It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Democratic Party takes major stand for reproductive freedom

page: 2
22
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 26 2016 @ 08:11 PM
link   

originally posted by: Metallicus
a reply to: xuenchen

I think there should be Federal funding for my next Gun purchase. By not providing Federal funds they are restricting access to my Second Amendment rights.



Yup.

With subsidies and tax credits too.

Oh and sales tax exempt.

What's fair is fair.





posted on Jun, 26 2016 @ 08:11 PM
link   

originally posted by: neo96


“The Democratic Party platform explicitly calls for repealing the Hyde Amendment, which restricts access to women’s reproductive rights, particularly low-income women and women of color,” Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton’s campaign said in a statement.


Why yes people!

Because minorities can't kill their offspring fast enough for the NAZI's.

That has been on the Democratic Party agenda since at least the early 70s .



posted on Jun, 26 2016 @ 08:14 PM
link   

originally posted by: In4ormant

originally posted by: Orionx2
Well I am not a Hillary fan but I am also pro-choice. There are already to many people in the world and anyone that wants to abort will not make the best of parents if denied the choice. The kid will have a miserable life and will probably end up being very negative to the world.



Your trying to predict the future. Just because you think the child will have a bad life it's ok. That excuse is pathetic. The kids not gonna be anything so it's OK to kill em. Seriously mate? That's all it takes for you to be ok with this?

Yes, actually. Sorry to be blunt. 40 years life experience...



posted on Jun, 26 2016 @ 08:16 PM
link   

originally posted by: Orionx2

originally posted by: In4ormant

originally posted by: Orionx2
Well I am not a Hillary fan but I am also pro-choice. There are already to many people in the world and anyone that wants to abort will not make the best of parents if denied the choice. The kid will have a miserable life and will probably end up being very negative to the world.



Your trying to predict the future. Just because you think the child will have a bad life it's ok. That excuse is pathetic. The kids not gonna be anything so it's OK to kill em. Seriously mate? That's all it takes for you to be ok with this?

Yes, actually. Sorry to be blunt. 40 years life experience...



40 years huh. That's actually more pathetic.



posted on Jun, 26 2016 @ 08:19 PM
link   

originally posted by: In4ormant
I don't want my tax money funding the death of babies. They wanna murder a kid then pony up the cash for your own convictions.


And I don't want to pay for someone's welfare.

It isn't murder if it isn't a living, thinking, feeling human being.

Perhaps the GOP wants to fund IUDs, tube-tying and birth control implants instead? Or do they just want women to be treated as chattel/property and expected to have sex only when they're told it's acceptable?



posted on Jun, 26 2016 @ 08:21 PM
link   
a reply to: MystikMushroom




It isn't murder if it isn't a living, thinking, feeling human being.


Well then mass shootings are just late term abortions.



posted on Jun, 26 2016 @ 08:23 PM
link   

originally posted by: MystikMushroom

originally posted by: In4ormant
I don't want my tax money funding the death of babies. They wanna murder a kid then pony up the cash for your own convictions.


And I don't want to pay for someone's welfare.

It isn't murder if it isn't a living, thinking, feeling human being.

Perhaps the GOP wants to fund IUDs, tube-tying and birth control implants instead? Or do they just want women to be treated as chattel/property and expected to have sex only when they're told it's acceptable?



"It isn't murder if it isn't a living, thinking, feeling human being"

-just wow


I'm holding out hope that was sarcasm and I'm just being slow tonight.
edit on 26-6-2016 by In4ormant because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 26 2016 @ 08:24 PM
link   
a reply to: neo96

How so?

I don't consider a clump of non-consciously aware cells a living, breathing, human being.

False equivalence.



posted on Jun, 26 2016 @ 08:25 PM
link   

originally posted by: MystikMushroom
a reply to: neo96

How so?

I don't consider a clump of non-consciously aware cells a living, breathing, human being.

False equivalence.


Is it alive?



posted on Jun, 26 2016 @ 08:25 PM
link   
a reply to: MystikMushroom




I don't consider a clump of non-consciously aware cells a living, breathing, human being.


That is a false equivalence.

We ALL come from the same place given the chance.

I thank GOD, and my mother she had me instead of killing me because of 'inconvenience'.



posted on Jun, 26 2016 @ 08:27 PM
link   
a reply to: In4ormant

This is America and I am allowed to have my own opinion. Based on the medical evidence I've been presented with, a fetus before the legal cut off isn't sentient and can't survive outside the host body of the mother. It isn't a human being.

Personally, I wouldn't ever choose pro-abortion if I was in that situation; but a woman should have the right to make that decision for herself and safe facilities available to her if she makes that decision.

It's not my place to tell a woman what she has growing inside of her has to be born. It isn't yours either. You and I do not have any moral authority over anyone else.

And if we're not using tax money on Planned Parenthood, I want all churches to pay income tax.



posted on Jun, 26 2016 @ 08:29 PM
link   
a reply to: neo96

Your post doesn't make any sense whatsoever.

A fetus is called a fetus, not an infant for a reason.



posted on Jun, 26 2016 @ 08:29 PM
link   
a reply to: MystikMushroom




This is America and I am allowed to have my own opinion. Based on the medical evidence I've been presented with, a fetus before the legal cut off isn't sentient and can't survive outside the host body of the mother. It isn't a human being.


Going by that 'evidence' that would make Clinton supporters ineligible to vote.



posted on Jun, 26 2016 @ 08:31 PM
link   
a reply to: neo96

Did you just suggest the victims of mass shootings were not living, thinking, feeling human beings?



posted on Jun, 26 2016 @ 08:31 PM
link   
a reply to: MystikMushroom




Your post doesn't make any sense whatsoever.


So we don't come from a womb ?

Do tell WHERE do we come from?



posted on Jun, 26 2016 @ 08:32 PM
link   

originally posted by: MystikMushroom
a reply to: In4ormant

This is America and I am allowed to have my own opinion. Based on the medical evidence I've been presented with, a fetus before the legal cut off isn't sentient and can't survive outside the host body of the mother. It isn't a human being.

Personally, I wouldn't ever choose pro-abortion if I was in that situation; but a woman should have the right to make that decision for herself and safe facilities available to her if she makes that decision.

It's not my place to tell a woman what she has growing inside of her has to be born. It isn't yours either. You and I do not have any moral authority over anyone else.

And if we're not using tax money on Planned Parenthood, I want all churches to pay income tax.


I feel comfortable telling any woman she doesn't have the right to murder an unborn child.

She has the right to make better decisions prior to exercising her 'right' to murder.



posted on Jun, 26 2016 @ 08:33 PM
link   
a reply to: In4ormant

No, it can't reproduce, so one of the conditions for life isn't met. Therefore, it isn't technically "alive". It has and shares some characteristics of something "alive" but it doesn't meet all the criteria.

Irrespective of that, we kill living things all the time. Ever mow your lawn or cut down a tree? A tree can reproduce at the time you cut it down, a fetus cannot.

Tell me something that one can do that the other cannot?



posted on Jun, 26 2016 @ 08:36 PM
link   

originally posted by: spiritualzombie
a reply to: neo96

Did you just suggest the victims of mass shootings were not living, thinking, feeling human beings?





2012 699,202


en.wikipedia.org...

What about THOSE victims there ?

More than the last 5 years of 'mass shootings'.

And NO I didn't suggest it.

Those victims where made by people that were not feeling, or thinking.
edit on 26-6-2016 by neo96 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 26 2016 @ 08:36 PM
link   

originally posted by: MystikMushroom
a reply to: In4ormant

No, it can't reproduce, so one of the conditions for life isn't met. Therefore, it isn't technically "alive". It has and shares some characteristics of something "alive" but it doesn't meet all the criteria.

Irrespective of that, we kill living things all the time. Ever mow your lawn or cut down a tree? A tree can reproduce at the time you cut it down, a fetus cannot.

Tell me something that one can do that the other cannot?


The ability to reproduce does not equate to "living".
There are many people, fish, cats etc. that are sterile. They are still "living".

If your going to draw an analogy between a fetus and a tree that's inaccurate. A more accurate analogy would be a fetus and a seed.
edit on 26-6-2016 by In4ormant because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 26 2016 @ 08:37 PM
link   
a reply to: In4ormant




I feel comfortable telling any woman she doesn't have the right to murder an unborn child.


I feel comfortable telling any woman that if I don't get a say in if my child lives don't expect me to pay for birth control.




top topics



 
22
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join