• 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!

[W: 594] A great question for pro abortion types

Re: A great question for pro abortion types

I'm not too sure what you are writing of when you state I have no right to the medical situation of a mother. What have I written that makes you think I believe I have that right? I write of the state of being pregnant and the consequence thereof. I have no individual in mind when I write. I merely write about the universal practice.
Regards,
CP
If you have no right to know, then neither should the government, so there would be no way to enforce laws on pregnant women having an abortion, since you allow for exceptions.

Sent from my SM-N970U using Tapatalk
 
Re: A great question for pro abortion types

Curious, I have heard the argument that women's rights may not be unabridged(even from some in this thread), and that the choice of abortion, even for convenience is hers alone, from the pro-abortion group. Where do you think the unborn not being person's argument stems from?
You haven't heard that, and further, you don't agree with it?
Regards,
CP

Roe was decided regarding a right to privacy between the pregnant woman and her doctor.

Some argue it’s women’s rights but it really a right to privacy.

Just like religious beliefs are a right to privacy.

And parents have a right to privacy regarding where to send their child to school.

Parents may choose a private or religious school or even home school a child instead of sending their child to a public school provided by their state and local district.

An unborn has never been counted in the US census.

An unborn has never had any rights.

Rights are only bestowed upon birth.

Once born the infant becomes a person. If born in the US it is a US citizen with all of the rights of US citizens.
 
Re: A great question for pro abortion types

That pregnancy ought to have been terminated early on. There are many ways to do that.
Once a child is viable, way too long after the incidence, then that child ought not be killed.
Regards,
CP

Ok, I read your sentence wrong then. My apologies.
 
Re: A great question for pro abortion types

If you have no right to know, then neither should the government, so there would be no way to enforce laws on pregnant women having an abortion, since you allow for exceptions.

Sent from my SM-N970U using Tapatalk

I have no right, certainly so. I am not the government. But, I assure you that society has justice because the executive division has information neither you or I have, or entitled. If Society outlaws abortion on demand, barring the exceptions of in-viability of the fetus, physical health of the mother(that is: with valid medical reason) and incest or rape, they will know. As you know; we pay them to enforce law.
Regards,
CP
 
Re: A great question for pro abortion types

Roe was decided regarding a right to privacy between the pregnant woman and her doctor.

Some argue it’s women’s rights but it really a right to privacy.

Just like religious beliefs are a right to privacy.

And parents have a right to privacy regarding where to send their child to school.

Parents may choose a private or religious school or even home school a child instead of sending their child to a public school provided by their state and local district.

An unborn has never been counted in the US census.

An unborn has never had any rights.

Rights are only bestowed upon birth.

Once born the infant becomes a person. If born in the US it is a US citizen with all of the rights of US citizens.

I have to admit; I thought you of a different cloth than the wailing zealots. I am sadly surprised. Nonetheless -

Roe was decided regarding a right to privacy between the pregnant woman and her doctor.

If that were the extent of it, you could not argue abortion was any part of that. HEPA does that.

Regards,
CP
 
Re: A great question for pro abortion types

I have to admit; I thought you of a different cloth than the wailing zealots. I am sadly surprised. Nonetheless -

Roe was decided regarding a right to privacy between the pregnant woman and her doctor.

If that were the extent of it, you could not argue abortion was any part of that. HEPA does that.

Regards,
CP

States have a right to protect citizens from unsafe medical procedures.

When states first passed anti abortion laws abortions were unsafe for woman (the citizen ).

But the 1970s medical abortions before viability were safer for the woman than pregnancy or childbirth.

Therefore states may no longer ban abortions before viability as an unsafe medical procedure.

By the way

Row was passed in 1973.

HIPPA laws were not passed until 1996.

23 years later.
 
Last edited:
Re: A great question for pro abortion types

States have a right to protect citizens from unsafe medical procedures.

When states first passed anti abortion laws abortions were unsafe for woman (the citizen ).

But the 1970s medical abortions before viability were safer for the woman than pregnancy or childbirth.

Therefore states may no longer ban abortions before viability as an unsafe medical procedure.

By the way

Row was passed in 1973.

HIPPA laws were not passed until 1996.

23 years later.

Respectfully, I don't think you have truly considered what abortion on demand truly encompasses in your reply. I doubt you not; but wonder of the company you keep. I may be wrong, but there it is.
By the way, I apologize for my acronym blunder. Certainly, HIPPA was what I intended to write.
Regards,
CP
 
Re: A great question for pro abortion types

Respectfully, I don't think you have truly considered what abortion on demand truly encompasses in your reply. I doubt you not; but wonder of the company you keep. I may be wrong, but there it is.
By the way, I apologize for my acronym blunder. Certainly, HIPPA was what I intended to write.
Regards,
CP

I understand elective abortion has saved the lives of many women.
It has also reduced the rate of abortions.

The legal abortion rate in the US is less now than when it was made legal in the 1973.

From a high rate of over 32 in the early 1980s

We have reduced them to a rate of 14.6 in 2014.

In countries where elective abortions are legal there are less abortions than in countries where abortion are more restrictive.
 
Last edited:
Re: A great question for pro abortion types

Respectfully, I don't think you have truly considered what abortion on demand truly encompasses in your reply. I doubt you not; but wonder of the company you keep. I may be wrong, but there it is.
By the way, I apologize for my acronym blunder. Certainly, HIPPA was what I intended to write.
Regards,
CP

Do you really understand how women were greatly harmed and how hard doctors had to work to save the life’s of the women who were harmed from the damage that occurred before Roe ?

Here are a few snips from an Essay by a retired doctor who spent his early training in New York City from 1948 to 1953 helping to repair the damage done by the pregnant woman herself, or illegal abortionists.

From the following :
Repairing the Damage, Before Roe


< SNIP>

I am a retired gynecologist, in my mid-80s. My early formal training in my specialty was spent in New York City, from 1948 to 1953, in two of the city’s large municipal hospitals.

There I saw and treated almost every complication of illegal abortion that one could conjure,
done either by the patient herself or by an abortionist — often unknowing, unskilled and probably uncaring.
Yet the patient never told us who did the work, or where and under what conditions it was performed. She was in dire need of our help to complete the process or, as frequently was the case, to correct what damage might have been done.

< SNIP>

The worst case I saw, and one I hope no one else will ever have to face, was that of a nurse who was admitted with what looked like a partly delivered umbilical cord. Yet as soon as we examined her, we realized that what we thought was the cord was in fact part of her intestine, which had been hooked and torn by whatever implement had been used in the abortion.
It took six hours of surgery to remove the infected uterus and ovaries and repair the part of the bowel that was still functional.

It is important to remember that Roe v. Wade did not mean that abortions could be performed. They have always been done, dating from ancient Greek days.

What Roe said was that ending a pregnancy could be carried out by medical personnel, in a medically accepted setting, thus conferring on women, finally, the full rights of first-class citizens — and freeing their doctors to treat them as such.


ESSAY: Repairing the damage done before Roe - The San Diego Union-Tribune
 
Last edited:
Re: A great question for pro abortion types

Do you really understand how women were greatly harmed and how hard doctors had to work to save the life’s of the women who were harmed from the damage that occurred before Roe ?

Here are a few snips from an Essay by a retired doctor who spent his early training in New York City from 1948 to 1953 helping to repair the damage done by the pregnant woman herself, or illegal abortionists.

From the following :



ESSAY: Repairing the damage done before Roe - The San Diego Union-Tribune

I believe the active discussion is post Roe v Wade, isn't it?
Regards,
CP
 
Re: A great question for pro abortion types

I have no right, certainly so. I am not the government. But, I assure you that society has justice because the executive division has information neither you or I have, or entitled. If Society outlaws abortion on demand, barring the exceptions of in-viability of the fetus, physical health of the mother(that is: with valid medical reason) and incest or rape, they will know. As you know; we pay them to enforce law.
Regards,
CP

So they should have a right to invade a womans medical and even personal life? Why? Should women be forced to take periodic pregnancy tests just to make sure they arent pregnant and may have an abortion? Are you also going to advocate that women who are pregnant cannot leave the country to have an abortion and then claim it is a miscarriage? And talk about big brother.

Of course the likelihood of the US government changing our laws across the country to make abortion completely illegal is very small, as it would most likely require a Constitutional Amendment that you do not have the support for.

Sent from my SM-N970U using Tapatalk
 
Re: A great question for pro abortion types

I have to admit; I thought you of a different cloth than the wailing zealots. I am sadly surprised. Nonetheless -

Roe was decided regarding a right to privacy between the pregnant woman and her doctor.

If that were the extent of it, you could not argue abortion was any part of that. HEPA does that.

Regards,
CP
HIPAA laws are very important and should not be violated in favor of those whom our constitution does not even provide rights for.

And those laws would have to be trampled all over when it comes to women and the government trying to enforce laws against abortion.

Sent from my SM-N970U using Tapatalk
 
Re: A great question for pro abortion types

I believe the active discussion is post Roe v Wade, isn't it?
Regards,
CP

I guess you failed to understand that before Roe women were so desperate not to continue their pregnancy they risked their health and their very lives seeking an illegal unsanitary abortion.

I quoted the part in the story about the nurse whose intestine had gotten hooked on the abortion implement and had been pulled out through her cervix. The doctors had tried to repair it as well as they could.
The doctors saved her life but she would never be able to have another pregnancy later in life if she wanted to.

A nurse would know the dangers of seeking an illegal abortion more than the average women yet she was that desperate she went ahead with the illegal abortion because it was before Roe and safe legal elective abortions were not available in the United States before Roe.

After Roe passed women are able to get safe ( for the woman ) sterile legal elective abortions.

They can choose to put off giving birth until after marriage or until their health is better or they can provide a safe place for a little one etc.

If Roe was dismantled and abortion were illegal again women would still have abortions, but the abortions would no longer be safe for woman.
Doctors would again be tasked with repairing the damage from illegal abortions.
 
Re: A great question for pro abortion types

If she decided she didnt want a baby why didnt her and her pardner be responsible and have safe sex???? Killing a baby is murder and for the reason she and her pardner were not responsible???????????

1. non of your damned business if she or if she didn't use contraceptives. No contraceptive is 100% full proof.

2. killing a baby can be murder, but abortion is not killing babies, it is aborting ZEF's.

3. the reason why a woman aborts is also none of your damned business.
 
Re: A great question for pro abortion types

Which is greater, the life of the baby or a womans "rights"??????

ZEF's do not have rights, women have. So in the early part of the pregnancy the rights are 100% with the woman.
 
Re: A great question for pro abortion types

But it is in the eyes of God. Ever think of that???

Who cares about that? That is down to every women herself. Not the business of the government.
 
Re: A great question for pro abortion types

But sadly these days it seems women are so self centered they would rather live and kill their baby.

Abortion has nothing to do with killing of babies.
 
Re: A great question for pro abortion types

And I'll say it again:NONE of those "mishaps" is grounds for murder (which you abortionists call "abortion".

That there is total :bs

And we pro-lifers call it freedom of choice, which has nothing to do with murder. That is pro-life extremist talk and well, they often tell untruths and you are guilty of that too.
 
Re: A correction

Great, I suspect you are terrified that that miscarriage of "justice" will be rectified. Those of us who recognize murder when we see it, prefer to use the actual terminology.

There has not been a miscarriage of justice and for that reason does not need to be rectified.

And even if the extreme right idiots on the court scrap Roe V. Wade, not a whole lot will change for large majorities of the US public. Just the most anti-freedom states will start banning abortion and will suffer the consequences of that choice.
 
Re: A great question for pro abortion types

Actually, I do. But that does not negate that the killing of a defenseless human being as a birth control method, no matter how effective (100%), is still murder.

Clearly you have no clue what the word murder means. You do know how to spread pro-life lies though.
 
Actually I do. The problem is you hide your murderous ways by calling it abortion.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Re: A great question for pro abortion types

Actually, I do. But that does not negate that the killing of a defenseless human being as a birth control method, no matter how effective (100%), is still murder.

OK call a fetus a human being and abortion murder if makes you feel righteous and superior to speak scornfully of whores who get abortions.

Here's a suggestion. You pass a law banning abortions. And we'll pass a law jailing you for whining about paying for all the poor children you produced by banning abortion.

It's a win-win solution. You get to force women into producing children. And everybody else gets relief from your incessant whining about lazy, cheating poor families that won't work, sit around drinking beer and sucking down your hard earned money.
 
Are you really as ignorant as you post? The ONLY one MAKING a woman have a baby is the woman herself.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Back
Top Bottom