• 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!

Arkansas to ban abortion at 12 weeks, earliest in nation [W:1036:1154]

minnie616 said:
The day you were born you became a person.
Even premies who are born two months or more early are persons. Your argument is invalid.

Abortions after the limit of viability are very rare.
Only .08 percent of all abortions in this country take place after 24 weeks gestation ( which is the limit of viability).

They are the extreme cases. The cases where the woman's life is at risk or where irreparable damage to a major bodily function would take place if the pregnancy were allowed to continue, where the fetus died a natural death in the womb and it was not expelled ( yes, the removal of dead fetus and the fetal material is called an abortion and would counted in .08 percent if it was removed after the 24 week gestation mark) the cases where the fetus would be stillborn or is so malformed it will only live a few minutes or hours.

There were 323 legal abortions in Kansas in 2008 that took place after 22 weeks gestation.
191 of those of fetuses were not viaible. They had died in the womb, would be stillborn or were so deformed they would only live a few hours or minutes.
131 of those abortions were because irreparable damage to a major bodily function would take place if the pregnancy were allowed to continue. Those cases were extreme cases.
Click to expand...

Yeah but who are you to determine that?

I've already given examples of woman having their fetuses murdered and the perpetrator being charged, prosecuted and convicted of murder.

You just cant say and be correct that "the second a fetus is born its and individual or person" because there is already legal precedence that proves otherwise.
 
minnie616 said:
A mother and a child are two individuals but a woman and the fetus are not two separate entities until birth.

I had 6 pregnancies and I have 4 children. I know the difference between a fetus and a child.
Click to expand...

Yes - is it really so hard to understand how pregnancy works?

It's not rocket science.
 
minnie616 said:
A mother and a child are two individuals but a woman and the fetus are not two separate entities until birth.

I had 6 pregnancies and I have 4 children. I know the difference between a fetus and a child.
Click to expand...

Yes they are two separate entities....

A child is not an body part of the mother - hence they are two separate entities.

If I stick my hand up a chicks yahoo does it make me and her the same entity?
 
Cable said:
Life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. That could be interpreted as anti-abortion.
The unborn child is certainly a life, is alive.
The unborn child is genetically a unique individual, so is not "a part of the mothers body." The child is a unique individual within the mothers body. That is a scientific fact.
Currently the law allows for the woman to decide whether to kill this unique life within her body, up to a point.
The pivotal point of decision would appear to be "when is that unique body actually a human being." This point is usually set in a very arbitrary fashion by most people.
For me, I believe it is a unique human life at conception. It is at that point everything it is ever going to be, in process.
But there are those who will say until it can walk around on it's own, it is not a viable human being and is therefore not human.
It is a very God-like decision to be making in my mind, to decide when a human life is actually human. Especially when that human existence hinges on the outcome of our decisions.
Would it not make sense to err on the side of caution?

--------->Or are we really smart enough to know the exact point of humanity?
Click to expand...

you list yourself as a conservative, and you see i am getting fire from YOU ,as well as LIBERALS.

oh i am smart enough, its just those here who are not smart enough to answer, my questions.......i exclude<-- you from them...
 
Mr.Nick said:
Yes they are two separate entities....

A child is not an body part of the mother - hence they are two separate entities.
Click to expand...

The fetus and umbilical cord is attached to the woman. It is a part of the woman's life and until viability it does not have a life of its own.

If the woman dies a pre viable fetus will die with her. Once the fetus reaches viability it has good chance of surviving the woman's death if it is removed immediately and given medical aid if needed.
 
Last edited:
ernst barkmann said:
you list yourself as a conservative, and you see i am getting fire from YOU ,as well as LIBERALS.

oh i am smart enough, its just those here who are not smart enough to answer, my questions.......i exclude<-- you from them...
Click to expand...

Dude libertarians can't be pro-choice. That violates the basic principals of being a libertarian - the right to life - the right to individualism.

As far as I'm concerned abortion should be treated as murder.

Government shouldn't be legalizing or endorsing murder, however they are with death panels and abortion.
 
Mr.Nick said:
Dude libertarians can't be pro-choice. That violates the basic principals of being a libertarian - the right to life - the right to individualism.

As far as I'm concerned abortion should be treated as murder.

Government shouldn't be legalizing or endorsing murder, however they are with death panels and abortion.
Click to expand...

i have to tell you are some pro-choice libertarians, they exist, libertarians,--------> main stay is....... government is to be limited.

but to put your mind at ease.......i am not for abortion.

i was playing on words with liberals to make themselves contradict what they believe in.....and they do.
 
minnie616 said:
The fetus and umbilical cord is attached to the woman. It is a part of the woman's life and until viability it does not have a life it own.

If the woman dies a pre viable fetus will die with her. Once the fetus reaches viability it has good chance of surviving the woman's death if it is removed immediately and given medical aid if needed.
Click to expand...

Can you give me an example of a "pre-viable fetus?"

I've heard of 3-month old fetuses living outside their mothers womb and surviving. The same individuals that could have been aborted.

Now, attempting to claim a fetus is a body part because of the umbilical cord is loony... If I put a straw in my mouth and stick it into another individuals mouth does that make me a body part?

Also, lets not forget an umbilical cord is not even a body part, nor is the placenta.
 
ernst barkmann said:
i have to tell you are some pro-choice libertarians, they exist, libertarians,--------> main stay is....... government is to be limited.

but to put your mind at ease.......i am not for abortion.

i was playing on words with liberals to make themselves contradict what they believe in.....and they do.
Click to expand...

I'm a libertarian/classical liberal so I really don't see how a libertarian could be pro-choice on abortion considering the premise is to murder another individual. I know there are all types of libertarians out there so the term "libertarian" is subjective. However obviously we all agree on limited government intervention, but isn't Roe vs Wade government intervention? I think it most certainly is. So beyond the whole murder concept of abortion it still violates the principals of my brand of libertarian(ism).

Also us libertarians shouldn't refer to progressives as "liberals" because we're literal liberals and "liberals" they give us a bad name... Progressives have turned "liberal" into a dirty name.
 
Mr.Nick said:
Can you give me an example of a "pre-viable fetus?"

I've heard of 3-month old fetuses living outside their mothers womb and surviving. The same individuals that could have been aborted.

Now, attempting to claim a fetus is a body part because of the umbilical cord is loony... If I put a straw in my mouth and stick it into another individuals mouth does that make me a body part?

Also, lets not forget an umbilical cord is not even a body part, nor is the placenta.
Click to expand...

The earliest surviving preemie was Amilia Homestead who was born at 22 weeks. . . a 3-month old fetus would be 13 weeks.

Earliest surviving preemie to stay in hospital - Health - Children's health | NBC News
 
Mr.Nick said:
I'm a libertarian/classical liberal so I really don't see how a libertarian could be pro-choice on abortion considering the premise is to murder another individual. I know there are all types of libertarians out there so the term "libertarian" is subjective. However obviously we all agree on limited government intervention, but isn't Roe vs Wade government intervention? I think it most certainly is. So beyond the whole murder concept of abortion it still violates the principals of my brand of libertarian(ism).

Also us libertarians shouldn't refer to progressives as "liberals" because we're literal liberals and "liberals" they give us a bad name... Progressives have turned "liberal" into a dirty name.
Click to expand...

a liberal is a progressive.

classical liberalism died in america after the civil war.

progressives came into being about 1890, , and you see them with TR, AND W. WILSON.

however the term progressive faded, and they took of the title of liberal.

the founders were classical liberals, as are libertarians today.

remember, that nothing always fits into one little neat box, i have heard of pro choice libertarians.....its a debate of .....right over your own body, and a right to life.
 
minnie616 said:
The murder of the fetus which is feticide.
Click to expand...

I'm sure some states will call it that. I'm really not concerned or care about the language considering feticide is the same as homicide and carries the same penalty... Of course - that is - only when the mother wants the child.

You can split hairs all you like, but that doesn't change the fact individuals are prosecuted all the time for killing what you refer to as NOT a valid form of life.
 
Mr.Nick said:
I'm sure some states will call it that. I'm really not concerned or care about the language considering feticide is the same as homicide and carries the same penalty... Of course - that is - only when the mother wants the child.

You can split hairs all you like, but that doesn't change the fact individuals are prosecuted all the time for killing what you refer to as NOT a valid form of life.
Click to expand...

Also, there are plenty that call both murder. For example, the CA Penal Code calls both murder.

Pilot said:
Example:

CALIFORNIA PENAL CODE

187. (a) Murder is the unlawful killing of a human being, or a
fetus, with malice aforethought.
(b) This section shall not apply to any person who commits an act
that results in the death of a fetus if any of the following apply:
(1) The act complied with the Therapeutic Abortion Act, Article 2
(commencing with Section 123400) of Chapter 2 of Part 2 of Division
106 of the Health and Safety Code.
(2) The act was committed by a holder of a physician's and surgeon'
s certificate, as defined in the Business and Professions Code, in a
case where, to a medical certainty, the result of childbirth would be
death of the mother of the fetus or where her death from childbirth,
although not medically certain, would be substantially certain or
more likely than not.
(3) The act was solicited, aided, abetted, or consented to by the
mother of the fetus.
(c) Subdivision (b) shall not be construed to prohibit the
prosecution of any person under any other provision of law.
Click to expand...
 
ernst barkmann said:
a liberal is a progressive.

classical liberalism died in america after the civil war.

progressives came into being about 1890, , and you see them with TR, AND W. WILSON.

however the term progressive faded, and they took of the title of liberal.

the founders were classical liberals, as are libertarians today.

remember, that nothing always fits into one little neat box, i have heard of pro choice libertarians.....its a debate of .....right over your own body, and a right to life.
Click to expand...

Liberalism is the separation from authoritarianism, these modern day progressives are obviously authoritarian, with their attacks on guns, fast food, soda et al, and the way they want government to regulate everything in authoritarian fashion. Then of course you have people label libertarians "anarchists" for the simple fact we believe in limited government (Bill of Rights)...

I agree with and am highly educated on everything else you posted.

I'm still a classical liberal, so are a lot of people - they just don't know it.

As far as the rise of the progressive, their plights and their pseudo-patriotic ideas - I wrote a 500+ page thesis on the topic.
 
Mr.Nick said:
Liberalism is the separation from authoritarianism, these modern day progressives are obviously authoritarian, with their attacks on guns, fast food, soda et al, and the way they want government to regulate everything in authoritarian fashion. Then of course you have people label libertarians "anarchists" for the simple fact we believe in limited government (Bill of Rights)...

I agree with and am highly educated on everything else you posted.

I'm still a classical liberal, so are a lot of people - they just don't know it.

As far as the rise of the progressive, their plights and their pseudo-patriotic ideas - I wrote a 500+ page thesis on the topic.
Click to expand...

i dont share the idea of anarchists.

anarchy is no government, no law at all, we have to have some government, as Madison says" if men were angels no government would be nessary".....but men are not angels.

even the Greeks of the past say ..." without government there is no freedom"

Definition of ANARCHY

a : absence of government
b : a state of lawlessness or political disorder due to the absence of governmental authority
c : a utopian society of individuals who enjoy complete freedom without government<-------------------not possible

a : absence or denial of any authority or established order
b : absence of order : disorder <not manicured plots but a wild anarchy of nature — Israel Shenker>
 
Pilot said:
Also, there are plenty that call both murder. For example, the CA Penal Code calls both murder.
Click to expand...

Absolutely... All states have different codes, despite what a state calls "feticide" it's still treated as homicide. That's why the language used is irrelevant to me.
 
ernst barkmann said:
i dont share the idea of anarchists.

anarchy is no government, no law at all, we have to have some government, as Madison says" if men were angels no government would be nessary".....but men are not angels.

even the Greeks of the past say ..." without government there is no freedom"

Definition of ANARCHY

a : absence of government
b : a state of lawlessness or political disorder due to the absence of governmental authority
c : a utopian society of individuals who enjoy complete freedom without government<-------------------not possible

a : absence or denial of any authority or established order
b : absence of order : disorder <not manicured plots but a wild anarchy of nature — Israel Shenker>
Click to expand...

I know all about anarchy - anarchy is impossible to achieve - it's impossible to exist. The simple reason is because there will always be a leader. Hell even these nutty anarchists have a leader when they go smashing up neighborhoods to protest stuff like G8. There is always someone yelling orders out of bullhorns.. Smashing stuff because someone told you to smash stuff is not anarchy it's stupidity, conformity and obedience.

The term anarchist organization is an oxymoron yet I get this via google search:

List of anarchist organizations - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 
Mr.Nick said:
Liberalism is the separation from authoritarianism, these modern day progressives are obviously authoritarian, with their attacks on guns, fast food, soda et al, and the way they want government to regulate everything in authoritarian fashion. Then of course you have people label libertarians "anarchists" for the simple fact we believe in limited government (Bill of Rights)...

I agree with and am highly educated on everything else you posted.

I'm still a classical liberal, so are a lot of people - they just don't know it.

As far as the rise of the progressive, their plights and their pseudo-patriotic ideas - I wrote a 500+ page thesis on the topic.
Click to expand...

Liberal is progressive. The lack of gun laws under Bush have created an escalation of deaths to children. This is simply unacceptable to the democratic Christians. As such, it is only right to return to the gun laws initiated by Reagan and continued through Clinton. The definition of insanity is to keep doing the same thing over and over (repealing gun laws under republicans and Bush) and expecting a different outcome (less deaths by military style guns and not including ALL guns sales in registration and background checks.).
 
Mr.Nick said:
?..

Now, attempting to claim a fetus is a body part because of the umbilical cord is loony... .
Click to expand...



I did not say a fetus is a body part I said the fetus is attached to the woman. I said a pre viable fetus cannot live apart from the woman and that it was not a separate entity until it is born.
 
Mr.Nick said:
Also, lets not forget an umbilical cord is not even a body part, nor is the placenta.
Click to expand...

Just HOW much do you NOT know about pregnancy and the human body?

Because my God - I think you need to read some books.
 
Muddy Creek said:
Liberal is progressive. The lack of gun laws under Bush have created an escalation of deaths to children. This is simply unacceptable to the democratic Christians. As such, it is only right to return to the gun laws initiated by Reagan and continued through Clinton. The definition of insanity is to keep doing the same thing over and over (repealing gun laws under republicans and Bush) and expecting a different outcome (less deaths by military style guns and not including ALL guns sales in registration and background checks.).
Click to expand...

A liberal is not a progressive... Progressives are fascists. What are they progressing to and what do they want? a government that dictates outcome with authoritarian fascist rule..

That's not liberalism. Liberalism is the exact opposite of that.

Anyone who wants the central government to dictate outcomes via bans and regulations is NOT a liberal they are authoritarian fascists.

As far as guns - I could care less if the slime of the earth gangsters cant behave. Maybe if drive by's are normal in your neighborhood you shouldn't live there? because you may a well be putting yourself in front of a gun. It's not responsible folks fault gangsters are killing people, nor is it their fault wacko's shoot up movie theaters for their 10 seconds of fame, infamy and the idea they will go down in history. This is a nation of 300,000,000 people and there are a lot of nuts and hard core gangsters out there who are delusional or don't value life at all.. The gun isn't the problem the psychos are.

If you want my opinion, I think progressives and the progressive media uses these psycho nutters as cannon fodder and glorifies this murder **** to breed more - because they can't get enough of it.

Also, if you think a gangster (who commit 99.9% of the homicides) gives two ****s about a gun ban you're mistaken. Those cats could care less. like they're just going to turn in their weapons - like I will just turn in my weapons.
 
Aunt Spiker said:
Just HOW much do you NOT know about pregnancy and the human body?

Because my God - I think you need to read some books.
Click to expand...

Are girls born with an umbilical cord and placenta in their bodies?

Do you know physiology or do you just pretend that you do to boost your ego?
 
Mr.Nick said:
A liberal is not a progressive... Progressives are fascists. What are they progressing to and what do they want? a government that dictates outcome with authoritarian fascist rule..

That's not liberalism. Liberalism is the exact opposite of that.

Anyone who wants the central government to dictate outcomes via bans and regulations is NOT a liberal they are authoritarian fascists.

As far as guns - I could care less if the slime of the earth gangsters cant behave. Maybe if drive by's are normal in your neighborhood you shouldn't live there? because you may a well be putting yourself in front of a gun. It's not responsible folks fault gangsters are killing people, no is it their fault wacko's shoot up movie theaters for their 10 seconds of fame and the idea they will go down in history. This is a nation of 300,000,000 people and there are a lot of nuts and hard core gangsters out there who are delusional or don't value life at all.. The gun isn't the problem the psychos are.

If you want my opinion, I think progressives and the progressive media uses these psycho nutters as cannon fodder and glorifies this murder **** to breed more - because they can't get enough of it.

Also, if you think a gangster (who commit 99.9% of the homicides) gives two ****s about a gun ban you're mistaken. Those cats could care less. like they're just going to turn in their weapons - like I will just turn in my weapons.
Click to expand...

Progressive Democrats of America

Progressive Democrats of America

Progressive Democrats of America was founded in 2004 to transform the Democratic Party and our country. We seek to build a party and government controlled by citizens, not corporate elites-with policies that serve the broad public interest, not just private interests. As a grassroots PAC operating inside the Democratic Party, and outside in movements for peace and justice, PDA played a key role in the stunning electoral victories of November 2006 and 2008. Our inside/outside strategy is guided by the belief that a lasting majority will require a revitalized Democratic Party built on firm progressive principles.

For over two decades, the party declined as its leadership listened more to the voices of corporations than those of Americans. PDA strives to rebuild the Democratic Party from the bottom up-from every congressional district to statewide party structures to the corridors of power in Washington, where we work arm in arm with the Congressional Progressive Caucus. In just a couple of years PDA and its allies have shaken up the political status-quo on issues from ending the Iraq war, voter rights, protecting Social Security, a full employment economy, national healthcare and economic justice.
Click to expand...

fas·cism
/ˈfaSHizəm/
Noun

An authoritarian and nationalistic right-wing system of government and social organization.
(in general use) Extreme right-wing, authoritarian, or intolerant views or practice.
Click to expand...

As to the criminals in this nation, they legally buy their guns now at gun shows and on the internet where NO background check is currently required. If you think background checks won't hinder the supply of guns to criminals, then you've not studied the issue at all.

BTW, next time let's agree on the definitions of the political spectrums of the two parties before we talk about them. Agreed?

As you can see from the above, the progressives ARE like liberals and the fascists like the current right wing.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom