All this arguing about whether the fetus is or isn't alive has no real baring on this law and its correctness under the laws of the land, because under the law of the land a fetus can not be considered living until I believe the 3rd trimester. You may disagree with that legal standard, but you don't get to pass laws ignoring legal standards simply because you disagree with it.
Click to expand...

Even that is wrong:

Why Young Voters Are Lukewarm on Abortion Rights - Newsweek.com

"...Thirty-eight states now consider it a separate crime to kill a fetus in an act of aggression against a pregnant woman, and just last week Nebraska banned abortions after 20 weeks because of the possibility that the fetus could feel pain..."
Click to expand...

If someone disagrees with the legal standard that the 2nd amendment IS an individual right you don't get to make laws barring people from owning guns and make an argument for the case based on the fact you disagree with what the actual legal standard is.
Click to expand...

I can't even understand the comparison to the gun thingy. The 2 issues, aren't comparable.

I do know this. As medical technology has gotten better, the ability to take a baby from the womb and keep it alive is getting better at younger and younger ages during pregnancy. With that advancement in medical technology, laws are going to be effected, as they already have. As this medical technology, to save lives, gets even better, babies will be kept alive at even earlier and earlier times during pregnancy until babies aren't even carried within the womb. At that point in medical advancement, what will the laws be? This is the future of medical technology folks. This is the route it is taking. Laws are going to change with it, and along with that comes a change in mindset on abortion and a whole host of other life issues b/c at that point, abortion becomes null and avoid does it not? And at that point what will the pro-death crowds chant be to abort babies then, when mothers don't even carry their young in the womb?
 
Deuce said:
Translation: "I'm not going to answer your question because it might expose my inconsistent ideology."

This bill doesn't make abortion illegal, it just makes the process more painful and humiliating and intrusive. You're letting your personal feelings about a legal procedure cloud the issue.



You're swapping cause and effect. Socio-economic factors make the African American population more likely to want an abortion, and setting up abortion clinics in those areas is purely the market responding to a demand. Equating abortion with eugenics is yet another transparent attempt to create an emotional response.
Click to expand...

Um, perhaps you ought to look into the history of your modern day birth control related stuff. Its all based off of eugenics.

I should also point out that abortion brings in very little of Planned Parenthood's revenue.
Click to expand...

****/
 
TheHat said:
Um, perhaps you ought to look into the history of your modern day birth control related stuff. Its all based off of eugenics.



****/
Click to expand...

I don't care what the history is. Suggesting that modern abortion clinics are engaged in a deliberate attempt to kill black people is ludicrous.
 
Deuce said:
I don't care what the history is. Suggesting that modern abortion clinics are engaged in a deliberate attempt to kill black people is ludicrous.
Click to expand...

Really? What about the fact that the majority are in black areas and that their founder was a racist eugenicist?
 
digsbe said:
Really? What about the fact that the majority are in black areas and that their founder was a racist eugenicist?
Click to expand...

Doesnt matter. They want to know what they want to know and that is all there is to it.
 
Deuce said:
I've already addressed this.
Click to expand...

Well the facts are that Planned Parenthood has more clinics in black neighborhood with black women having more abortions. They were also founded by a racist eugenicist.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom