Eight countries sign up to counter Trump's global anti-abortion move

a reply to: SpaceGoatFart

Ya, that whole thing makes no sense.

originally posted by: reldra
a reply to: reldra

This

is more accurate. Your picture makes it look like a toddler.

So babies are just measured in size? At what weight does a baby become a baby?

a reply to: reldra

I suppose 36 week year old infants have tougher skin & bones than 20 week old fetuses. But then again I'm no expert.

a reply to: IgnoranceIsntBlisss

In time, ability to live outside the womb without horrible consequences, mainly.

originally posted by: IgnoranceIsntBlisss
a reply to: reldra

I suppose 36 week year old infants have tougher skin & bones than 20 week old fetuses. But then again I'm no expert.

They certainly have progressed much more toward being able to live outside of the womb. Lung and brain function has increased dramatically.

originally posted by: reldra

I think most states have it at 20 weeks. Some a week or 2 less or a week more. I could google a list if you like.

It's not obvious. And emojis don't make your post look nicer.

I didn't ask when various states set late term abortions. I was really asking what you defined them as (when is too late in your book????).

originally posted by: reldra

originally posted by: IgnoranceIsntBlisss
a reply to: IgnoranceIsntBlisss

I suppose 36 week year old infants have tougher skin & bones than 20 week old fetuses. But then again I'm no expert.

They certainly have progressed much more toward being able to live outside of the womb. Lung and brain function has increased dramatically.Did no science class walk you through this in school?

originally posted by: reldra
What has this got to do with abortions not considered late term?

Trying to derail you with appeal to emotion.

The topic is simple:

Whether you agree with birth control or not, cutting the funding of its promotion worldwide (especially poor countries) means an increase of poverty, famine, and sub-sequentially, emigration from those countries.

That's the legacy of this decision by Trump. It was not motivated by logic or the well-being of Americans. It's only to please Christian fundamentalists who voted for him.

a reply to: reldra

His picture is from a different angle...are you serious?

a reply to: raymundoko

His picture is a magnification. I am serious and am done with this thread.

a reply to: reldra

Oh, a magnification, that changes everything. GTFO .

I have to say, I was unaware until fairly recently that the U.S. funded abortions overseas. Apparently I was not the only one. Good on Trump for making people aware by de-funding this initiative.

Lets call it what it is shall we, "family planning" or whatever is just a prettier name for killing the unborn.

I'm all for extenuating circumstances to save the mother's life, etc. what about these women who have had eight, ten, twelve of them?

It's MY body MY choice

I'll tell that to the judge next time I decide to miss an alimony payment to the ex-wife, oh wait.....

originally posted by: reldra
a reply to: Profusion

It is fantastic news! So many places around the world will suffer due to lack of family planning information due to the NGO EO. Too bad for Trump, it won't stop sane people from filling in the financial gap.

Around the world? Please elaborate, I didn't know his EO affected laws of other countries.

It does'nt.

It just stops US funding of taxpayer sponsored abortions overseas.

Lol abortions are not banned it just the state will not fund them anymore. Honestly whats the cost of something like that 600 dollars for the pill and 350 up to 800 for surgery without medical insurance!

If you dont want a kid you will find 350 quickly between two working adults its $175 to $400. Damn people its more costly to run a f--king red light and get a ticket but i dont see people on here advocating for paying redlight fines. The real issue here is instead of just having the procedure done without anyone knowing other people will need to be informed aka underage girls and women who dont want a kid but dont have the money to abort it. 90 percent of the time that reality is laid on the man anyway who forks out the money for one and then is given a guilt trip about how much these poor women dont actually want to follow through with it. But as most people can see once funding is cut to it amazingly these poor women who never wanted to have to go through an abortion will become rabid foaming at the mouth crazy to defend abortions.

Its total bs from first off to give women the full option to have or abort the child then to also give them the power to make the man pay for the child regardless of what he wanted. All this does is allow women to be irresponsible and are protected regardless of their partner wants.

Feminist are agaisnt this because without goverment funded abortions they cant be sexually liberated from males allowing them to have multiple partners it will become too costly over the years.

originally posted by: IgnoranceIsntBlisss
a reply to: Profusion

I hadn't realized there was a global US abortion apparatus. Interesting!

Me either.

What is beyond clear to me is that if people are going to advocate the 'right' to deal with things, they should also be against the idea of it simultaneously. They should advocate people going to lengths to argue against actually going and doing it. It is actually possible to advocate against such brutality, while also being for the availability of it as an option. Unfortunately, I've never witnessed the words of a pro-abortion soul to ever put it anywhere near that set of terms....

That is the most sane and reasonable comment I have ever heard on this subject.