Abortion

[DC Al Fine]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Fixed it for you.

[k-onmmunist]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Fixed it for you.

so you think abortion and raping children are morally equivalent?

[inks] you

[Icehand Gino]

Its sick and disgusting how YOU want to punish a baby for the evils of the rapists. So its the babies fault that the woman was raped? pure evil. Abortion is complete evil in every case.

Even if mother's life is threatened ?

If abortion is a murder, right of self-defense should be applied like in every case of murder.

[DC Al Fine]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Fixed it for you.

so you think abortion and raping children are morally equivalent?

[inks] you

No abortion is worse.

[The Simpsons Cinematic Universe]

No abortion is worse.

And that position would be absolutely justified if fetuses were sentient. The flaw in your position is that they aren't.

[DC Al Fine]

No abortion is worse.

And that position would be absolutely justified if fetuses were sentient. The flaw in your position is that they aren't.

Have you ever seen a premature baby. They seem pretty sentient to me.

[John Dibble]

No abortion is worse.

And that position would be absolutely justified if fetuses were sentient. The flaw in your position is that they aren't.

Have you ever seen a premature baby. They seem pretty sentient to me.

MCC is probably unaware of the fact that the medical definition of a fetus refers to the time of development between 9 and 38 weeks, so it would be a broad statement to say sentience is not present in all fetuses.

It would be fair to say that a fetus is likely sentient in the later stages of development. However, have you seen what a fetus looks like at week nine? On what basis does is seem sentient to you at that point?

[smoltchanov]

Option 2. For me - obviously (i am at least somewhat fiscal conservative, but rather social liberal)

[DC Al Fine]

No abortion is worse.

And that position would be absolutely justified if fetuses were sentient. The flaw in your position is that they aren't.

Have you ever seen a premature baby. They seem pretty sentient to me.

MCC is probably unaware of the fact that the medical definition of a fetus refers to the time of development between 9 and 38 weeks, so it would be a broad statement to say sentience is not present in all fetuses.

It would be fair to say that a fetus is likely sentient in the later stages of development. However, have you seen what a fetus looks like at week nine? On what basis does is seem sentient to you at that point?

I'm not asserting all fetuses are sentient. I was pointing out that MCC was incorrect in his assertion.

[John Dibble]

No abortion is worse.

And that position would be absolutely justified if fetuses were sentient. The flaw in your position is that they aren't.

Have you ever seen a premature baby. They seem pretty sentient to me.

MCC is probably unaware of the fact that the medical definition of a fetus refers to the time of development between 9 and 38 weeks, so it would be a broad statement to say sentience is not present in all fetuses.

It would be fair to say that a fetus is likely sentient in the later stages of development. However, have you seen what a fetus looks like at week nine? On what basis does is seem sentient to you at that point?

I'm not asserting all fetuses are sentient. I was pointing out that MCC was incorrect in his assertion.

Ok. I wasn't sure which is why I asked.

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

it doesn't matter what they believe. if they are so anti-abortion, they don't have to have one. but they have to infringe on other people's rights too. trying to control women's bodies smacks quite heavily of sexism to me

I see you are still begging the question and asserting that your beliefs are objective fact.  If you were to take the opposite position as objective fact I could see an an alternate universe version of you writing:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[Queen Mum Inks.LWC]

It should be illegal and never federally funded.  The only exception I would allow for is in an ectopic pregnancy where the fetus is known to have no chance of surviving and all other alternatives have already been exhausted.

[k-onmmunist]

it doesn't matter what they believe. if they are so anti-abortion, they don't have to have one. but they have to infringe on other people's rights too. trying to control women's bodies smacks quite heavily of sexism to me

I see you are still begging the question and asserting that your beliefs are objective fact.  If you were to take the opposite position as objective fact I could see an an alternate universe version of you writing:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

i'm not asserting anything as fact, except that they're trying to control women's reproductive rights, which they are.

[Okay, maybe Mike Johnson is a competent parliamentarian.]

it doesn't matter what they believe. if they are so anti-abortion, they don't have to have one. but they have to infringe on other people's rights too. trying to control women's bodies smacks quite heavily of sexism to me

I see you are still begging the question and asserting that your beliefs are objective fact.  If you were to take the opposite position as objective fact I could see an an alternate universe version of you writing:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

i'm not asserting anything as fact, except that they're trying to control women's reproductive rights, which they are.

Nobody is denying that. The only difference of opinion is over whether or not the situation merits such controls, which you're reducing to a question of personal preference because you don't think that it does and aren't demonstrating any interest in understanding the mindset of people who do.

[Supermariobros]

Option three.