Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
My apologies. I need to slow down sometimes.Then you did misread my post. Good to know.
My point was that the bodily autonomy of an individual should be the concern and responsibility of the person in question and that using the government to interfere with that bodily autonomy should be severely limited.That's a bit of a misrepresentation. He is concerned about rights, namely the human rights of the embryo/fetus. He thinks that it should have legal rights and should be protected from harm. Personally, I can sympathize with that, even if I don't think legal rights should be conferred to a human organism that hasn't even achieved sentience yet.
If enough people like him manage to change the laws to give the unborn legal rights, then we have to accommodate those rights somehow, while still preserving the mother's rights... somehow.
If the interpretation of a psalm is so imprecise, why trot it out to bolster one’s argument?That's where we get off topic because there are literally thousands if not billions of different interpretations per person.
Is the one you want to kill outside of your body? If so, it's no longer your call.That's like saying don't kill someone. It's that simple.
Beyond that, it's not your call.
Makes no sense.
In the body, outside the body, it's still a person.Is the one you want to kill outside of your body? If so, it's no longer your call.
See, that's the critical difference.
-- A2SG, kind of a jurisdictional thing, sorta....
Well, not quite. Not yet, anyway. A zygote can't live outside of a womb, so it's pretty much up to the woman how her womb is used.In the body, outside the body, it's still a person.
Roughly half of all pregnancies end before birth, even without anyone intending it to end. The human reproductive system doesn't guarantee birth for all fertilized ova, let alone zygotes.No one has the right to kill anyone. Point blank. Period.
Kinda is. Her body, her decision. The law can try to override her decisions, but ultimately, its ability to demand control over her medical decisions is pretty limited.No, it's not a "jurisdictional thing."
I don't agree with the whole "her body, her choice." She had sex, she knew what she was doing.Well, not quite. Not yet, anyway. A zygote can't live outside of a womb, so it's pretty much up to the woman how her womb is used.
Roughly half of all pregnancies end before birth, even without anyone intending it to end. The human reproductive system doesn't guarantee birth for all fertilized ova, let alone zygotes.
Kinda is. Her body, her decision. The law can try to override her decisions, but ultimately, its ability to demand control over her medical decisions is pretty limited.
-- A2SG, some states just try harder to override a woman's personal freedoms and liberties.....
So that gives the state the right to override her personal rights and liberties, and demand her body be used against her will?I don't agree with the whole "her body, her choice." She had sex, she knew what she was doing.
The state doesn't have the ability to guarantee every fertilized ova gets to survive to birth. Roughly half of all pregnancies end spontaneously, no matter what anyone intends. So who protects this "right" you feel fertilized ova have?It's a child. Period. It has a right to life. Period.
No problem. Don't have an abortion. No one will ever force you to have one.I stand by what I said. Pro-life through and through.
No one's trying to.No liberal agenda can change my mind.
God bless you
Can it breathe on it's own?A child, newborn child, can't live without the help of others. Does that make it right to kill it? Of course not. That whole argument falls flat then.
It still depends on others to take care of it. It cannot survive on its own. Period.Can it breathe on it's own?
A zygote can't. It can't do anything by itself, not a single function of life.
A baby can be taken care of by anyone. A zygote can't exist outside of one specific womb.
And that womb belongs to someone. Shouldn't she have some say in how it's used?
-- A2SG, at least in most states, she does.....
No one's trying to change your mind.Nope. Not going to change my mind. Abortion is wrong because it kills an unborn child. No one should be killed. I must speak for those who can't speak for themselves.
Not the same thing. Hilarious how you compare the two.Wonder how he'd feel about a bill that mandated he get a vasectomy, whether he wants one or not.
-- A2SG, just curious.....
Why not protect those who can't speak for themselves?It kinda is his call these days, if he (with others like him) can get enough lawmakers on his side.
A baby breathes on its own. A baby can eat, no matter who holds the spoon. A baby can perform bodily functions, no matter who changes the diaper afterward. A baby can exist anywhere in the world.It still depends on others to take care of it. It cannot survive on its own. Period.
Why not? What's the difference?Not the same thing. Hilarious how you compare the two.
They still depend on others for its survival. You can't put a baby in an empty house and expect it to survive. An adult needs to take care of it.A baby breathes on its own. A baby can eat, no matter who holds the spoon. A baby can perform bodily functions, no matter who changes the diaper afterward. A baby can exist anywhere in the world.
A zygote can do none of those things.
They're not the same.
-- A2SG, you're also forgetting there's a pregnant woman entirely surrounding that zygote....the baby isn't inside her any more.....
A zygote is just an unborn baby. Different stages, still human.Why not? What's the difference?
-- A2SG, you seem more than willing to compare babies to zygotes, despite their many significant differences.....