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.
originally posted by: UKTruth
originally posted by: Annee
originally posted by: UKTruth
originally posted by: Annee
originally posted by: Bone75
originally posted by: Annee
a reply to: Teikiatsu
I don't really care.
It's none of their damn business.
It's none of your business if I wanna kill my dog and eat it either, but the society I live in has decided it is. So I can either just go without dogmeat, or I can go find myself a society that's more welcoming to the practice.
I support LIVING CHILDREN.
You are talking about a dog that is already living.
Do you support DACA? Those are LIVING CHILDREN.
Yes the DACA children have a right to life. The right to citizenship is a different argument.
What's your point?
NO -- it is NOT a different argument.
You are either Pro LIVING CHILDREN or you're not.
And DACA is not about citizenship.
Totally different, obviously. Ending life in one case and not in the other. It's a stupid comparison.
DACA kids can have a life in Mexico or wherever they were brought from.
Anti-abortions bills should be unconstitutional.
originally posted by: Annee
originally posted by: UKTruth
originally posted by: Annee
originally posted by: UKTruth
originally posted by: Annee
originally posted by: Bone75
originally posted by: Annee
a reply to: Teikiatsu
I don't really care.
It's none of their damn business.
It's none of your business if I wanna kill my dog and eat it either, but the society I live in has decided it is. So I can either just go without dogmeat, or I can go find myself a society that's more welcoming to the practice.
I support LIVING CHILDREN.
You are talking about a dog that is already living.
Do you support DACA? Those are LIVING CHILDREN.
Yes the DACA children have a right to life. The right to citizenship is a different argument.
What's your point?
NO -- it is NOT a different argument.
You are either Pro LIVING CHILDREN or you're not.
And DACA is not about citizenship.
Totally different, obviously. Ending life in one case and not in the other. It's a stupid comparison.
DACA kids can have a life in Mexico or wherever they were brought from.
Not different.
You either support the welfare of LIVING CHILDREN.
Or you don't.
originally posted by: intrepid
originally posted by: UKTruth
originally posted by: intrepid
originally posted by: Carcharadon
originally posted by: intrepid
originally posted by: Bone75
originally posted by: Bluntone22
There are exceptions in the bill for rape, incest and the mothers health.
To me, those exceptions undermine the moral precedent of this entire bill. Are the products of rape and incest less than human?
You want women to have kids that were a result of the worst experience in their lives? Violated in ways a man can't imagine? Adding to the trauma that they had?
What do you mean "in ways a man can't imagine"? Men can't be raped? Or is rape somehow worse for a woman than a man?
Explain your idiotic statement please.
The frequency of men getting raped outside of prison is quite rare. Women are raped at a vastly higher rate daily. So unless you've experienced this type of violation keep you "idiotic" statements to yourself.
Give it a rest. About half of one percent of pregnancies are due to rape.
Then why are you guys busting a nut over it then? The lack of logic with you is astounding. Logic pretzels anyone?
originally posted by: Bone75
originally posted by: dug88
Just like there's no drug dealers in countries with the death penalty for that right?
I said you'd be hard pressed.
Also drug dealers don't spend hundreds of thousands of dollars and go through 8 years of college to deal drugs.
Well American doctors do, but that's beside the point.
originally posted by: UKTruth
originally posted by: Annee
originally posted by: UKTruth
originally posted by: Annee
originally posted by: UKTruth
originally posted by: Annee
originally posted by: Bone75
originally posted by: Annee
a reply to: Teikiatsu
I don't really care.
It's none of their damn business.
It's none of your business if I wanna kill my dog and eat it either, but the society I live in has decided it is. So I can either just go without dogmeat, or I can go find myself a society that's more welcoming to the practice.
I support LIVING CHILDREN.
You are talking about a dog that is already living.
Do you support DACA? Those are LIVING CHILDREN.
Yes the DACA children have a right to life. The right to citizenship is a different argument.
What's your point?
NO -- it is NOT a different argument.
You are either Pro LIVING CHILDREN or you're not.
And DACA is not about citizenship.
Totally different, obviously. Ending life in one case and not in the other. It's a stupid comparison.
DACA kids can have a life in Mexico or wherever they were brought from.
Not different.
You either support the welfare of LIVING CHILDREN.
Or you don't.
Welfare and life are not the same thing, obviously.
Like I said, DACA children can live a good standard of living in Mexico or wherever they came from. If those places are truly untenable then they can seek asylum. No one is suggesting we kill them.
originally posted by: Sookiechacha
a reply to: UKTruth
No one is suggesting we kill them.
Just abandon them. Aren't you the bastion of moral platitudes!
originally posted by: Bone75
originally posted by: Annee
a reply to: Bone75
A fetus is a group of cells with potential to become a LIVING human.
It is NOT a living human.
I can attest to that because I pullled my 4th month spontaneous aborted fetus out of the toilet.
It was NOT a LIVING CHILD.
I'm sorry your child died.
originally posted by: Annee
originally posted by: Bone75
originally posted by: Annee
a reply to: Bone75
A fetus is a group of cells with potential to become a LIVING human.
It is NOT a living human.
I can attest to that because I pullled my 4th month spontaneous aborted fetus out of the toilet.
It was NOT a LIVING CHILD.
I'm sorry your child died.
It was NOT a child.
It was a clump of cells with potential to become a human.
No different then personal choice stop a clump of cells from progressing further.
originally posted by: MysticPearl
originally posted by: Annee
originally posted by: Bone75
originally posted by: Annee
a reply to: Bone75
A fetus is a group of cells with potential to become a LIVING human.
It is NOT a living human.
I can attest to that because I pullled my 4th month spontaneous aborted fetus out of the toilet.
It was NOT a LIVING CHILD.
I'm sorry your child died.
It was NOT a child.
It was a clump of cells with potential to become a human.
No different then personal choice stop a clump of cells from progressing further.
Most "clumps of cells" don't have a heartbeat.
does
There's a helluva difference between pulling a tumor out of one's body than a fetus with a heartbeat.
originally posted by: dawnstar
a reply to: Bone75
so was I and I would say that it's a whole different matter. the psychological effects entirely different.
but if you are against the exemptions in this law, then you must be all for making that young child of 9, 10, 11, 12, or whatever age victim of such an abuse continue with the pregnancy...
originally posted by: MysticPearl
a reply to: Annee
If your line is drawn at a "living human being", then you'd support abortion at 37 weeks.
A "living human being" might even be classified as a human which can survive without the help or assistance of others. In that case we can just murder most infants and clean out a number of assisted living and old folks homes.
originally posted by: Sookiechacha
a reply to: UKTruth
No one is suggesting we kill them.
Just abandon them. Aren't you the bastion of moral platitudes!