The key to victory in 2024 for the democrats lies in abortion

Author: Vegasgiants
Abortion

Posts

Total: 357
#151
prefix
prefix's avatar
Debates: 8
Posts: 542
3
4
9
prefix's avatar
prefix
3
4
9
-->
@Vegasgiants

I'm still waiting for you  to produce a dozen  VALID and RESPECTED SCIENTIFIC and UNBIASED agencies other than ACOG that supports you view. 

I asked long enough.

You made all these claims about the NIH and did NOT POST ANYTHING DIRECTLY FROM THE NIH
Have someone explain to you that there are many sub agencies to the NIH, many of which were cited. Are you so literal that you do not understand the transitive property?


It appears that agenda have entrenched your reasoning. It may be too late to save you.


How about a debate, where others can vote against you?


#152
John_C_87
John_C_87's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 287
0
2
5
John_C_87's avatar
John_C_87
0
2
5
-->
@prefix
My "position" is that there is a heart at 6 weeks gestation.

The child is not a citizen at 6 weeks gestation...The child is a patient at pregnancy and the privacy of the patient is under the athority of the mother by law of nature.

The National Institute of Health
The Lozier Institute
"Detection of Functional Changes of the Fetal Heart in the First Trimester of Gestation. " by Pinto de Avila MA, et al.
"When Does the Human Embryonic Heart Start Beating? A Review of Contemporary and Historical Sources of Knowledge about the Onset of Blood Circulation in Man" 
"Embryonic heart activity: Appearance and development in early human pregnancy"
"Embryonic length, crown-rump length and fetal heart activity in early human pregnancy determination by transvaginal ultrasound."
Nishantivf "No heartbeat at 6 weeks is a sign of miscarriage"
Healthline
 American Public Health Association
The National Center for Biotechnology Information
PubMed
The National Library of Medicine
The Centers for Disease Control
The US Deportment of Health
The American Pregnancy Association
Medical News Today
The National Health Service of the United Kingdom
American Journal of Roentgenology
The Radiological Society of North America.

These are not biased agencies unless they have court filed documents of emancipation of the Child in question. Not only establishing the child is a court documented adult according to law, also as adult has a federal social security number and citizenship of a nation been issued? They, these people, witnesses are possibly self-incriminating against the state and federal crime of violation to patient privacy. Is the medical patient seeking asylum?
#153
prefix
prefix's avatar
Debates: 8
Posts: 542
3
4
9
prefix's avatar
prefix
3
4
9
-->
@Vegasgiants
Here is the "value" of the ACOG "position"( which at best is expert OPINION)


"Expert opinion is a comment or judgement made about a subject by a single expert or group of experts in that field. It might take the form of an editorial or an executive summary. This can be helpful when there is a dearth of empirical evidence but should be displaced if research arises which contradicts it.
Expert opinion is not considered a research method, but it can be invaluable when informing health policy, particularly where research is lacking."

I hope you learn something.
Topic's author
#154
Vegasgiants
Vegasgiants's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 1,327
3
3
2
Vegasgiants's avatar
Vegasgiants
3
3
2
-->
@prefix
Research does not contradict it ACCORDING TO ACOG WHICH READS THE RESEARCH


My god
#155
prefix
prefix's avatar
Debates: 8
Posts: 542
3
4
9
prefix's avatar
prefix
3
4
9
-->
@Vegasgiants
I wonder about your reasoning ability.  Show me research by any respected authority outside the ACOG that supports the ACOG opinion.

You have failed repeatedly to do so.

Show me a statement by ACOG that denies that there is contradictory research.

Show me a statement by ACOG that states that they have read  contradictory research.

You take opinion as fact. You need to review the discipline of epistemology.

Now  put up a debate or admit defeat.




Topic's author
#156
Vegasgiants
Vegasgiants's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 1,327
3
3
2
Vegasgiants's avatar
Vegasgiants
3
3
2
-->
@prefix
I'm a little tired of your insults 


You have nothing 

Dismissed
#157
prefix
prefix's avatar
Debates: 8
Posts: 542
3
4
9
prefix's avatar
prefix
3
4
9
-->
@Vegasgiants
I am tired on your entrenched, yet inaccurate view of how things are.

I'm a little tired of your insults 
List here the "insults".

You are the one who has nothing.

Your reasoning is dismissed.

P.S. The NWS has predicted temperatures that preclude the existence of snowflakes.


Topic's author
#158
Vegasgiants
Vegasgiants's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 1,327
3
3
2
Vegasgiants's avatar
Vegasgiants
3
3
2
-->
@prefix
Dismissed 
#159
prefix
prefix's avatar
Debates: 8
Posts: 542
3
4
9
prefix's avatar
prefix
3
4
9
-->
@Vegasgiants
You claim someone or something insulted you, yet you have not listed the ostensible "insults".

Are you not aware of them? 

Is it just a feeling that you or someone has been insulted by someone or something?

It must be difficult to be you.

Where is that debate?


Topic's author
#160
Vegasgiants
Vegasgiants's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 1,327
3
3
2
Vegasgiants's avatar
Vegasgiants
3
3
2
-->
@prefix
I will reply with them to you now on


It may be too late to save you.

#161
John_C_87
John_C_87's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 287
0
2
5
John_C_87's avatar
John_C_87
0
2
5
-->
@Vegasgiants
As the author of the debate the argument itself is flawed as democrats nor republican should have ever used abortion as a political viewpoint in elections. This is because of not only the Supreme Court’s ruling in 1973 in Roe Vs Wade. It has much more to do with American legislation of laws written for patient privacy which went into effect in 2000. Changing the wording used to an overall Constitutional idea describing not just a realistic treatment but it holds a level of privacy of treatment by women in such a way as to be more in line with up-to-date law and regulation. Abortionis a legislative dead term it is abolished by unratified constitutional right and legislated laws that ahve been placed in effect over a time period.
#162
prefix
prefix's avatar
Debates: 8
Posts: 542
3
4
9
prefix's avatar
prefix
3
4
9
-->
@Vegasgiants
I will reply with them to you now on

Is there a context here?

What concept are you trying to advance?

It may be too late to save you.
Save me?

From what?

From scientific data?

From facts?

It is in fact you who needs saved:

Saved from an entrenched chauvinistic view of  thinking that your OPINION outweighs FACTS  presented by dozens of science based entities.
#163
prefix
prefix's avatar
Debates: 8
Posts: 542
3
4
9
prefix's avatar
prefix
3
4
9
-->
@John_C_87
Thanks for your post.

Perhaps a review of this thread may help.

The poster ( hereinafter P) began with "The key to victory in 2024 for the democrats lies in abortion"

prefix ( hereinafter  Victor or simply V) listed several concepts of more import.

V then found humor in the Freudian "democrats lies in abortion" and pointed out the lies about abortion.

Humourless P missed the joke entirely and asked for quotes that were lies.

V gave examples of democrats disseminating misinformation. P saw misinformation as being factual.

We then narrowed in on the concept of "at what age is there a gestational heart"?

P quoted ONE organization that supported his view of "no heart at 6 weeks"

V gave over a dozen respected scientific sources supporting the existence of the heart at 6 weeks.

V even gave personal experience supporting his view ( i.e. the family OBGYN)

P dug in his heels and denied ALL science.

And that brings us here......awaiting the next P chirp.



Topic's author
#164
Vegasgiants
Vegasgiants's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 1,327
3
3
2
Vegasgiants's avatar
Vegasgiants
3
3
2
-->
@prefix
It must be difficult to be you.

#165
prefix
prefix's avatar
Debates: 8
Posts: 542
3
4
9
prefix's avatar
prefix
3
4
9
-->
@Vegasgiants

Ah the P chirp!

It must be difficult to be you.
It is no more difficult than it is for any rational being.

But you might not be aware, as you leave too much in an unresolved state.

You seem to have difficulty in finding supporting documentation. A rational being might begin to question that being's beliefs.

"i anexétasti zoí den axízei na ti zeis"

sokrátis aná plátona



Topic's author
#166
Vegasgiants
Vegasgiants's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 1,327
3
3
2
Vegasgiants's avatar
Vegasgiants
3
3
2
-->
@prefix
I wonder about your reasoning ability.  
#167
prefix
prefix's avatar
Debates: 8
Posts: 542
3
4
9
prefix's avatar
prefix
3
4
9
-->
@Vegasgiants
Do you have any original thoughts at all?

Do you need assistance in finding evidence to corroborate the ACOG opinion?

Are you aware of the hierarchical importance of research over opinion?

If you cling to ideas that are incorrect, where is the room  for actual reality in your tiny crowded miniverse?

Never accept science based on a single source.


That's bad science 
The above is a quote from Vegasgiants on 07.16.2023 12:35PM , #109 in this thread.

And yet the argument by Vegasgiants, rests completely on a single source ( the ACOG ).

It is admitted by Vegasgiants as "bad science"

And Vegasgiants defends this with a single source.

A hypocrite is defined as "a person who acts in contradiction to his or her stated beliefs or feelings."   Hypocrite Definition & Meaning - Merriam-Webster

The APA states "Hypocrisy is a special case of cognitive dissonance, produced when a person freely chooses to promote a behavior that they do not themselves practice."

Hypocrisy by Vegasgiants is found here.

Cognitive dissonance by Vegasgiants is found here.


Topic's author
#168
Vegasgiants
Vegasgiants's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 1,327
3
3
2
Vegasgiants's avatar
Vegasgiants
3
3
2
-->
@prefix
You seem to have difficulty in finding supporting documentation. A rational being might begin to question that being's beliefs.
#169
prefix
prefix's avatar
Debates: 8
Posts: 542
3
4
9
prefix's avatar
prefix
3
4
9
-->
@Vegasgiants

The National Institute of Health
The Lozier Institute
"Detection of Functional Changes of the Fetal Heart in the First Trimester of Gestation. " by Pinto de Avila MA, et al.
"When Does the Human Embryonic Heart Start Beating? A Review of Contemporary and Historical Sources of Knowledge about the Onset of Blood Circulation in Man" 
"Embryonic heart activity: Appearance and development in early human pregnancy"
"Embryonic length, crown-rump length and fetal heart activity in early human pregnancy determination by transvaginal ultrasound."
Nishantivf "No heartbeat at 6 weeks is a sign of miscarriage"
Healthline
 American Public Health Association
The National Center for Biotechnology Information
PubMed
The National Library of Medicine
The Centers for Disease Control
The US Deportment of Health
The American Pregnancy Association
Medical News Today
The National Health Service of the United Kingdom
American Journal of Roentgenology
The Radiological Society of North America.

" there is a heart at 6 weeks gestation." per John_C_87

You P have offered NO CORROBORATION FOR ACOG 

NO PAPERS

Never accept science based on a single source.


That's bad science 
HYPOCRITE!!!!

Why don't you and the DNC get a room?




Topic's author
#170
Vegasgiants
Vegasgiants's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 1,327
3
3
2
Vegasgiants's avatar
Vegasgiants
3
3
2
-->
@prefix
OK we will
#171
prefix
prefix's avatar
Debates: 8
Posts: 542
3
4
9
prefix's avatar
prefix
3
4
9
-->
@Vegasgiants
Here are yet more FACTS for you to disregard.....

  • Pregnancy, Birth and Baby, a website backed by the Australian government: “If you have an ultrasound in the sixth week, you may be able to see the baby’s heart beating.”
  • Public Health Agency of Canada: “The tissues that will form the heart begin to beat. The heartbeat can be detected with ultrasound at around 6 weeks of pregnancy.
  • Johns Hopkins places it even earlier, saying on its website that “the heart is beating” by the end of four weeks.
  • TheBump.com: “Baby’s heart is typically beating away by six weeks.”
  • Whattoexpect.com: “Your baby’s heart has started to beat sometime between week 5 and now.”
  • BabyCenter.com: “Your baby’s heart isn’t fully developed, but cells in the heart tube have started beating fast, around 160 times a minute. You may hear the sound this week if you have an early ultrasound.”
"Even Planned Parenthood’s website .... [described ] a six-week embryo as having “a very basic beating heart and circulatory system develop.” 

“A baby’s heart is actively beating at 6 weeks gestation and will have already beat nearly 16 million times by 15 weeks. In fact, at 6 weeks, when Stacey Abrams says a heartbeat doesn’t exist, that baby’s heart is actually beating at about 110 beats/min.”   

Harvard-Trained Scientist Confirms: “A Baby’s Heart is Actively Beating at Six Weeks”

All above references from" The fight over ‘heartbeat’ further inflames tensions in abortion battle" https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2022/09/26/fight-over-heartbeat-further-inflames-tensions-abortion-battle/ unless otherwise noted.

It is also found that ACOG is a registered lobbying organization.



#172
prefix
prefix's avatar
Debates: 8
Posts: 542
3
4
9
prefix's avatar
prefix
3
4
9
-->
@Vegasgiants
Make them pay upfront.
#173
John_C_87
John_C_87's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 287
0
2
5
John_C_87's avatar
John_C_87
0
2
5
 Just for the record the understanding is abortion is and has been found not innocent of crime by the Supreme Court, it is a process of illegal intention never correctly identified by the supreme court due to an invasion of American Constitutional privacy the crime creates. Which has now as of the year 20001 turned into violations of Federal and state patient privacy law. What this means for political candidates is the voters and the political figures alike who cast votes on the topic are taking part in a likely criminal act requiring a court trial to resume the idea of innocence. It can be taken as far as to say the days of atwo-part processes in election on the Federal level like Oval Executive officer are over if not numbered. All candidates for Oval Executive Office and Federal office are republican as a united state of consitutional right, higher law, and the election process for Oval Executive officer and Federal office should not be so time consuming with parties requiring unnecessary voter’s runoffs, it is detrimental to work required to address Constitutional legislation.
#174
John_C_87
John_C_87's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 287
0
2
5
John_C_87's avatar
John_C_87
0
2
5
The honest but extreme answer is a heartbeat according to science or medical doctor does not "ever" make thechild a citizen of the country a mother lives in during her pregnancy. All children become a citizen after birth as a result of that birth and the filing of legal documents not heartbeat before birth. Correct?

the year was to be written as 2001 not 20001. 
#175
sadolite
sadolite's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 3,173
3
2
4
sadolite's avatar
sadolite
3
2
4
The key to victory for the Democrats is arresting  and jailing all possible challengers before election day.
#176
prefix
prefix's avatar
Debates: 8
Posts: 542
3
4
9
prefix's avatar
prefix
3
4
9
-->
@sadolite
Some days it does seem that way.
#177
YouFound_Lxam
YouFound_Lxam's avatar
Debates: 34
Posts: 2,182
3
4
7
YouFound_Lxam's avatar
YouFound_Lxam
3
4
7
Ahhhh, the abortion argument.

An interesting debate. 
Whether a life is considered valuable even in the womb.

It is indeed a life, that is for sure. Becomes a life at conception. We can all agree on that fact. 
But where people disagree, is whether it is valuable or not.

Now, human life is valuable, and that's why we made murder illegal. So, is a fetus, or zygote considered human life?
Well, by definition it is. It is a life................that is human. 
So, now the argument isn't whether human life is valuable or not, it is now about how some human life is valuable, while some isn't.
And for that, we are going to need some standards.

At what point does a human life become valuable? 
Well, some consider birth that point. 
But this doesn't make logical sense, because if you are arguing that, then you are saying that just minutes before the child emerged from the mother, it wouldn't have been valuable, and therefore you would be justified to kill it. 
I mean, if it was halfway out of the mother, would only one half of the baby be valuable? 

It just doesn't make sense to stand on that notion. 
So, at what point does the life become valuable then?
Topic's author
#178
Vegasgiants
Vegasgiants's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 1,327
3
3
2
Vegasgiants's avatar
Vegasgiants
3
3
2
-->
@YouFound_Lxam
Wherever the state sets the limit.  Because we say so.  That's how democracy works
#179
YouFound_Lxam
YouFound_Lxam's avatar
Debates: 34
Posts: 2,182
3
4
7
YouFound_Lxam's avatar
YouFound_Lxam
3
4
7
-->
@Vegasgiants
Wherever the state sets the limit.  Because we say so.  That's how democracy works
I'm talking about morally. Where would the moral limit have to be set. 

If the state says its ok to murder someone if they are a certain race, would that be ok?
No because that is morally wrong. So where should the limit be set morally. 
Topic's author
#180
Vegasgiants
Vegasgiants's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 1,327
3
3
2
Vegasgiants's avatar
Vegasgiants
3
3
2
-->
@YouFound_Lxam
Morally 20 weeks.  No fetus has survived born by that point