Once Again, Fighting Abortion

Early abortion is completely painless, as fetus then cannot feel pain.

But some do commit suicide, so their rape was worse than murder.

Some children do commit suicide.

I dont know, maybe lack of desire to commit suicide.

Some people dont want to live, but also dont have enough will to commit suicide.

Early abortion is completely painless, as fetus then cannot feel pain.

In that rare instance, you would be correct.

Some do, the vast majority do not.

If you don't have enough will to commit suicide, then you do want to live.

It's not okay to kill somebody painlessly without due process without the consent of the person getting killed.

"Human life begins at conception and should be treated as such. "

It is in terms of birth control. That's the point I was making.

Doesn't matter the gender. Both can do the superior act of sexual abstinence.

Yes that's why abstinence is key . It does, not does not, it does prevent and control birth .

Sexual abstinence is superior.

Got nothing to do with a union

We must accept the fact that 1:

Human life begins at conception and should be treated as such.

The fetus that presides in the womb of a mother, is in no way part of the mother's body no matter what way you spin it.

The fetus in the womb has different DNA, most times contains different blood types, half the time the child is a different sex completely, and inherently is not a product of only the mother's body, but a combination of the mothers DNA and the fathers DNA. 3:

Abortion is 98% of the time never medically necessary for a woman's health.

There are safer and more productive alternatives to abortion, that involve benefit to both the mother and the child,

The risk of injury to the mother during pregnancy is extremely low.

In fact, pregnancy can actually benefit the mother in many ways, such as reduced risks of breast, ovarian and endometrial cancer, if the pregnancy is completed without major complication. Abortion takes away that benefit, and in fact in many cases abortions can cause severe mental health problems to women. And finally, 5:

Planned Parent Hood's roots are inherently racist, and genocidal and while many organizations also have ugly backgrounds, we should take this into consideration while thinking about this legislation. 

Moral dilemmas.

1. People who don’t want to be pregnant, and don’t want the responsibility of a child.
   

I think it is extremely important, as mature as we are, to talk about sex, and its effects on people. If an individual is scared of the possibility of getting pregnant, then they shouldn’t involve themselves in sexual relations, because no matter how much protection you give yourself, having sexual relations is by definition is consenting to the possibility of pregnancy.

Just as you would get into your car, but you don’t want to crash, when you enter that car, you are consenting to the possibility of getting into a wreck. One of the ways you can defend yourself from getting an abortion, is by being smart about who you sleep with.

If you do find yourself in a situation where you are pregnant, and you do not wish to take care of the child, there are alternatives to abortion, such as giving the child up for adoption. 

   2. Abortion in cases where the child has a disability is necessary to save them from a life of struggle. 

I believe in the proposition that no matter what hardships human beings endure, we always have the ability to not only survive, but to thrive regardless of the situation. There are many cases of this throughout not only today, but throughout history. 

To make a bold statement such as that is in fact extremely offensive to individuals today who live with disabilities and developmental complications, because it implies that their lives are too hard, so they don’t matter. It takes away meaning from the lives of those most vulnerable among us. 

"...and should be treated as such." What does this even mean? 

Treated as [such], treated like....what, exactly??

That which is within, is a part of the whole. It is feeding off her, taking her nutrients to develop. Taking from her, makes it a part of her.

"Women who have had a first full-term pregnancy at an early age have reduced risks of breast, ovarian and endometrial cancer. Furthermore, the risks of these cancers decline with each additional full-term pregnancy.
Pregnancies that are terminated afford no protection; thus, a woman who chooses abortion over continuing her pregnancy would lose the protective benefit.”

It shares familial DNA, not independent DNA. DNA from both generations, mother and father, despite maybe having a different blood type, whatever. It is still of her and is within her. 

Pregnancy let alone birth wreaks havoc on a girl's/woman's body and lasts a lifetime. There is no benefit to the mother when pregnancy ages her body beyond years. 

And I doubt the over 90 million children who were unwanted and/or orphaned would disagree with your idea of how they are benefited. 

Many women and little girls would unequivocally disagree with you. 

A lot of women would disagree with you.

Where did you go to school? Wherever it was, get your parents' money back. They failed you. 

If "an individual" is scared of getting pregnant? An individual? I think you mean a girl/woman. We all know ONLY females can get pregnant, so do not demean them by using BS language that would be used by the alphabet soup mafia. 

AND, consenting to sexual relations is just that and nothing more. Both parties, if they don't want to be saddled with the possibility of having a child, then precautions are taken. At the beginning of her period, contraception, I mean it is not that difficult to enjoy another's sexuality without worrying about an unplanned pregnancy. I mean really, how old are you? 16?

Oh FFS, comparing getting into a car to sexual relations...dumb comparison of no equal relevance on any level. 

There are 90+ million unwanted children worldwide who would disagree with you. 

And THIS is the choice of the individual family, not you or anyone else.

 You (nor anyone else) foots the bill for their lifelong healthcare, so you (nor anyone else) do not have any say in the matter that you're not a part of. 

@<<<Sam_Flynn>>>

"...and should be treated as such." What does this even mean? 

Treated as [such], treated like....what, exactly??

A human being with inherent value. 

That which is within, is a part of the whole. It is feeding off her, taking her nutrients to develop. Taking from her, makes it a part of her.

It actually does the opposite. There are numerous medical benefits for having a child including: 

Abortion & Pregnancy Risks | La Dept. of Health

"Women who have had a first full-term pregnancy at an early age have reduced risks of breast, ovarian and endometrial cancer. Furthermore, the risks of these cancers decline with each additional full-term pregnancy.

Pregnancies that are terminated afford no protection; thus, a woman who chooses abortion over continuing her pregnancy would lose the protective benefit.”

And yes, it is inside her body, but has separate DNA from her, is a distinct independent living organism, and is not part of the mother's body. It uses parts of the mother's body to grow and collect nutrients, but it is completely separate biologically. 

It shares familial DNA, not independent DNA. DNA from both generations, mother and father, despite maybe having a different blood type, whatever. It is still of her and is within her. 

Ok, with that logic, you are still part of your mom, because you have some of your mothers DNA still.

With that logic you are also part of your dad still, because you have your dads DNA.

And since you are part of their body, you are not independent, and if your mom wants to, she should be allowed to kill you right?

Pregnancy let alone birth wreaks havoc on a girl's/woman's body and lasts a lifetime. There is no benefit to the mother when pregnancy ages her body beyond years. 

It's actually a part of a female organisms maturing process. Look it up. 

And I doubt the over 90 million children who were unwanted and/or orphaned would disagree with your idea of how they are benefited. 

Wow. Thats a dangerous argument you're making there. 

I believe in the proposition that no matter what hardships human beings endure, we always have the ability to not only survive, but to thrive regardless of the situation. There are many cases of this throughout not only today, but throughout history. Every human life has value, even the orphans. 

Many women and little girls would unequivocally disagree with you. 

Fully matured women shouldn't disagree with me. 

Now if we were talking about little girls, (which we weren't so Red Herring right there) I would disagree with me too. 

A lot of women would disagree with you.

Facts don't care about your feelings. 

Where did you go to school? Wherever it was, get your parents' money back. They failed you. 

A very liberal school actually. It wasn't pleasant. 

If "an individual" is scared of getting pregnant? An individual? I think you mean a girl/woman. We all know ONLY females can get pregnant, so do not demean them by using BS language that would be used by the alphabet soup mafia. 

Again, another Red Herring man. 

I wasn't even talking about that. 

And yes, only females can get pregnant. I agree with you. 

AND, consenting to sexual relations is just that and nothing more. Both parties, if they don't want to be saddled with the possibility of having a child, then precautions are taken. At the beginning of her period, contraception, I mean it is not that difficult to enjoy another's sexuality without worrying about an unplanned pregnancy. I mean really, how old are you? 16?

Another fallacy, talking about my personal being. (I'm not 16).

Oh FFS, comparing getting into a car to sexual relations...dumb comparison of no equal relevance on any level. 

It actually does. 

Maybe think about it intellectually next time bud. 

There are 90+ million unwanted children worldwide who would disagree with you. 

And you think all those 90 million children would rather die? 

Big assumption of you man.

Again, ALL human life is valuable,

And THIS is the choice of the individual family, not you or anyone else.

Is murder the choice of a family or is it the law? 

 You (nor anyone else) foots the bill for their lifelong healthcare, so you (nor anyone else) do not have any say in the matter that you're not a part of. 

Great..........all I'm saying is that they can't kill a baby. Is that too harsh?

It is not [a] human being. 

It does not have any 'inherent value" prior to fetal viablity. 

Huh? Your response makes no SENSE to the original claim. Try again, child. 

That which is within, is a part of the whole. It is feeding off her, taking her nutrients to develop. Taking from her, makes it a part of her.

Separate DNA doesn't mean shit.

A drop of blood at a crime scene results in DNA upon testing. Doesn't make that blood sample [a] human being.

No shit Sherlock. I have had a DNA test done that tells me a long about my mother's DNA and how far it goes back to know who my ancestors were. It's called Mitochondrial DNA, ignoramus.  

Yeah, I am. That's how human reproduction words. 

You make no sense here. Total sophomoric banal babble. 

Uh, not it is not. Pregnancy has nothing to do with a female maturing, it has everything to do with altering their physiological maturation. Dumbass. 

If only your dumbass would be tossed into a destitute situation that so many of millions of unwanted and orphaned children have endured would smack reality in your ignorant face...you might understand. 

Red herring on little girls?

You just defeated your own position right there; you callous little shit. 

That is a non-sequitur. 

My feelings are not in play here, the women who disagree with you are. Dumbass. 

Strawman fallacy. Never claimed what those children would rather do or not do. That's your ignorant retort. Speaks volumes. 

No, it is not. 

Hitler was not valuable. 

Charles Manson was not valuable.

Every violent human being throughout existence has not been valuable.

You lose this argument, child. 

Your query makes no sense giving the fact that murder is against the law. Try again. Child. Only children argue points like this. 

No "baby" is "killed" during an abortion. 

We must accept the fact that 1:

Human life begins at conception and should be treated as such.

"...and should be treated as such." What does this even mean? 

Treated as [such], treated like....what, exactly??

We must accept the fact that 1:

Human life begins at conception and should be treated as such.

"...and should be treated as such." What does this even mean? 

Treated as [such], treated like....what, exactly??

It means the we (sic) must accept that a arprtial (sic) truth is nough (sic) fact to base criminal law on.

Science describes as whole truth that life begins at the creation of two things independent from eachother (sic) an egg and sperm.

In the law of nature as whole truth

according to science

men kill  more sperm then women kill eggs.

A male female couple can practice medicinesa (sic) and exstend (sic) the life of one sperm and one egg in most aplications (sic) of sexual intercourse.

Just as medical science can preactice (sic) marriage and produce life by having sex according to christain (sic) law without sexual intercourse.

This debate becomesa matter of equality under criminal law and United States Constitutional right.It is a United States Constitutional right to apply lethal force to a child of certainage when married and unmarried in one way. The parents must neglect the law ofnature they possess as share to save the child and not extend the length of anatural life of a child at this stage as fact. The scientific life expectancyis about 28 days or 1-month. The age is not set by absence of intercourse it isset by the mother of the child and the laws of nature; natures GOD gives them.In whole truth this is the connection Christianity is making as a proposedUnited States Constitutional state of the Union.

Now let’s look atthe United States Constitutional Right executive officer # 45 has made which isnot being placed in writing to be evaluated his abilities of preserving UnitedStates Constitution under House Impeachment. Remember this is not a criminal chargeand there is no presumption of innocence to be expected. It is to be given ornot give by all those under oath during impeachment. A man in attempt to preserveUnited States Constitutional right is use a very young child as a 2nd amendment right to bear arms to attempt to kill all women. Yes, as whole truththe odds of him killing all women is not very likely, though all women areplaced at risk of death randomly as a gamble. Simply said odds dictate not allwomen die simple because that try at creating what American United StatesConstitution describes as a nation’s posterity. The United States Constitutionalright that is created by all men’s independence from English law without women andcreation of men’s own equality is the future and the present are separated by aborder created by law of nature.

As a united stateconstitutional right the very young child cannot even be charged withaccidental use of lethal force it may apply allowing a woman to defend her lifeplaced only her at risk for presenting a nation with the most perfect posteritypossible for her to create. A woman is at War with the laws of nature and allconception or copulation ensures is she is not alone in that battle. Lifeliberty and the pursuit of happiness.

Female specific amputation is not abortion they may both share a use of lethal force but they are in no way equal.

You lack the requisite education and experience to have this debate/discussion.

I made myself plain and clear with scientific and reality-based arguments.

You're replying sophomorically. No facts, just subjective emotiveness.

Not going to waste my time replying to a child who lacks the sufficient life experience and education to have this discussion. 

Good luck with others on this.

And don't try to hammer me with a bunch of whining about this and that merely because I wouldn't engage you further. 

If you do, you only prove my point. 

I now agree to disagree.

"You need to rethink it, dumbass."

"Intellectual coward denialist." 

".... you are so fucking daft."

 "Dumbass." 

".... you callous little shit." 

"If only your dumbass would be tossed...."

"Dumbass." 

"Damn you are so naive." 

Not how criminal law works, mehoe. 

Biological criteria is met at conception. That's just a basic fact of life, irrelevant of your "whole truth" (it's not a whole loaf of bread).

-->

@<<<Sam_Flynn>>>

Not how criminal law works, mehoe. 

Criminal law is not a law of United States Constitutional Right, paesano. 

Biological criteria is met at conception. That's just a basic fact of life, irrelevant of your "whole truth" (it's not a whole loaf of bread).

 Literally fact science does harvest, store, and take donations of sperm and human egg keeping them alive so they can be used in the treatment of infertility.

Biological material for additional medical treatments is grown after human conception as well as medical conception.

Whole truth that is a way of say all the truth that might be gathered as a United State as a complete condition or principle. A medical professional can be found guilty of perjury for only describing a partial truth when giving an expert opinion in an official proceeding of inquiry. 

Article II | U.S. Constitution | US Law | LII / Legal Information Institute (cornell.edu)

The President, Vice President and all civil officers of the United States, shall be removed from office on impeachment for, and conviction of, treason, bribery, or other high crimes and misdemeanors.

Full Text of the U.S. Constitution | Constitution Center

The Senate shall have the sole Power to try all Impeachments. When sitting for that Purpose, they shall be on Oath or Affirmation. When the President of the United States is tried, the Chief Justice shall preside: And no Person shall be convicted without the Concurrence of two thirds of the Members present.

Judgment in Cases of Impeachment shall not extend further than to removal from Office, and disqualification to hold and enjoy any Office of honor, Trust or Profit under the United States: but the Party convicted shall nevertheless be liable and subject to Indictment, Trial, Judgment and Punishment, according to Law.

Abortion is a foreign criminal law written by legislators outside American United States Constitutional Right before America had ever been established an independent state of two forms of law, Criminal law, and Law of Right. A United States Constitutional Right does not need to be ratified before it held before the Courts of America it is a power described to be held by “We the people.” With a condition of being a more perfect state of the union than what is in use at any given time in history.

You lack the requisite education and experience to have this debate/discussion.

If you really think that, have an actual real comprehensive debate with me on the subject (sic) 

There is no such thing as criminal law being not of "a law of (sic) United States Constitutional Right (sic)..."

Cannot because you "lack the requisite education and experience to have this debate/discussion."