2024 Presidential Race

#42,701
#42,701
Sandman 423 said:
The trick that the left is so good at is putting just enough truth in so that they can claim it isn't a lie. For example, The article says they will deny life saving treatment to a child born through a botched abortion. See,They will not kill it, they just won't make any effort to save it. In their eyes they didn't lie even though letting it lay there suffering is a very cruel way to die.
Click to expand...

What percentage of abortions are performed after 24 weeks?
 
  • Like
Reactions: NashVol11
#42,703
#42,703
Sandman 423 said:
The trick that the left is so good at is putting just enough truth in so that they can claim it isn't a lie. For example, The article says they will deny life saving treatment to a child born through a botched abortion. See,They will not kill it, they just won't make any effort to save it. In their eyes they didn't lie even though letting it lay there suffering is a very cruel way to die.
Click to expand...
Palliative care is LESS cruel than the alternative, that’s the entire point
 
#42,713
#42,713
CobbVol said:
Unsure. Very sure that approximate 6,260 children died in the process.
Click to expand...
Well we’re talking about whether it’s illegal to kill, execute, or euthanize a baby after birth. Meaning the provider or the parent’s actions or neglect are responsible for the death of a child that is living outside the womb and has the ability to sustain life.

So are you conceding that that’s not legal and now we’re talking just the morality of abortion or are you defending the claim that the fact check was incorrect?

If the latter, what percentage of that “unsure” were aborted because of defects and deformities that were incompatible with sustained life?
 
  • Like
Reactions: NashVol11
#42,714
#42,714
Sandman 423 said:
The trick that the left is so good at is putting just enough truth in so that they can claim it isn't a lie. For example, The article says they will deny life saving treatment to a child born through a botched abortion. See,They will not kill it, they just won't make any effort to save it. In their eyes they didn't lie even though letting it lay there suffering is a very cruel way to die.
Click to expand...
Especially considering that medical ethics has traditionally made it a priority to do everything possible to save life. Of course we do allow adults of sound mind to ask that no extra efforts be made to extend their life in a medical emergency; but the just born child is not in a position to make such a decision; much less communicate it.
And if you want to understand just how ghoulish the democrat position on this is; remeber that they scuttled the proposed „Born Alive“ act that would have had doctors be vaialble to save the life of a child born alive during an abortion. Which is morally equivalent of trying to take a life, failing to succeed, and then getting help to make sure you don’t fail in your attempt to finish off the victim now.
Absolute barbarism
 
#42,716
#42,716
RockyTop85 said:
Well we’re talking about whether it’s illegal to kill, execute, or euthanize a baby after birth. Meaning the provider or the parent’s actions or neglect are responsible for the death of a child that is living outside the womb and has the ability to sustain life.

So are you conceding that that’s not legal and now we’re talking just the morality of abortion or are you defending the claim that the fact check was incorrect?

If the latter, what percentage of that “unsure” were aborted because of defects and deformities that were incompatible with sustained life?
Click to expand...
Because doctors are NEVER wrong about their pronouncements of who is and isn’t expected to live, right? 🙄
 
#42,720
#42,720
This is the kind of commerce killing crap we can expect with a Harris administration.

MSN

Warehouses are expanding to meet demand for e-commerce
That changed with a landmark policy in Southern California called the Warehouse Indirect Source Rule (ISR) that requires large warehouses to take steps to limit those tailpipe emissions. The EPA just approved the ISR as part of the state’s air plan, which gives the agency and people living near warehouses the ability to sue if companies violate the rule. Making the rule federally enforceable could also help pave the way for similar rules in other regions where warehouses are expanding to meet demand for e-commerce.

“These indirect sources, such as warehouses, ports, and rail yards, all contribute to pollution and therefore must be addressed so our communities can breathe cleaner air,” EPA Pacific Southwest regional administrator Martha Guzman said in the EPA’s announcement yesterday.
Click to expand...
 
  • Like
Reactions: InVOLuntary and RavinDave
#42,721
#42,721
NashVol11 said:
I would have thought he’d want one, to erase the memory of the last one, but oh well
Click to expand...
The polls are basically unchanged since the debate. Trump maintains a lead on the general polling as well as in the swing states. It’s late in the fourth quarter. Trump has the lead and the ball. Just get a few more first downs and it’s all over.
I wouldn’t risk throwing an interception either.
 
#42,722
#42,722
OrangeTsar said:
Because doctors are NEVER wrong about their pronouncements of who is and isn’t expected to live, right? 🙄
Click to expand...
That’s an argument against abortion, not related to whether babies are being euthanized after birth.

It seems we’re 1-3 on people actually caring enough about the death of innocents to study the issue. Hat tip to @CobbVol for knowing what he’s talking about. Shame on @Vol8188 @Sandman 423 and you for using tragedy as a political bludgeon.
 
#42,723
#42,723
RockyTop85 said:
That’s an argument against abortion, not related to whether babies are being euthanized after birth.

It seems we’re 1-3 on people actually caring enough about the death of innocents to study the issue. Hat tip to @CobbVol for knowing what he’s talking about. Shame on @Vol8188 @Sandman 423 and you for using tragedy as a political bludgeon.
Click to expand...
This isn’t political. It is morality. Abortion would be just as wrong if every politician on the planet was for it.
Doctors take an oath to preserve life. If they do not take whatever steps they are able to take to save a life; they have violated their most sacred trust.
 
  • Like
Reactions: InVOLuntary and dovervolz
#42,724
#42,724
OrangeTsar said:
This isn’t political. It is morality. Abortion would be just as wrong if every politician on the planet was for it.
Doctors take an oath to preserve life. If they do not take whatever steps they are able to take to save a life; they have violated their most sacred trust.
Click to expand...
Good talk. Off subject, though. Try reading back.
 
#42,725
#42,725
OrangeTsar said:
Doctors take an oath to preserve life. If they do not take whatever steps they are able to take to save a life; they have violated their most sacred trust.
Click to expand...
Another BS talking point, doctors let people die all the time and it doesn’t make them “executioners” or whatever. Passive euthanasia is legal in all 50 states
 
  • Like
Reactions: swampfoxfan and Go aeiou
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top