Pro-Life

[GeoMetro]

Babies dream in the womb.

Do you have no right to live when you dream?

 

[JustOneWay]

Babies dream in the womb.

Do you have no right to live when you dream?

What do they dream about?

 

[TheBear]

Who should be held accountable for miscarriages, stillbirths, spontaneous fetal deaths and SIDS?

 

[GeoMetro]

What do they dream about?

How would anyone know?

But ask a doctor if babies dream in the womb.
The answer is yes.

 

[Guttermouth]

How would anyone know?

But ask a doctor if babies dream in the womb.
The answer is yes.

When?

Do they dream the minute the sperm hits the egg?

Do they need a brain to dream?

 

[GeoMetro]

Do they dream the minute the sperm hits the egg?
No.

Do they need a brain to dream?
Yes.

 

[Asimov]

To protect human life entering this world.
I want to protect those that have no one to protect them.

So they can have a chance to do good deeds on Earth.

Right, so I'm guessing you have like 50 kids?

 

[GeoMetro]

Right, so I'm guessing you have like 50 kids?

I have 0.

 

[ImmortalTechnique]

Babies dream in the womb.

Do you have no right to live when you dream?

uhh fetuses POSSIBLY begin dreaming when they show REM like eye movement at 20 weeks. Abortion is illegal at 20 weeks in most places. what's your point?

 

[GeoMetro]

"Abortion is illegal at 20 weeks in most places."

You would support that for all 50 states?

 

[BlessedGraceAlways]

There are conditions such as ectopic /tubal pregnancy that noone would know it would happen before a person got pregnant. A pregnancy can't survive in the tube and sometimes it ruptures. So, in a case like that it comes down to two options such as....

1) Safe the mother and abort the pregnancy in order to do so.

OR

2) Do nothing and let both die.

I'm going with saving the only one who can be saved, the mother. I'm prolife and so I wouldn't support both dying.

I agree with poohgirl, I couldn't have put it better.

 

[chaz345]

No. No we shouldn’t. It is all-or-nothing ultimatums that we can’t afford in this debate. People need to stop finger pointing and name calling and realize that everyone is anti-abortion. Everyone. We all want to put in place reasonable guidelines for when abortions are performed. That involves discussion and compromise. All or nothing doesn’t work.

If the pro-choice side were really interested in limiting abortions then there wouldn't be such an outcry every time any sort of limit is proposed. Any limit is met with the (factually incorrect) cry that it's a violation of Roe v Wade and will lead to the eventual overturning of it. How many people know that the Roe v Wade decision specifically mentions that some limits on abortion are perfectly fine? In fact if I recall correctly it's mentioned in a way that makes it clear that the people writing the decision hoped that such limits, as decided on a state by state basis, would be put in place.

 

[KomissarSteve]

Who should be held accountable for miscarriages, stillbirths, spontaneous fetal deaths and SIDS?

Not to mention the two thirds of pregnancies that spontaneously abort within the first couple weeks after fertilization.

We need to start prosecuting uteruses!!!!!!1

 

[Guttermouth]

Sorry but I've got to call BS on this. If the pro-choice side were really interested in limiting abortions then there wouldn't be such an outcry every time any sort of limit is proposed. Any limit is met with the (factually incorrect) cry that it's a violation of Roe v Wade and will lead to the eventual overturning of it. How many people know that the Roe v Wade decision specifically mentions that some limits on abortion are perfectly fine? In fact if I recall correctly it's mentioned in a way that makes it clear that the people writing the decision hoped that such limits, as decided on a state by state basis, would be put in place.

As long as the right proposes all-or-nothing legislation, that is the cry you will hear. I will oppose any and all of this kind of legislation. As I said earlier, this was true of the "partial birth" abortion legislation. A perfectly legitimate procedure was demonized as something used exclusively to end viable, late-term pregnancies. A lie.

A very suitable law that set reasonable limits on when such a procedure was acceptable would have been fine. But the right wouldn't have it. It had to be about calling people murderers. It had to be about sucking out the brains of innocent crying, dreaming babies.

It was about a pack of lies and all-or-nothing propositions that do nothing to decrease abortion in the US.

 

[Guttermouth]

Not to mention the two thirds of pregnancies that spontaneously abort within the first couple weeks after fertilization.

We need to start prosecuting uteruses!!!!!!1

What of the eggs? The poor baby eggs. The ones that are allowed to die every month by women who are willing to deny those children the opportunity, nay the right, to be.

(I refuse to reference the male contribution on the grounds that I might incriminate myself.)

 

[KomissarSteve]

What of the eggs? The poor baby eggs. The ones that are allowed to die every month by women who are willing to deny those children the opportunity, nay the right, to be.

(I refuse to reference the male contribution on the grounds that I might incriminate myself.)

Unfortunately, that isn't even humorous hyperbole at this point.

 

[flicka]

It's ironic that the "all or nothing" pro-lifers are the ones who practically guarantee abortion will remain completely legal and RvW will never be overturned. People can never get past their own pig-headedness even if it means they won't get what they want.

Human behavior is fascinating.

 

[KomissarSteve]

It's ironic that the "all or nothing" pro-lifers are the ones who practically guarantee abortion will remain completely legal and RvW will never be overturned. People can never get past their own pig-headedness even if it means they won't get what they want.

Human behavior is fascinating.

Yeah, well, that's what one gets when one mistakenly assumes that God is on one's side.

 

[chaz345]

As long as the right proposes all-or-nothing legislation, that is the cry you will hear. I will oppose any and all of this kind of legislation. As I said earlier, this was true of the "partial birth" abortion legislation. A perfectly legitimate procedure was demonized as something used exclusively to end viable, late-term pregnancies. A lie.

A very suitable law that set reasonable limits on when such a procedure was acceptable would have been fine. But the right wouldn't have it. It had to be about calling people murderers. It had to be about sucking out the brains of innocent crying, dreaming babies.

It was about a pack of lies and all-or-nothing propositions that do nothing to decrease abortion in the US.

Ok provide examples of medical conditions where the mother can survive delivering all but the last few inches of the baby's head?

I'm not saying that they don't exist, but I've never heard of any.

 

[GeoMetro]

It's ironic that the "all or nothing" pro-lifers are the ones who practically guarantee abortion will remain completely legal and RvW will never be overturned. People can never get past their own pig-headedness even if it means they won't get what they want.

Tell me more.