I've hesitated to post this thread, but someone has to speak out.

It's not proof of the necessity when you are for abortion outside of rape and incest. 😂😂😂 Good lord you are mental.
Sure it is. Whoever said those were the only two reasons? Certainly not me.
If there is one reason, there may be a second. If there are two reasons, there may be a third and fourth.
Not sure why you find it such a difficult concept.....talk about mental.
 
The zygote is an embryo in the fertilization stage that is the beginning of human life.

I am not against the day after pill though. I am against abortion past the first trimester.

Are you?
Yes - except in the most unusual of circumstances.
 
  • Like
Reactions: NEO
What do they call the rate of zygotes that don/t make it?

Also, I believe it is 25% that don't make it. 75% do.
'After simple adjustments for varying methods, existing data show that at least 73% of natural single conceptions have no real chance of surviving 6 weeks of gestation. Of the remainder, about 90% will survive to term."

I have no idea what they call them......nature's cruel murder of unborn children?
The vast majority of those terminated without the female having any idea.
 
They’re not telling a city or state how to legislate, only that they’ll choose to do business elsewhere based on how a particular city or state legislates.

No different than people here advocating boycotting Nike or Adidas for political reasons, or LGBT activists boycotting Chick Fil’A based on its founder’s religious beliefs.
The people boycotting are effectively saying 'change your law or we will hurt your economy' so they are telling them how to legislate.
 
Yes - except in the most unusual of circumstances.

Ok so if I am understanding correctly you are against abortion past the first trimester unless it’s due to rape or risk of danger etc. Maybe it’s genetic defects too, which I disagree with, but am not going to split hairs there.

If so then I give u credit and I was too harsh.

There is some common ground there.
 
  • Like
Reactions: luthervol
Ok so if I am understanding correctly you are against abortion past the first trimester unless it’s due to rape or risk of danger etc. Maybe it’s genetic defects too, which I disagree with, but am not going to split hairs there.

If so then I give u credit and I was too harsh.

There is some common ground there.
We are pretty much in complete agreement.
Genetic defects are a difficult issue. I would lean more toward leaving those issues up to the mother/father and a team of doctors.
 
  • Like
Reactions: NEO
We are pretty much in complete agreement.
Genetic defects are a difficult issue. I would lean more toward leaving those issues up to the mother/father and a team of doctors.

So now we're back to the old method of parents taking undesirables out into the woods and leaving them.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Rickyvol77
They’re not telling a city or state how to legislate, only that they’ll choose to do business elsewhere based on how a particular city or state legislates.

No different than people here advocating boycotting Nike or Adidas for political reasons, or LGBT activists boycotting Chick Fil’A based on its founder’s religious beliefs.

The analogy fails because your example above is of a group recommending ("advocating") the individual customers not patronize a business. This is more akin to groups demanding that a city or university not allow a business to open in town or on campus because members of that group disagree with certain views or policies expressed by owners.

Now, if the groups advocated that individual players boycott the tournament, that would be analogous. Each player could exercise his/her/their free choice to protest.

What's next? The NCAA boycotting states controlled by governors and legislatures from certain political parties? How is that any different from advocating for this action?
 
It's amazing how the right claims to stand up for individual rights but then passes a law that forces women to bear the children of rapists.

It's amazing that the left claims to represent the rights of "the little person" yet enthusiastically embraces the wholesale slaughter of dozens of millions of unborn humans. That is rank hypocrisy at its worst.
 
  • Like
Reactions: NEO and Rickyvol77
It's amazing that the left claims to represent the rights of "the little person" yet enthusiastically embraces the wholesale slaughter of dozens of millions of unborn humans. That is rank hypocrisy at its worst.
Haha, so I assume you preach about personal liberties and self-determination… except in this instance. 🙄
 
So now we're back to the old method of parents taking undesirables out into the woods and leaving them.
What?
That jump is WORSE than the jump required to say "people who are against abortion want to go back to the days when women were the property of men and had no rights."

Plus, you seem to have conveniently overlooked the "TEAM OF DOCTORS" part.
 
Haha, so I assume you preach about personal liberties and self-determination… except in this instance. 🙄

Yeah, you got me there. I am 100% against executing innocent people, I must confess. I feel so badly for wanting to prohibit folks from exercising their right to murder others.

But it's not just this one instance. I'm also against euthanizing those with mental disabilities, drowning toddlers, lynchings, and genocides in general.
 
Last edited:

VN Store



Back
Top