"Women's reproductive rights" or a Child's right to be born? It's all about choiceS.

a reply to: Another_Nut

Glad we agree though...

No, we don't agree. Just be be clear;

You said:

You dont mean "viable" you mean "outside the womb"

I said, "Yes", that's exactly what I mean; fetal viability, the ability to survive outside the womb " That is the obvious answer when weighing the rights of the woman compared to the rights of the states to interfere."

We clear?

originally posted by: Sookiechacha

No they didn't. Fetal viability has medical and scientific validity to it, and is the logical, thought out process of balancing the rights of the woman to the interest of the state to protect life. Your 14 weeks is a number that is pulled out of someone's butt.

They are using an arbitrary condition, when is it human? When are you not killing a human? Today it is down to 20 weeks, in 10 years it might be 14 weeks for viability. What doesn't change is that it is human the whole time, so if you do not want an endless argument of when you need to pick something and not just what you like either.

Have it your way and you can argue forever, don't really care.

Ah, but it is the point. Any abortion ban, at any number of weeks, rather than a viability benchmark is the point. Some fetuses will never achieve viability at any "date", not at 14 weeks, not at 32 weeks.

There are a lot of benchmarks...

originally posted by: andy06shake

Which company, and how have we gone from abortions to vaccines?

Mandating vaccines or you lose your livelihood is mandating a medical practice while not taking into consideration the health or well-being of the individual. What this means is the whole "my body my choice" for abortions was pretty much destroyed once those same people screaming for abortions started to scream for people to get the vaccine or their livelihood would be destroyed.

People can't have it both ways.

a reply to: Xtrozero

Who are these "same people" your alluding to?

Nobody forced us to take vaccines Xtrozero, it was by choice where I hail from.

And how can people not have it both ways?

If you do not wish to be vaccinated, don't get vaccinated.

And if a woman does not wish to have a baby she can choose to have an abortion within a reasonable time scale.

Which in most forward-thinking states and nations amounts to around 24 weeks.

Vaccinations and abortions are hardly synonymous with one another.

Conflating the two serves little purpose.

Unless of course, it's an "anti-vax" purpose.

originally posted by: andy06shake

Who are these "same people" your alluding to?

Really? You didn't know that people lost their jobs because they wouldn't get vaccinated, young adults couldn't go back to college without being vaccinated so on and so forth? What do you think mandate means? Millions of young people didn't get the vaccine because they wanted to, they were forced to keep their way of life untouched.

Your logic works the same with abortions in they do not need to get one and can just have the baby.

They are similar since both are medical procedures dealing with one's body and the government is forcing the choice.

a reply to: Xtrozero

I hate to break it to you Xtrozero but "employers" have made their ""employees"" jump through hoops and be vaccinated long before the likes of COVID-19 and mRNA vaccines were ever a thing.

Same with schools and the kids that attend such.

Start a thread on it and you know ile play.

But do you need to turn this one into anti-vax lunacy?

As to logic, well that would suggest that a woman's body is her own concern, just like your body is your own concern.

Abortion is a choice, and a woman's choice at that.

Vaccination, again is a choice.

Logic is not mine by the way, the origin of logic lies with the ancient Greeks or thereabouts.

link.springer.com...#:~:text=premises%20are%20true.-,The%20origins%20of%20logic%20are%20with%20the%20Greeks%2 0who%20were,argument%20and%20convincing%20an%20audience.

We should stop referring to the issue as "women's reproductive rights"; the issue of reproduction does not just impact women. It should be referred to simply as "reproductive rights".

The language we use to talk about pregnancy and abortion is changing. But not everyone welcomes the shift

CNN

Abortion and Repoduction are not a matter of "women's" rights.

originally posted by: andy06shake

I hate to break it to you Xtrozero but "employers" have made their ""employees"" jump through hoops and be vaccinated long before the likes of COVID-19 and mRNA vaccines were ever a thing.

It was mandated by the government... Companies with government contracts had to follow it too or lose their contracts. I truly understand vaccines are needed for school, but even those have doctor control over people who may not do well with them.

So back to my point... My body, My choice is total BS...

a reply to: Xtrozero

I think we will simply need to agree to disagree on the matter Xtrozero.

More than 70% of the population here in the UK choose to receive at least one dose of vaccine.

We did not need to be forced, point of fact they were lining up all of their own volition.

So again choice is a good thing, and a woman body is her own concern, whether it is vaccines or abortions.

I'm away to eat my Kebab now buddy(looks a bit like it could have claimed out of the bucket) and watch 2001, it's been emotional

I bid ye fair evening.

a reply to: Xtrozero

Today it is down to 20 weeks, in 10 years it might be 14 weeks for viability.

No it isn't. The gestational age at which a healthy fetus can survive outside the womb hasn't changed. What has changed is the heroic technologies that can save babies born premature, fetal surgeries and other heroic types of medical intervention.

There are a lot of benchmarks...

Indeed there are. Which benchmark are you relying on, when you pick 14 weeks, that you think tips the scales from the woman's right to the states' right and why? Or did you just pick a number out of your ass?

originally posted by: Disgusted123
Republicans obviously feel women simply don't have the intelligence to make their OWN decisions when it comes to their pregnancies.

I agree. Women should not have autonomy of their own bodies. Only men should.

Women, accept that you like men controlling you and America can move on.

Put Trump in office and accept your fate. It will be easier on you. And if you keep resisting, we might take away your right to vote or maybe drive. We have the power to do it. You let us.

What it comes down to is personal responsibility. Women have a choice to spread their legs or not. They also have the choice to be on the pill and make sure their male partner wears a condom. They can take a plan B pill the day after.

originally posted by: Sookiechacha
Indeed there are. Which benchmark are you relying on, when you pick 14 weeks, that you think tips the scales from the woman's right to the states' right and why? Or did you just pick a number out of your ass?

You don't really comprehend much... I told you to go re-read my post. The 14 weeks wasn't the point, and I said I don't care about what week is picked..make it the 6, 15, or 22-week ban, but it got to be one that the majority can live with.

a reply to: Xtrozero

What you keep failing to understand is that any arbitrary abortion ban that isn't a viability ban is untenable for women carrying a fetus with a congenital defect that makes the survival of the fetus outside of the uterus impossible, whether the fetus is 5 weeks,15 or 32 weeks. So, a woman carrying a fetus with no brain, for example, must carry that fetus till birth because it still has a heartbeat or is at a gestational age past 15 weeks.

Now, if you say that only abortion on demand is banned at 15 weeks, and make it easy for women to access safe, legal and affordable abortions, and allow for exceptions, like the fetal anomalies and the health of the woman up till fetal viability, I'm all in.

originally posted by: Xtrozero

originally posted by: Sookiechacha
Indeed there are. Which benchmark are you relying on, when you pick 14 weeks, that you think tips the scales from the woman's right to the states' right and why? Or did you just pick a number out of your ass?

. . . but it got to be one that the majority can live with.

Majority?

It is no one else's business except those personally making a decision.

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: Xtrozero

originally posted by: Sookiechacha
Indeed there are. Which benchmark are you relying on, when you pick 14 weeks, that you think tips the scales from the woman's right to the states' right and why? Or did you just pick a number out of your ass?

. . . but it got to be one that the majority can live with.

Majority?

It is no one else's business except those personally making a decision.

No worries. When people are given the opportunity to vote on the issue, so far, they've voted for the restoration of women's rights.

originally posted by: Sookiechacha

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: Xtrozero

originally posted by: Sookiechacha
Indeed there are. Which benchmark are you relying on, when you pick 14 weeks, that you think tips the scales from the woman's right to the states' right and why? Or did you just pick a number out of your ass?

. . . but it got to be one that the majority can live with.

Majority?

It is no one else's business except those personally making a decision.

No worries. When people are given the opportunity to vote on the issue, so far, they've voted for the restoration of women's rights.

Yes, that's good.

I mean seriously -- if it was about voting on a man's sperm count -- this would be dead in the water.

You never mess with a man's virility.

originally posted by: Sookiechacha

Now, if you say that only abortion on demand is banned at 15 weeks, and make it easy for women to access safe, legal and affordable abortions, and allow for exceptions, like the fetal anomalies and the health of the woman up till fetal viability, I'm all in.

That works perfectly for me.

originally posted by: Annee

You never mess with a man's virility.

Don't complain. I give you 10 million and you only need one.

originally posted by: andy06shake
If you do not wish to be vaccinated, don't get vaccinated.

My husband didn't want to be vaccinated, but he had to in order to keep his job.
And we need his job for an income otherwise we'd be homeless.

a reply to: Echo007

Now that is a valid argument they have morning after pills and plan B. Why would you wait months just to decide you don't want kids. After 3 months i dont understand why you would change your mind? I can understand if the doctor tells you it could be dangerous. But even a doctor would warn you before 3 months. So if most abortions are done because not wanting kids then why are people waiting?