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.

 

Pelosi Says Planet Is "God’s Creation" But Got Rattled When Asked If Unborn Baby Is Human

page: 9
39
<< 6  7  8   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 29 2019 @ 06:13 PM
link   
a reply to: Bloodworth




As a country built on 1 nation under God, the citizens sure do hope so.


There are many "gods" to consider, not just your "Christian" god. According to our currency, the "god" that we trust in in Mammon, i.e. money.




posted on Mar, 29 2019 @ 06:15 PM
link   
a reply to: RadioRobert




What is the reason to defend killing viable children in utero in non-life-threatening situations?


Please cite an example of this happening, legally, in the USA. Find one, and you will have your answer.

In other words, do your own research.



posted on Mar, 29 2019 @ 06:32 PM
link   
a reply to: Sookiechacha

We already demonstrated this happens. It's why the state laws specifically address the mother's mental and physical health instead of her life.

If you do not think it happens, why not close the exemption in cases of non-life-threatening circumstances? What possible reason would we write it any other way? You said there are good reasons for the exemptions. What are they? If there aren't any, let's close the exemptions for non-life-threatening circumstances.


Further, we know they are happening. We only have to look to Neuhaus in Kansas who was approving third-trimester abortions for reasons of stress and anxiety if you need documented instances. You don't have to be a genius to notice every pregnancy is a source of anxiety, therefore every mother is legally able to abort a third-trimester abortion if they find a sympathetic and like-minded doctor who will diagnose stress (in states with such a provision) in order to kill the viable child in utero.

Repeatedly saying it isn't happening belies the existence of these laws referencing "health" and " mental health" instead of threats to the mother's life-- and obviously the reasons they are crafted that way.



posted on Mar, 29 2019 @ 06:40 PM
link   
a reply to: RadioRobert




We already demonstrated this happens.


You assert that it's happening. You have yet to provide a case of it actually happening. Find a case of it actually happening, and then argue against it, instead of feigning outrage for what might or could happen in your imagination.



posted on Mar, 29 2019 @ 06:58 PM
link   
a reply to: Sookiechacha

The laws are written in such a way that literally anything may justify a late-term abortion. I gave you a specific example of a doctor losing her license after the board determined she was improperly referring patients for late abortions for mental health reasons.

You would have to be naive to assume the laws are written this way for no reason, or be exceptionally deceitful to deny it is happening.

The Supreme Court has thus far upheld mental health concerns to be viable reasons under the "healfh of mother" clauses. Why would it be forced to decide that issue if it was not happening? Doe vs Bolton as one example, sued to keep that option open. The ruling states " ...the medical judgment may be exercised in the light of all factors - physical, emotional, psychological, familial, and the woman's age - relevant to the well-being of the patient... "

Why would there be a lawsuit to force the court to acknowledge the applicability of cases that never happen? Why would the court specifically allow for things that according to you are never happening?



posted on Mar, 29 2019 @ 07:09 PM
link   
a reply to: RadioRobert

You haven't sourced your claim. Please do that.

In the meantime, do you think a pregnant 10 year old girl, who was raped by her uncle, should be forced to carry to term and deliver that baby?

If the woman, as you claim, lost her license, then what she was doing wasn't legal. I specifically asked you to cite a legal situation where a doctor aborted a healthy viable fetus. In the case that you haven't cited, was the fetus healthy and viable? How do you know, did you see the woman's medical chart, or are taking outraged pro-lifers word for it?



posted on Mar, 29 2019 @ 07:18 PM
link   
You think Neuhaus is the only one handing out permission for late period abortions for mental health reasons?

But here's the kicker for your latest false equivalency. She lost her license for improperly documenting the health exemption. On those cases which reach proper documentation, these abortions are completely legal. noone (except you. apparently) denies these are currently legal and occurring. For reasons that are not life-threatening.


You've twisted yourself into such a pretzel to avoid listing the "good reasons" that you forgot they aren't supposed to be happening at all according to you... *eyeroll*

Way to hide behind the "how would you know their life isn't in danger or that the fetus is not actually viable" talking point to avoid admitting what even the majority of the pro-choice crowd doesn't pretend is not happening.


edit on 29-3-2019 by RadioRobert because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 29 2019 @ 07:38 PM
link   
a reply to: RadioRobert

You need to cite and source real medical case, not just throw around names and innuendos. Do you homework and present an actual case were a doctor opted to abort a healthy, viable fetus legally, here in the USA. Then, if there is enough information, we can discuss the doctor's reasoning and how it reckons with state laws and Roe V Wade.


edit on 29-3-2019 by Sookiechacha because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 29 2019 @ 08:03 PM
link   
We can't have an intellectually honest discussion if you're going to willfully pretend abortions never happen in non-life-threatening situations (legally, no less). If you want to talk about "very good reasons" outside of life-threatening situations that you feel may justify killing a viable child, then feel free to make your best case. Beyond that, I'm over the word games, name-calling, and pretzel logic trollery.



posted on Mar, 29 2019 @ 09:08 PM
link   
a reply to: RadioRobert




We can't have an intellectually honest discussion if you're going to willfully pretend abortions never happen in non-life-threatening situations (legally, no less).


I never said women weren't getting abortions for non-medical reasons. Almost all abortions are for non-medical issues. I'm not addressing those abortions.

You're changing the goal posts. First, there was claim that Democrats want doctors to be able to murder newborn babies. Then, there was the claim that Democrats want doctors to able to kill viable healthy fetuses. Now, you're saying that women are getting abortions for non-life threatening reasons.

What happened to you wanting to know good reasons for late terms exemptions, that might legally allow a doctor to abort viable fetus? If you find a case like that, present it. Then we can have a discussion.



posted on Mar, 29 2019 @ 09:38 PM
link   
I never said half those things. I said viable children are being aborted under non-life-threatening conditions. You've called me a liar, misogynist, etc in the several pages since then and are still dancing around the issue pretending it doesn't happen. I think we know who the liar is in the "discussion".

Here's a nice anecdote from doctor Susan Robinson, also of Tiller fame:



Women whose fetuses have terrible abnormalities, Robinson said, "are a lot easier for people to understand. The husband and wife want to spare their baby whatever suffering that baby would have."

"Then there's the group of women who didn't know they were pregnant," she said. "They were told they were not pregnant for one reason or another and they are just as desperate. 'I already have three children, my husband just lost his job and I can barely put food on the table. If I add a new baby to this family, we'll all go under.'"


I guess you should tell her she doesn't know what she is talking about and she didn't refer or terminate children for anyone like that, and neither does anyone else...

Here's a story from Ron Fitzsimmons, one-timsnexecutive director of the National Coalition of Abortion Providers:





A prominent member of the pro-abortion community has confirmed what opponents of partial-birth abortion said from the beginning.
Fitzsimmons also says that he "lied through my teeth" in a "Nightline" interview when he asserted that partial-birth abortions were performed rarely and only when the life of the mother or the health of the fetus was in question...

We also knew, as did hundreds of obstetrician/gynecologists and fetal-maternal specialists including former Surgeon General C. Everett Koop, that "partial-birth abortion is never medically necessary to protect a mother's health or her future fertility." Indeed, the doctors say the breech-style delivery used in this procedure can significantly threaten a mother's health or ability to carry future children to term...

The Supreme Court interprets "health" abortions so broadly as to include all those related to social, psychological, financial or emotional concerns...


edit on 29-3-2019 by RadioRobert because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 29 2019 @ 09:54 PM
link   
“The spin out of Washington was that it was only done for medical necessity, even though we knew it wasn’t so. I kept waiting for [the National Abortion Federation] to clarify it and they never did. I got caught up: What do we do about this secret? Who do we tell and what happens when we tell? But frankly, no one was asking me, so I didn’t have to worry.”

Renee Chelian, president of the National Coalition of Abortion Providers

“Abortion: Activists lied: Pro-choice advocates admit to deception.” Bergen Record, February 27, 1997


Thank goodness, that particular horror is finally stopped. Are you really trying to convince anyone that providers who lied about partial-birth abortion would never lie about other late-term abortions?



posted on Mar, 29 2019 @ 10:06 PM
link   
Exodus 21:22 ! Life of the unborn is lesser than that of its mother ! Yeled and Yasa no matter the semantics or vernacular ! Life starts at exit ? I don’t know , but the OT does not support the Christian Right



posted on Mar, 29 2019 @ 10:40 PM
link   
a reply to: RadioRobert




I said viable children are being aborted under non-life-threatening conditions.


Show me!

By the way....

18 U.S. Code § 1531.Partial-birth abortions prohibited www.law.cornell.edu...

Do your research, outside of pro-life anti-choice outlets.



posted on Mar, 29 2019 @ 10:56 PM
link   
a reply to: Sookiechacha





Thank goodness, that particular horror is finally stopped.


www.rif.org



posted on Mar, 30 2019 @ 12:53 AM
link   

originally posted by: wheresthebody
I thought christians believed that the world was here for our personal exploitation, and that limited resources didn't matter because the end is nigh.


You thought wrong. So many assumptions and stereotyping by the atheists and the anti-religious. It's getting boring, the lack of any rational argument.

There are some fundamentalists who might think that way, but that's not how Christians generally think.

I swear that there's a spirit of animus that rouses people to irrational hatred and they always makes these kinds of ignorant statements while professing themselves to be so smart. It's absurd! Ridiculous. Like trying to reason with a teenager suffering from rebellious teenage angst who hasn't even read very many books, but who thinks they have it all figured out!



posted on Mar, 30 2019 @ 05:26 AM
link   

originally posted by: Sookiechacha
a reply to: Bloodworth




As a country built on 1 nation under God, the citizens sure do hope so.


There are many "gods" to consider, not just your "Christian" god. According to our currency, the "god" that we trust in in Mammon, i.e. money.



Your beating around the Bush. During the rise and foundation of the United states, it was built under one God. The Christian 1.

And the Irish, polish, Italian were very happy with that.

During the 40s, 50s, 60s, 70s, 80s and 90s the United stated had very strong patriotic citizens.
No exception. Learn English and pledge your allegiance to the country.

Go fight in war or go in a factory and help mass produce for the country. Zero handouts or help.

After high school men were ready to be fathers and work full time and women were real mothers.

A time when men were real men and women were real women.

Today literally looks like a freakshow.



posted on Mar, 30 2019 @ 09:31 AM
link   
a reply to: Bloodworth





During the 40s, 50s, 60s, 70s, 80s and 90s the United stated had very strong patriotic citizens.
No exception. Learn English and pledge your allegiance to the country.


Patriotism and religion are two different things, and you know what Jesus said about serving two masters....you can't.

If the United States were a "Christian" nation we would have Christian policy, based on Jesus' teachings, but we don't.



posted on Mar, 30 2019 @ 01:53 PM
link   
Dont we have a nation built on Roman catholics?
All roads lead to rome?



posted on Mar, 30 2019 @ 07:21 PM
link   




top topics



 
39
<< 6  7  8   >>

log in

join