S.D. House Approves Abortion Ban Bill 467 replies

Please wait...

Dot Com

I'm too cool to Post

50 XP

26th June 2000

0 Uploads

6,116 Posts

0 Threads

#451 12 years ago

allocating




Guest

I didn't make it!

0 XP

 
#452 12 years ago
I'm still slightly confused by your answer. "Some elaboration on before birth, no." Does that mean that the unborn isn't alive even a day before its birth? And no, fetuses are not just "extentions" of the mother. They are completely unique human beings, with their very own chromosones and DNA. If they were simply "extentions", they'd have they exact same genetic makeup.

When the child can survive outside of the womb, it is alive. After it is born, and can live on it’s own, it is Alive. Until that time, no. Laws exist to stop late term abortions that is none issue. Most abortions are done in the first trimester. When it comes to chromosomes. Yes fetuses are extensions of the mother, and the father. Who do you think donated the chromosomes? What do you think you, and all the rest of mankind is? Surely not an extension of our parents? A production of their choice.

Growing constitutes life. Reproducing cells constitute life. Not being dead is being alive. If your heart is beating (A fetuses heart beats after 7-8 weeks.) then you are alive..

Funny thing about some definitions or ideas of what constitutes life. They can give "life" too thing‘s we know aren‘t alive. Take "fire", you are familiar with this phenomenon right? Well fire appears to breathe, grow, and even reproduce. Hell, it begins and it ends. Lives and dies so to speak. As for the mention of the heart in the fetus, that’s none issue. Until that heart can beat on its own in it’s own body, outside the uterus of the female body. It is not a candidate for civil liberties or any other fundamental human rights. The actual woman housing that fetus has those rights. If the baby is premature, or is in its 2nd or 3rd trimester it is subject to circumstance, as well as chance. Some people living today are aborted, abortions. Simply due to the fact that no abortion facilities existed, or it wasn‘t an option. 88% of all American counties lack abortion services as an elective planned choice. Emergency only abortions, which in all cases end up being the mothers life over the childs life, continue to exist, even with this particular ban. Right wingers and religious sects inflate abortion into this evil sinister thing making it seem like it is inexpensive, easy to do, and available in every area.




Locomotor

in spite of erosion

50 XP

13th May 2004

0 Uploads

3,490 Posts

0 Threads

#453 12 years ago
Originally posted by Sedistix Laws exist to stop late term abortions that is none issue.

Where have you been for the last 3 years? Partial-birth abortions are legal, in case you haven't noticed.

When it comes to chromosomes. Yes fetuses are extensions of the mother, and the father. Who do you think donated the chromosomes? What do you think you, and all the rest of mankind is? Surely not an extension of our parents? A production of their choice.

They are still seperate human beings. They are not "parts" of their mothers any more than I am of mine right now. They are not tumors being fed cells by their mothers. They reproduce cells on their own, starting with conception. Hence, they are "growing".

Funny thing about some definitions or ideas of what constitutes life. They can give "life" too thing‘s we know aren‘t alive. Take "fire", you are familiar with this phenomenon right? Well fire appears to breathe, grow, and even reproduce. Hell, it begins and it ends. Lives and dies so to speak.

And you told me that a 5 year old child has no place in an abortion argument. :lol:

It is not a candidate for civil liberties or any other fundamental human rights.

Says you.

Emergency only abortions, which in all cases end up being the mothers life over the childs life, continue to exist, even with this particular ban.

What bans? There are "restrictions" (Such as waiting periods), if you wanna call them that. In case you haven't noticed, abortion is legal in every US state. (With the exception of South Dakota, of course.)




Guest

I didn't make it!

0 XP

 
#454 12 years ago

Some states banned 3rd trimester's. The SD ban takes place in july. Yet to be quashed. That ban, this thread's title.. As for the rest, the sin of spin.




Locomotor

in spite of erosion

50 XP

13th May 2004

0 Uploads

3,490 Posts

0 Threads

#455 12 years ago

Okay then. One more question I have to ask you. Do you think the legality of abortion belongs in the Supreme Court or in state legislatures?




Guest

I didn't make it!

0 XP

 
#456 12 years ago

The choice belongs to the people, the majority. This ban in SD wasn't even put to a public vote. Which ever one of the two you have the most faith in, you choose.




Locomotor

in spite of erosion

50 XP

13th May 2004

0 Uploads

3,490 Posts

0 Threads

#457 12 years ago

I agree with you there, at least. Questions of morality of this magnitude should be left to the people, not the government.




Guest

I didn't make it!

0 XP

 
#458 12 years ago

Exactly. If the majority of the nation and or state agrees that abortions should be outlawed, well shit whatever i guess. That’s the way it has to be then. I don’t like how this is all came to be, and I see woman’s rights being violated as more important then the alleged life of fetuses. Diminished rights is never a good thing, gender specific rights being restricted is really not a good thing. I'm not completely callus or with out a little compassion. I just favor established living people who have rights that need upholding, over the unknown possibilities that a fetus entails. A possible life that has no promises of life even with the best of cirumstances. Miscarriages, and stillborns arent that uncommon. Abortions have existed for a long, long time. I'm of the opinion that bans will only harm women and make the process more complicated then it needs to be. Reproductive education, availability of contraceptives, healthcare, social services, housing, welfare pipelines and many other sectors could all use the money that this legal fight will receive. The hypocrisy of bans exist, even if you can’t see it at first. People, young and old aren’t going to stop having sex any time soon, and no contraceptive is 100%. Kids, will be raising kids, wards will be over stocked, and the general public will pay for it all. Imagine what kind of black-market this could create in some settings, cities and such? Or Wont women do what they have already been known to do in the past. Give birth and throw the babies they cant or don’t want away, except with more frequency? Check out state wards overloaded with unwanted kids all over the nation. Once babies get past that first year of cuteness its slim pickings for parents, or hopes of living a semi-normal life. Any way you cut it, this will crush poverty stricken families financially, and keep them poverty stricken, sucking on government pipelines. It all seems very unnecessary. There has to be another way to reduce abortions. Look at illegal drugs, if the government can't stamp out a the proliferation of drugs, how will they ever control rights over ones own body?

Hopefully the majority will look at the best possible good in a bad situation. Provided it's given the chance.




Locomotor

in spite of erosion

50 XP

13th May 2004

0 Uploads

3,490 Posts

0 Threads

#459 12 years ago
Originally posted by Sedistic gender specific rights being restricted is really not a good thing.

Biology is destiny, dude. And these anti-abortion laws aren't created with the intent of harming women's rights but providing basic liberties to all living humans, unborn or not.

Kids, will be raising kids, wards will be over stocked, and the general public will pay for it all.

I don't believe in putting a price tag on a human's life, potential or not.

hopes of living a semi-normal life.

Like I've said before: I can personally garuantee that if you were to spend your entire life interviewing orphaned children, not a single right-minded one would say that they'd rather be dead than alive.

It all seems very unnecessary.

Promiscuousness is also unnecessary.




Guest

I didn't make it!

0 XP

 
#460 12 years ago
Biology is destiny, dude. And these anti-abortion laws aren't created with the intent of harming women's rights but providing basic liberties to all living humans, unborn or not.

That’s subjective to ones personal beliefs on what constitutes life, we’ve been there, lets not go back. People never change their minds based on forum conversations, so it’s safe to say we all stand where we did before. Besides, often the worst results develop from the best intentions.

I don't believe in putting a price tag on a human's life, potential or not.

I do, a lot of people aren’t worth the air they breathe. Quantity of life, tends to cheapens it as well. With good reason, a lot of people are so damn lazy they drag everyone around them down with them. Life isn’t fair. That’s why it’s life, if you lucky enough to get it.

Like I've said before: I can personally garuantee that if you were to spend your entire life interviewing orphaned children, not a single right-minded one would say that they'd rather be dead than given a chance.

They have no basis for comparison, just like me or you can no more explain what not existing is like. A lot of children in adoption wards, or who have been bounced around between many of them are very often active in aspects of criminality. By necessity, or by sheer lack of respect for a world that cares nothing for them. Many experience physical and emotional abuse at one point or another traveling through the system. Some never get out. Ask them if they would rather be dead? They couldn’t know life if they weren’t born so they wouldn’t know. What are they missing, what you and i, and all the rest already know?

Promiscuousness is also unnecessary.

Between couples even more so then one might imagine.