• 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!

Clarifying Time Line - Conception to Birth - DRAW THE LINE OF LIFE

Thumb on the scale?

Originally Posted by southwest88

If you truly think that debating the issues around abortion is all merely spin - Why do you bother?

MrWonderful said:
I counter the malicious lies of the Left wherever I encounter them, and I encounter them everywhere.

http://DemocratsBigLies.blogspot.com
Click to expand...

Yah. Well, gotta tell you, the stuff you're putting up in rejoinder isn't convincing. The material on Sanger is the same old, same old - quotes out of context, meant to paint her as a racist & etc. What I do notice in that posturing - nowhere there does it mention that Sanger was opposed to abortion. She thought if the mother/family didn't want the coming child, the woman should carry to term & put the child up for adoption. But that doesn't fit the desired bloodthirsty image, & so it's passed over.

& in the one photo the blogger (?) seems quite touchy (Sanger speaking @ a KKK meeting) about accusations that the images were photoshopped. It's OK, Sanger actually would go anywhere & talk to anyone about birth control. But I think it's funny that the would-be paragons of virtue have to get big in the throat when their veracity is questioned.
 
Re: Thumb on the scale?

MrWonderful said:
View attachment 67254261
Click to expand...

There's nothing disruptive about valuing women as equal citizens in America and optimizing their participation in society for the betterment of all.

"Geniuses" know this. That's why all the non-religious human rights organizations promote women's rights, including a right to abortion, and do not recognize any rights for the unborn.
 
Re: Thumb on the scale?

There is no "right" to murder helpless, unborn babies. It's your fabrication, as was the "right" to own slaves, when that was "legal" in America.
You will forever be unable to see the truth, because you don't want to see it. Evil is like that.
 
Re: Thumb on the scale?

MrWonderful said:
There is no "right" to murder helpless, unborn babies. It's your fabrication, as was the "right" to own slaves, when that was "legal" in America.
You will forever be unable to see the truth, because you don't want to see it. Evil is like that.
Click to expand...

Correct...it's not murder.

But women do have a right to bodily sovereignty and reproductive choice. So they do have a right, protected by the Constitution, to have an abortion.

Perhaps if you were more open to actually examining the facts on this issue, nearly every single thing you post wouldnt be wrong. Why not try it? Nobody expects you to agree...but just attain an adult level of discourse.
 
Fairly ordinary invective, @ that

MrWonderful said:
There is no "right" to murder helpless, unborn babies. It's your fabrication, as was the "right" to own slaves, when that was "legal" in America.
You will forever be unable to see the truth, because you don't want to see it. Evil is like that.
Click to expand...

Yah. Under Roe v. Wade, abortion in line with the guidelines of Roe isn't murder. Nor is the fetus an unborn baby. It was legal to own slaves in the British colonies in N. America @ the time (& legal in the sugarcane colonies in the Caribbean & in Latin America). The law changed over time - the UK essentially waged war against slavery in Western Civilization, & the US eventually fought the Civil War, which laid the groundwork for outlawing slavery in the US.

If you want to characterize your debate opponents - Evil is like that. - then you've given up all hope of convincing your opponents? I'm amazed, then, that you continue to post. Mere invective isn't going to get you anywhere.
 
Re: Thumb on the scale?

MrWonderful said:
There is no "right" to murder helpless, unborn babies. It's your fabrication, as was the "right" to own slaves, when that was "legal" in America.
You will forever be unable to see the truth, because you don't want to see it. Evil is like that.
Click to expand...

There are no babies being murdered during an abortion.

It’s a fallacy that abortion and slavery have anything in common.

The fact is being forced by law to continue a pregnancy against one’s wishes is the very essence of slavery.


Held to a fate against her will.
Deprived of the right to get out of the situation.
Unable to refuse the work involved.
Receiving no compensation.
That's the very essence of slavery.
Click to expand...


Author -
Kent Pitman
 
Re: Thumb on the scale?

A baby's heart begins beating after six weeks of development.
OF COURSE stopping the beating heart of a developing child isn't "murder" in YOUR world.
But then again, YOUR world cherishes and promotes homosexuality, transgender insanity, *feminism* , a one-word oxymoron, the welfare state, socialism, and defending mass murderers on death row, to protect THEM from execution. YOUR angry, embittered world.
 
Re: Thumb on the scale?

MrWonderful said:
A baby's heart begins beating after six weeks of development.
OF COURSE stopping the beating heart of a developing child isn't "murder" in YOUR world.
But then again, YOUR world cherishes and promotes homosexuality, transgender insanity, *feminism* , a one-word oxymoron, the welfare state, socialism, and defending mass murderers on death row, to protect THEM from execution. YOUR angry, embittered world.
Click to expand...
..
Lursa said:
Correct...it's not murder.

But women do have a right to bodily sovereignty and reproductive choice. So they do have a right, protected by the Constitution, to have an abortion.

Perhaps if you were more open to actually examining the facts on this issue, nearly every single thing you post wouldnt be wrong. Why not try it? Nobody expects you to agree...but just attain an adult level of discourse.
Click to expand...
...

Do you support the govt forcing (by law or otherwise) women to remain pregnant against their will? Yes or no?
 
Re: Thumb on the scale?

MrWonderful said:
A baby's heart begins beating after six weeks of development.
OF COURSE stopping the beating heart of a developing child isn't "murder" in YOUR world.
....
Click to expand...

No babies are being murdered.
And at six weeks the embryos heart, liver , brain , and other organs and systems far from viability.

The heart of an unborn does not and can not function independently from the woman’s bodily systems.

From the following :

While the baby is still in the uterus, his or her lungs are not being used. The baby’s liver is not fully developed. Circulating blood bypasses the lungs and liver by flowing in different pathways and through special openings called shunts.

Blood flow in the unborn baby follows this pathway:

Oxygen and nutrients from the mother's blood are transferred across the placenta to the fetus through the umbilical cord.
This enriched blood flows through the umbilical vein toward the baby’s liver. There it moves through a shunt called the ductus venosus.
This allows some of the blood to go to the liver. But most of this highly oxygenated blood flows to a large vessel called the inferior vena cava and then into the right atrium of the heart.
Here is what happens inside the fetal heart:

When oxygenated blood from the mother enters the right side of the heart it flows into the upper chamber (the right atrium). Most of the blood flows across to the left atrium through a shunt called the foramen ovale.
From the left atrium, blood moves down into the lower chamber of the heart (the left ventricle). It's then pumped into the first part of the large artery coming from the heart (the ascending aorta).
From the aorta, the oxygen-rich blood is sent to the brain and to the heart muscle itself. Blood is also sent to the lower body.
Blood returning to the heart from the fetal body contains carbon dioxide and waste products as it enters the right atrium. It flows down into the right ventricle, where it normally would be sent to the lungs to be oxygenated. Instead, it bypasses the lungs and flows through the ductus arteriosus into the descending aorta, which connects to the umbilical arteries. From there, blood flows back into the placenta. There the carbon dioxide and waste products are released into the mother's circulatory system. Oxygen and nutrients from the mother's blood are transferred across the placenta. Then the cycle starts again.


At birth, major changes take place. The umbilical cord is clamped and the baby no longer receives oxygen and nutrients from the mother. With the first breaths of air, the lungs start to expand, and the ductus arteriosus and the foramen ovale both close. The baby's circulation and blood flow through the heart now function like an adult's.
Click to expand...

Blood Circulation in the Fetus and Newborn - Health Encyclopedia - University of Rochester Medical Center
 
Last edited:
Re: Thumb on the scale?

Mothers pat their beautiful tummies and graciously say, "My baby."

Killers call this precious life "garbage" and destroy it. Bottom line.

https://www.abortionno.org/
 
Re: Thumb on the scale?

MrWonderful said:
Mothers pat their beautiful tummies and graciously say, "My baby."

Killers call this precious life "garbage" and destroy it. Bottom line.

https://www.abortionno.org/
Click to expand...

So you have absolutely no foundation on which to argue your opinion?

Hasn't seemed so thus far.

Just emotional rhetoric, founded in ignorance.

LOL "Facts need not apply" :roll: Self-righteous wallowing must really give low-information people a great high.
 
MrWonderful said:
|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
CONCEPTION________________________________________________________BIRTH


Draw a vertical mark on the above time line showing where, in YOUR opinion, there is a person, a human to the right side of the mark you drew, and NOT a person, NOT a human to the left side of your mark.

Now explain to the very second how immediately left of your mark, it is NOT human, but a nanosecond later, it IS human, a real person.

This is an electrifying concept, this precise time you choose.

Medical doctors, scientists, define death as when a human heart stops beating permanently.
Is not the other side of this determination when a human STARTS beating permanently?

What would you say of a man who DEMANDED that his mistress abort their child? Wouldn't you be against it? Steve McQueen MADE Ali McGraw get an abortion when she wanted to have their baby. What a louse McQueen was.

The opposite of that situation is when a man begs his mistress to have their child, and instead she walks into the abortion clinic and has it murdered.
My brother was a security guard and he saw such men, crying, begging for their children. The fathers have no rights, whether they lose their child, or whether they pay child support for 18 years. No "CHOICE." Neither do 4 grandparents have any choice, any say-so.

Most crucial of all, the baby itself has no CHOICE. And it is NOT his mother's body that is being murdered. It is the baby's body. Unique DNA.

"Before you were conceived in the womb, I knew you." - The Holy Bible
Click to expand...


You describe exactly what Ricardo Montalban described once when he explained why he was pro life. He said, where can I draw the line. Is a baby a human being at one point, but just one day earlier he was not? He said you can keep going back, a day, another day, another day... ....you cannot draw a line. That is when he decided that he cannot be pro-choice.
 
KAG2020 said:
You describe exactly what Ricardo Montalban described once when he explained why he was pro life. He said, where can I draw the line. Is a baby a human being at one point, but just one day earlier he was not? He said you can keep going back, a day, another day, another day... ....you cannot draw a line. That is when he decided that he cannot be pro-choice.
Click to expand...

Thank you, Friend. I personally met Ricardo Montalban in an elevator in Hollywood some years back and exchanged pleasantries with him. So I got that goin' for me.
 
MrWonderful said:
Thank you, Friend. I personally met Ricardo Montalban in an elevator in Hollywood some years back and exchanged pleasantries with him. So I got that goin' for me.
Click to expand...

That's great. They don't make'em like that anymore.
 
Re: Thumb on the scale?

year2late said:
And they tell people "I am going to (future tense) have a baby "
Click to expand...

Where is that baby as they make such a statement? What day does it, in your estimation, magically convert from "garbage" to a baby?
State the exact second and give your "reasoning". You can't. You won't.
 
Re: Thumb on the scale?

MrWonderful said:
Where is that baby as they make such a statement? What day does it, in your estimation, magically convert from "garbage" to a baby?
State the exact second and give your "reasoning". You can't. You won't.
Click to expand...

Never said the fetus was garbage. Don't lie.
 
Re: Thumb on the scale?

MrWonderful said:
Where is that baby as they make such a statement? What day does it, in your estimation, magically convert from "garbage" to a baby?
State the exact second and give your "reasoning". You can't. You won't.
Click to expand...

The fetus is in the uterus. And she will have a baby when it is born. Do you need a physiology lesson?

This is a fetus at about 3 months

3 month fetus.jpg

This is a baby at three months

babies-2-3-months.jpg
 
Re: Thumb on the scale?

year2late said:
Never said the fetus was garbage. Don't lie.
Click to expand...

You would throw it out like so much garbage. You treat it like garbage. Don't pretend otherwise. You're the liar.
 
Re: Thumb on the scale?

year2late said:
The fetus is in the uterus. And she will have a baby when it is born. Do you need a physiology lesson?
Click to expand...


"She will have a baby when it is born." And YOU pretend to be able to give physiology lessons?

Split the line, split the second between when it is disposable, and when it becomes a baby. Split the second and provide your rationale.
Nobody has done that yet because of the obvious implication that no second differentiates a baby from a "fetus." You can't split the second because from the moment that child is conceived, it becomes a new person - a newly combined and unique bundle of DNA. Leftists are so enamoured of their own lies that they think men can become women and vice versa.
 
Re: Thumb on the scale?

MrWonderful said:
"She will have a baby when it is born." And YOU pretend to be able to give physiology lessons?

Split the line, split the second between when it is disposable, and when it becomes a baby. Split the second and provide your rationale.
Nobody has done that yet because of the obvious implication that no second differentiates a baby from a "fetus." You can't split the second because from the moment that child is conceived, it becomes a new person - a newly combined and unique bundle of DNA. Leftists are so enamoured of their own lies that they think men can become women and vice versa.
Click to expand...

So zygote,embryo, and fetus are bad words?
 
Re: Thumb on the scale?

MrWonderful said:
"She will have a baby when it is born." And YOU pretend to be able to give physiology lessons?

Split the line, split the second between when it is disposable, and when it becomes a baby. Split the second and provide your rationale.
Nobody has done that yet because of the obvious implication that no second differentiates a baby from a "fetus." You can't split the second because from the moment that child is conceived, it becomes a new person - a newly combined and unique bundle of DNA. Leftists are so enamoured of their own lies that they think men can become women and vice versa.
Click to expand...

Nah, no one has bothered to cut the baby in half to share it evenly with the two claimants because fetal viability is a moving goal. Roe v. Wade established viability as the bright line between fetus & person (in the legal sense). But viability itself depends upon where the woman is - in a hospital? On her own out in the back of beyond? With trained medical personnel & the resources of a hospital ICU (or neonatal ICU, if needed), viability pushes closer to the shortest gestation period possible. & with no access to modern medical personnel nor technology, viability pushes away, to the longest gestational period for the fetus.

There's also condition to consider. Is the woman basically healthy? Is the fetus? If the woman or fetus (or both) are suffering from long-term or severe medical problems, the successful outcome of a pregnancy also suffers. You're asking for a clear-cut black & white line - life isn't that compartmentalized. Nor is life that mechanical - this line of argument reminds me of the old clockwork universe conception of the World - that went out with the deists during the Enlightenment (Europe, 18th century).
 
Re: Thumb on the scale?

MrWonderful said:
You would throw it out like so much garbage. You treat it like garbage. Don't pretend otherwise. You're the liar.
Click to expand...

Perhaps you should read year2lates posts. She has said repeatedly that she does not like abortion and would not have one.
 
Re: Thumb on the scale?

MrWonderful said:
You would throw it out like so much garbage. You treat it like garbage. Don't pretend otherwise. You're the liar.
Click to expand...

Scrabaholic said:
Perhaps you should read year2lates posts. She has said repeatedly that she does not like abortion and would not have one.
Click to expand...

Seriously.

I literally risked my life to maintain my pregnancy through several major complications during a pregnancy that was initially unwanted.

I did not chose abortion early on when the pregnancy was not wanted. I did not chose abortion when my life was in danger.

I think that is why I am so clearly pro-choice. I was expected to have an uncomplicated pregnancy. I was healthy, active, good age, stable employment, great insurance. Good social resources. By the time all was said and done, I was off nearly 6 months due to complications. I had kidney and vascular complications. A required c section with general anesthesia.
I went heavily in debt...my employer kept my job open for me.....but COBRA was massive, not to mention putting nearly everything else on credit. If I did not have the ability to borrow and poor social resources....I could have been living in a shelter and lost my insurance. Who am I to judge what another woman should risk. I was in a good position and things went to crap. Most of the women who chose abortion don't come close to the resources I had.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom