When Does Life Begin ...

[ViRedd]

Vi I don't know who you are implying are Nazi's, but some of us are NOT willing to blindly follow the government.

Actually, I'm not implying that anyone here is a "Nazi." Not at all. What I AM implying, is that there is a direct parallel between those who deny that there is life in the womb, and that that life is destroyed through abortion ... and those good little German citizens who could clearly detect the odor of burning human flesh emanating from the detention camps, but were in denial and afraid to look at the horror taking place within.

There's a reason those pictures I posted are disturbing to the pro-choice advocates, and a reason our "progressive," liberal media won't show them. They are a clear look at the inside of the detention camp.

Vi

 

[Hayduke]

Republican mantra: life is sacred untill you're born, then fuck you!

Exactly!

And I don't have my own vagina to play with so my opinion on what a woman should be able to do with hers means nothing. But take a look outside...There really are too f-ing many of us on this planet. The last thing we need is more kids whose parents don't give a crap about. Plus, it's the dumbest people who have the most kids. Evolution in action. Not good for the species to think!? Intelligence is being selected out

If you have more than 2 kids you are overpopulating the planet exponentially!

But that is probably gods will right?

 

[Hayduke]

Hate to tell ya, but most unpluggings of brain-dead people are for convenience only too. The parents or spouse don't want to (or can't) fork out the bucks to keep the machinery running, and the rest of the country (that is, the taxpayer) doesn't want to pay for a bunch of vegetables taking up hospital space and feels that any unplugging should be a family decision.

Same concept. Without sentience, the vegetables give up their rights as sentient beings. The fetuses, never having had sentience in the first place, never had any rights to give up. Once a fetus has a brain, not just the little neural tube that a first-trimester fetus has, then it's probable that it's at least on the verge of sentience and should be given the same respect that we should give to all sentient creatures. (But which, alas, we do not -- elephants are terribly abused, and they have far more feelings than any fetus and do feel pain and suffer emotional trauma. But that's another story.) That probably happens near the end of the second trimester, or in the third. Certainly not in the first, not even close. The bulk of the time a fetus is in the first trimester, it is about the size of a sesame seed. Even at the end of the first trimester, it's still only 3 inches long, has no brain, and weighs one ounce, or around 0.7% of what a baby weighs.

Could not have said it better.

 

[ViRedd]

Exactly!

And I don't have my own vagina to play with so my opinion on what a woman should be able to do with hers means nothing. But take a look outside...There really are too f-ing many of us on this planet. The last thing we need is more kids whose parents don't give a crap about. Plus, it's the dumbest people who have the most kids. Evolution in action. Not good for the species to think!? Intelligence is being selected out
If you have more than 2 kids you are overpopulating the planet exponentially! But that is probably gods will right?

Well, I wish the leaders of Planned Parenthood were as honest as you, Hayduke. Margaret Sanger, the founder of Planned Parenthood was that honest and its interesting to read the history of the organization and its founding. Actually, its very Hitler-like ... and your post was as well. Its all about proper selection, right?

Vi

 

[AlphaNoN]

Well, I wish the leaders of Planned Parenthood were as honest as you, Hayduke. Margaret Sanger, the founder of Planned Parenthood was that honest and its interesting to read the history of the organization and its founding. Actually, its very Hitler-like ... and your post was as well. Its all about proper selection, right?

Vi

Come on Vi.. Dead babies and Hitler analogies? Your commentary is going down hill.. Despite his complicity in murdering over six million post-born with gas chambers, ovens, firing squads, starvation, and heinous medical experiments, one thing that all historians can agree upon is Adolph Hitlers staunch pro-life stance. He was so incredibly pro-life that he actually called for the death penalty for mothers who attempted to abort their pre-born Aryan defenders.

"On May 26, 1933, two pieces of penal legislation . . . prohibit[ed] the availability of abortion facilities and services. More important was the stricter handling of the old antiabortion law, resulting in a 65 percent increase in yearly conviction between 1932 and 1938, when their number reached almost 7,000. From 1935 on, doctors and midwives were obliged to notify the regional State Health Office of every miscarriage. Women's names and addresses were then handed over to the police, who investigated the cases suspected of actually being abortions. In 1936 Heinrich Himmler, head of all police forces and the SS, established the Reich's Central Agency for the Struggle Against Homosexuality and Abortion, and in 1943, after three years of preparation by the Ministries of the Interior and of Justice, the law entitled Protection of Marriage, Family, Motherhood called for the death penalty in 'extreme cases'."

 

[AlphaNoN]

Oh yeah.. Godwin's law..

 

[Stoney McFried]

On a personal note, today I learned that my brother's stepdaughter is in labor.She is 17 weeks pregnant.It will NOT survive outside of the womb, period.It hasn't got lungs.She had what I believe is called a placental abrubption.This has happened with two of her previous children, but they were far enough along to live.She wants her tubes tied immediately.Her dingbat Catholic mother, who shit out six children so she could collect welfare, is trying to influence her not to.What does this have to do with this issue?The baby could NOT survive outside of its mother.Therefore, life as we define it is not possible.Point proven.

Life begins with the first breath. Either that or you are stillborn. Get used to it, abortion is not murder. Some perfectly normal appearing babies are born dead, no first or last breath. Death usually occures sometime after your last breath, so wouldn't it make sense that life starts with your first breath? In fact human life is dependent on breathing. One could actually say it is the most important aspect of human life. Without breathing, you die, End of story.

I agree...lets store rubberbands on some right wing testicles.Saying life begins at conception is just a convienient way to push the responsibility off onto the woman.That way she gets to be the bad guy if she chooses to terminate.

First things first, Bongulator, I think I'm in love with you, and Stoney you are right as always, but still have me laughing at the truth of what you say !





The embryonic heart starts beating 22 days after conception. So your answer would be at around 3 weeks after the sex occured?





It can take anywhere from a few hours to a few days for the sperm to make the journey. So no you still have plenty of time to smoke.




Getting your tubes tied is not 100% effective. Maybe all men should go get vasectomies instead since they are easier to reverse. Like at age 12 we can just line them up and start clipping.

I am going to invite you to invent an artificial uterus that can be implanted in a mans body. Then you can carry and raise all these unwanted children yourself.

It's sad that your point of view is all children should be born, even if we know the parents are just going to, starve, beat, molest, neglect, abuse, and eventually kill the kids.



If you are a woman, I have something I'd like to stash in your womb for safe keeping. You don't own your womb, the rest of the country does.

If you are a man, I would like to borrow your nutsack to keep my spare rubber bands around. If women don't own their wombs, then men don't own their nuts.






OK that one had me on the ground laughing......

No, they are sensationalist tactics, Vi,and there are no sources listed for them.I remember in another topic in which I insulted the Queen of Hateful Bony Bitches, Anne Coulter, you admonished me that in the political forums, we have to back up our statements with sources.Please do so.

Actually, I'm not implying that anyone here is a "Nazi." Not at all. What I AM implying, is that there is a direct parallel between those who deny that there is life in the womb, and that that life is destroyed through abortion ... and those good little German citizens who could clearly detect the odor of burning human flesh emanating from the detention camps, but were in denial and afraid to look at the horror taking place within.

There's a reason those pictures I posted are disturbing to the pro-choice advocates, and a reason our "progressive," liberal media won't show them. They are a clear look at the inside of the detention camp.

Vi

 

[ViRedd]

'No, they are sensationalist tactics, Vi,and there are no sources listed for them.I remember in another topic in which I insulted the Queen of Hateful Bony Bitches, Anne Coulter, you admonished me that in the political forums, we have to back up our statements with sources.Please do so."

Sources for what, exactly? Are you talking about the pictures I posted, or are you talking about Margaret Sanger being a eugenist? And, Hitler may have been against abortion in the womb, but he was certainly pro-aborting children and adults that didn't meet his criteria of a "Good Aryan German." Instead of forceps, Hitler used SS officers, barbed wire and ovens.

Please name which sources you want and I'll provide them for you.

Vi

 

[Stoney McFried]

Why are you still on Hitler?When in doubt, play the Nazi card?Vi...you can do better. I want the sources that say that those abortions WERE NOT MEDICALLY necessary,and therefore illegal.I want sources for where you got the pics, and the proof that these said pics are in fact from illegal late term abortions.Then I'd like to know, who would take such pictures for their own profit, what you had to enter into your search engine, and who would look at pics of dead babies and decide it was a good way to prove a point.

'No, they are sensationalist tactics, Vi,and there are no sources listed for them.I remember in another topic in which I insulted the Queen of Hateful Bony Bitches, Anne Coulter, you admonished me that in the political forums, we have to back up our statements with sources.Please do so."

Sources for what, exactly? Are you talking about the pictures I posted, or are you talking about Margaret Sanger being a eugenist? And, Hitler may have been against abortion in the womb, but he was certainly pro-aborting children and adults that didn't meet his criteria of a "Good Aryan German." Instead of forceps, Hitler used SS officers, barbed wire and ovens.

Please name which sources you want and I'll provide them for you.

Vi

 

[misshestermoffitt]

VI (cupping my hands around my mouth and yelling)

You keep avoiding the selective reduction question.

During Invirto fertilization a minimum of 6 eggs are implanted into a womans womb. If all the eggs attach and start to grow, the doctor goes back in most of the time and "selectivly reduces" the amount of fetus'.

What this means is they are fertilizing 6 eggs and implanting them. Then they go back in later and ABORT a portion of them. This is a standard practice. Why is this socially acceptable but aborting an unplanned pregnancy isn't?

Are women who can afford $10,000 per try the only ones that are allowed abortions?

 

[Hayduke]

Well, I wish the leaders of Planned Parenthood were as honest as you, Hayduke. Margaret Sanger, the founder of Planned Parenthood was that honest and its interesting to read the history of the organization and its founding. Actually, its very Hitler-like ... and your post was as well. Its all about proper selection, right?

Vi

Ouch! No Hitler was not natural selection! I guess I should have been clearer and said Darwinian Evolution and stupid people having lots of babies is very natural. As people become more educated, reproduction decreases. A decrease in fecundity, in general, is bad for any species. This remains constant until resources become a limiting factor. Unfortunately the negative feedback of reaching the carrying capacity (K) of a species habitat does not have an immediate response in reduced fecundity, leading to disease and starvation. Many places on Earth are affected by this more than others (all of the 3rd world and most developing nations). Technology is allowing the rest of us to not feel the effects of over-population.

Some say that (K) has been exceeded already in terms of fresh water and farmable land. Clearing forests has artificially increased the latter and Desalination the former.

I am not advocating any selection or action to be taken (Hitler reference) other than responsible fornication and reproduction. My view is not that of fascism, but of SCIENCE!

Like I said I don't have a womb, so I won't tell you what to do with yours.

As a matter of fact, I really don't know how anybody on a board like RIU where we want to have the freedom to grow our own medicine, and don't want anybody telling us what we can and can not put in our own bodies could suggest a woman should not have the same rights with her body. What the f@%k century is this?

 

[TodayIsAGreenday]

perhaps we should just cut the mom open... ask the baby what it thinks and go from their

... thats pretty sound reasoning

 

[misshestermoffitt]

perhaps we should just cut the mom open... ask the baby what it thinks and go from their

... thats pretty sound reasoning

yeah



The vagina is not a clown car, just because it has the capability to spew a child a year for 30 years doesn't mean we should all shit out a kid per year.

Can you imagine the state of the world if nobody used contraception of any kind?

 

[ViRedd]

Why are you still on Hitler?When in doubt, play the Nazi card?Vi...you can do better. I want the sources that say that those abortions WERE NOT MEDICALLY necessary,and therefore illegal.I want sources for where you got the pics, and the proof that these said pics are in fact from illegal late term abortions.Then I'd like to know, who would take such pictures for their own profit, what you had to enter into your search engine, and who would look at pics of dead babies and decide it was a good way to prove a point.

Just go to Google and enter: Abortion pictures.

Who said anything about legal vs illegal abortions? Just because politicians pass a law, doesn't make that law moral, now does it?

Vi

 

[misshestermoffitt]

vi (cupping my hands around my mouth and yelling)

you keep avoiding the selective reduction question.

During invirto fertilization a minimum of 6 eggs are implanted into a womans womb. If all the eggs attach and start to grow, the doctor goes back in most of the time and "selectivly reduces" the amount of fetus'.

What this means is they are fertilizing 6 eggs and implanting them. Then they go back in later and abort a portion of them. This is a standard practice. Why is this socially acceptable but aborting an unplanned pregnancy isn't?

Are women who can afford $10,000 per try the only ones that are allowed abortions?

h e l l o

 

[Stoney McFried]

You cannot legislate morality in this case.This is a religious objection, stemming from religious right wingers.Pure and simple.So are you saying that you don't know whether or not these were medically necessary abortions?

Just go to Google and enter: Abortion pictures.

Who said anything about legal vs illegal abortions? Just because politicians pass a law, doesn't make that law moral, now does it?

Vi

 

[ViRedd]

VI (cupping my hands around my mouth and yelling)

You keep avoiding the selective reduction question.

During Invirto fertilization a minimum of 6 eggs are implanted into a womans womb. If all the eggs attach and start to grow, the doctor goes back in most of the time and "selectivly reduces" the amount of fetus'.

What this means is they are fertilizing 6 eggs and implanting them. Then they go back in later and ABORT a portion of them. This is a standard practice. Why is this socially acceptable but aborting an unplanned pregnancy isn't?

Are women who can afford $10,000 per try the only ones that are allowed abortions?

Why is anything socially acceptable? Socially acceptable to whom?

Vi

 

[Hayduke]

yeah



The vagina is not a clown car, just because it has the capability to spew a child a year for 30 years doesn't mean we should all shit out a kid per year.

Can you imagine the state of the world if nobody used contraception of any kind?

Scary huh!

Just because you got drunk, had sex, and did not use a condom, doesn't make it a miracle of gods creation. It was a mistake, and I think most christians would agree that besides the Platypus, god doesn't make many mistakes.

 

[Stoney McFried]

Vi, that's answering a question with a question.

Why is anything socially acceptable? Socially acceptable to whom?

Vi

 

[misshestermoffitt]

Well it seems to me that "selective reduction" is socially acceptable since you don't hear anyone bitching about it.

You don't see people picketing fertilization clinics. You don't see people trying to blow up fertilization clinics.

Since not 1 person has voiced a negative opinion about "selective reduction" that would make it seem accepted.