APP - Pro-choicer kills anti-abortionist

apple0154 said:
Obviously I have to go through this a bit slower for you.

A guy can be punched in the stomach, double over for a few moments, then walk away slightly crooked and the next day he's back at work. Another guy can be punched in the stomach with such force he suffers damage to his gall bladder or pancreas or has internal hemorrhaging.

Do you consider both scenarios a "simple assault"? A "Yes" or "No" answer is all that's required from you.
Click to expand...

I never said your wife would suffer from damage to her gall bladder or panchreas or have internal hemorrhaging.
So why not stick with the scenario suggested.

YES or NO??
 
uscitizen said:
they are in no way formed with lungs, etc to in anyway live outside the human body. Or are you saying the are thinking humans at 60 days?
Click to expand...

/shrugs....if we can kill them just because they aren't thinking, you're dead meat.....

you said you would accept abortions for zygotes, once they attach to the wall of the womb they are no longer zygotes.....that happens in under five days.....
 
PostmodernProphet said:
???....so you would kill the mother?......
Click to expand...

I wouldn't kill any human being. Why are you so fixated on killing human beings?

I don't understand, why would you assume that all aborted children would have been liberals?......
Click to expand...

If it could be shown all aborted fetuses would have eventually become Liberals I'd be your strongest anti-abortionist advocate.

I know of one class of human beings....what is the second class you are proposing....right now I know we live in a society where you feel free to kill any unborn child you wish.....regardless of anyone's health......
Click to expand...

You have continually asserted the mother's life is worth more than that of the fetus yet you advocate classifying fetuses as human beings. Why do you want to have two classes or values of human beings?

no, that argument tells us you are a fool....the reason is obvious because the mother is an adult, a wife, perhaps a mother with other children depending on her.....
Click to expand...

Thank-you for confirming what I have been saying all along. You want to classify embryos and zygotes and fetuses as human beings with the stipulation the mother's life is always worth more. You want two classes of human beings. You want to designate the life of human beings known as "mothers" to be always and unquestionably deemed more important than the life of human beings known as "fetuses".

now....we've played your little game...let's be honest....you don't give a fuck whether the mother is sick or not.....you want her to be able to kill her unborn child anyway, correct?......
Click to expand...

Oh, but I do care if the mother is sick. I care more about the mother than you or any other anti-abortionist does. I care more about all human beings than you and all the other anti-abortionists do which is evidenced by my not supporting the abhorrent idea that something that is not a human being, a zygote or embryo or fetus, is a human being but can be killed if another human being has a defective body.

While on the surface it may appear one is raising the value of an embryo or zygote or fetus by claiming it's a human being but the reality is one is lowering the value of all human beings. That is accomplished by the unjustly and sinister plot to classify embryos and zygotes and fetuses as human beings while maintaining they can be killed for no other reason than to lengthen the life of a defective human being.

What's your game? Why do you want to set a precedent whereby a healthy human being may be killed in order to prolong the life of another human being with a defective body?
 
PostmodernProphet said:
so you are content just aborting zygotes?....Fine with me....that gives you a five day window of opportunity.....
Click to expand...

Good grief. One more example of your cavalier attitude towards human beings. Now it's perfectly acceptable to take the life of a five day old so-called human being.

Kill them to allow a human being with a defective body to live and if they're young enough it's fine to just kill them for no reason whatsoever.

You're definitely post-modern, Prophet.
 
USFREEDOM911 said:
I never said your wife would suffer from damage to her gall bladder or panchreas or have internal hemorrhaging.
So why not stick with the scenario suggested.

YES or NO??
Click to expand...

I'm gave two scenarios and asked if both are considered "simple assaults". Why are you unable or unwilling to answer the question?
 
apple0154 said:
I wouldn't kill any human being. Why are you so fixated on killing human beings?
Click to expand...
I'm devoted to STOPPING people who are fixated on killing humans...

You have continually asserted the mother's life is worth more than that of the fetus yet you advocate classifying fetuses as human beings. Why do you want to have two classes or values of human beings?

Thank-you for confirming what I have been saying all along. You want to classify embryos and zygotes and fetuses as human beings with the stipulation the mother's life is always worth more. You want two classes of human beings. You want to designate the life of human beings known as "mothers" to be always and unquestionably deemed more important than the life of human beings known as "fetuses".
Click to expand...

??...it doesn't impose two classes of human beings....it simply acknowledges a choice is being made between two individuals.....the same thing happens every day in our court system.....one party wins a case, another party loses a case, depending upon the application of justice.....does that create two classes of human beings?...the winners and the losers?....

Oh, but I do care if the mother is sick.
Click to expand...

then a straightforward answer is necessary....will you concede a ban on all abortions when the mother is healthy?.....if not, my point stands....
 
PostmodernProphet said:
??...it doesn't impose two classes of human beings....it simply acknowledges a choice is being made between two individuals.....the same thing happens every day in our court system.....one party wins a case, another party loses a case, depending upon the application of justice.....does that create two classes of human beings?...the winners and the losers?....
Click to expand...

So, what are you getting at? Are you saying there will be times when the mother's health and/or life will be sacrificed for the sake of the fetus?

then a straightforward answer is necessary....will you concede a ban on all abortions when the mother is healthy?.....if not, my point stands....
Click to expand...

No, I would never concede that because of the reason I mentioned. It sets the stage for two classes of human beings. If a fetus is a human being then it is entitled to all the rights and privileges of every other human being. Certainly the right not to be killed because of another human being's defective body.

Either one is prepared to accept the possibility of seeing a female family member become ill and possibly die or classifying a fetus as a human being is disingenuous, at best.

If a woman has uncontrolled high blood pressure or diabetes surely one does not condone the killing of an innocent human being. That being the case maybe the woman will end up less a kidney or have a stroke and be partially paralyzed or having to be institutionalized for life.

People rant and rave about government trying to take over medicine. Imagine their reaction when the government denies their wife or daughter an abortion and tragedy strikes. On the other hand do we kill an innocent human being because a woman might have complications? Is the loss of one kidney worth a human life? Is the possibility of partial loss of memory due to a stroke worth a human being's life? Who decides?

Then we can contemplate the possibilities of couples who have split up. Is there a panel who decides if an abortion is a medical necessary? Let's say the woman's doctor feels she should have a abortion and the estranged husband offers to produce a doctor who has a conflicting opinion. Will the fate of the woman be based on who can afford the best doctors to testify?

And why wouldn't the estranged husband have a say? He is fighting for his son's/daughter's life. He doesn't give a damn about your daughter or sister who dumped him just because he liked to beat the hell out of her.

Even consider those scenarios?

The problem is people think the law can be changed and things will go back to pre-Roe vs Wade. The world has changed in the last 35 years. Now people want to know what the definition of "is" is.

In any case are you prepared to have a family member go through any of the scenarios I mentioned? Are you prepared to have the government determine the level of threat/injury to a family member verses the life of a fetus?
 
apple0154 said:
I'm gave two scenarios and asked if both are considered "simple assaults". Why are you unable or unwilling to answer the question?
Click to expand...

Why can't you just answer?

If the only harm that is suffered, is the loss of the fetus, then you would have no problem with the person being charged with an assault.

YES or NO.

It's beginning to look like you've finally realized the flaw in your presentation and are just trying to weasel out of making a choice.

Time to show some backbone, apple, instead of trying to spin the conversation to something that's more agreeable to you.
 
apple0154 said:
So, what are you getting at? Are you saying there will be times when the mother's health and/or life will be sacrificed for the sake of the fetus?
Click to expand...
what I am getting at is this whole train of thought makes no difference in determining whether someone is a human being or not.......in either event a determination has to be made, if both can't survive, which is going to be terminated....in any event, since you are prepared to kill the unborn child even if the mother is healthy and going through birth would cause her no injury, your whole issue is meaningless.....

No, I would never concede that because of the reason I mentioned. It sets the stage for two classes of human beings. If a fetus is a human being then it is entitled to all the rights and privileges of every other human being.
Click to expand...
we made that same choice for hundreds of years before Roe v Wade, there weren't two classes of human beings then.....the same considerations are still in play now....the only time it becomes an issue is when a healthy woman wants to kill her healthy unborn child.....

People rant and rave about government trying to take over medicine. Imagine their reaction when the government denies their wife or daughter an abortion and tragedy strikes.
Click to expand...
you realize of course that the law before Roe v Wade had always permitted abortion to save the life of the mother......there is zero reason for this to become an issue now....this whole line of argument has no value whatsoever....
 
USFREEDOM911 said:
Why can't you just answer?

If the only harm that is suffered, is the loss of the fetus, then you would have no problem with the person being charged with an assault.

YES or NO.

It's beginning to look like you've finally realized the flaw in your presentation and are just trying to weasel out of making a choice.

Time to show some backbone, apple, instead of trying to spin the conversation to something that's more agreeable to you.
Click to expand...

I have no problem with the person being charged with assault but we come back to the same place. What do you mean by "simple assault"?

For example, was the placenta torn from the uterus and hemorrhaging occur? Did the placenta not fully pass? Etc, etc, etc.

That's why I asked what constitutes a "simple assault". I gave you an example of what could happen regarding a punch in the stomach. A stomach punch can result in anything from minor discomfort to a lengthy hospital stay to death depending on the severity and treatment. A ruptured intestine will cause infection and death if not treated in a timely manner.

There's assault, assault and battery, assault with intent, aggravated assault.....

Now do you understand why I asked for clarification? Is the perp spending 30 days or five years in prison?
 
PostmodernProphet said:
what I am getting at is this whole train of thought makes no difference in determining whether someone is a human being or not.......in either event a determination has to be made, if both can't survive, which is going to be terminated....in any event, since you are prepared to kill the unborn child even if the mother is healthy and going through birth would cause her no injury, your whole issue is meaningless.....
Click to expand...

It's not meaningless. How do we determine anything? Hopefully, we think things through. If a fetus is a human being then the defective woman's health/life is not automatically a priority over and above the fetus. Are we prepared, as a society, to watch a family member deteriorate and possibly die due to government restrictions on abortion?

we made that same choice for hundreds of years before Roe v Wade, there weren't two classes of human beings then.....the same considerations are still in play now....the only time it becomes an issue is when a healthy woman wants to kill her healthy unborn child.....
Click to expand...

So how are the risks to the women determined and by whom? Is she permitted to get various opinions? Is the father of the fetus permitted to insist his choice of doctor examine the woman? If not, why not? Surely he has a stake in this. And if his doctor's opinion is the risk to the woman is not sufficient who finally decides? Can decisions be appealed?

you realize of course that the law before Roe v Wade had always permitted abortion to save the life of the mother......there is zero reason for this to become an issue now....this whole line of argument has no value whatsoever....
Click to expand...

See above questions.

This is not 1959 or 1969. It's 2009. When Roe vs Wade was in effect husbands controlled women and few women had the resources to stage a legal fight. Plus, the number of single women has dramatically increased.

Simply put, they will not tolerate such a vile intrusion into their lives. If you think the tea-baggers put on a show ya ain't seen nothin' yet.
 
Okay people, let's cut the crap.

For years, the anti-abortion rights folk were not only against abortion for any reason, but against any sex education in our public schools. The mantra use to be that sex education promotes promiscuity....which was just fucking dumb, given that the whole abortion issue came about because a whole lot of teens were getting knocked up BEFORE sex ed was ever an issue. And the kicker was/is that the same anti-abortion folk wail like banshees about any form of social welfare, or legalization of contraceptives for teens of driving age.

So the anti-abortion folk just don't give a damn about real people....just as long as their personal ideology and religious beliefs are not disturbed when they open the morning paper or watch/listen to the news.
 
But we are makiing progress. Condom commercials are on more sat/cable channels now.

the old teabaggers will die off and thigs will loosen up.
 
apple0154 said:
Are we prepared, as a society, to watch a family member deteriorate and possibly die due to government restrictions on abortion?
Click to expand...
of course you are....you've watched 47 million family members die since 1972.....


Simply put, they will not tolerate such a vile intrusion into their lives. If you think the tea-baggers put on a show ya ain't seen nothin' yet.
Click to expand...
/shrugs....you can't expect to be able to kill your children forever...folks used to argue that Jews and blacks weren't human as well.....someday we will look back on abortion the way we currently look at slavery and the Holocaust.....
 
Taichiliberal said:
Okay people, let's cut the crap.

For years, the anti-abortion rights folk were not only against abortion for any reason, but against any sex education in our public schools. The mantra use to be that sex education promotes promiscuity....which was just fucking dumb, given that the whole abortion issue came about because a whole lot of teens were getting knocked up BEFORE sex ed was ever an issue. And the kicker was/is that the same anti-abortion folk wail like banshees about any form of social welfare, or legalization of contraceptives for teens of driving age.

So the anti-abortion folk just don't give a damn about real people....just as long as their personal ideology and religious beliefs are not disturbed when they open the morning paper or watch/listen to the news.
Click to expand...

I can't find anything true in your post.....why is that?....
 
apple0154 said:
I have no problem with the person being charged with assault but we come back to the same place. What do you mean by "simple assault"?

For example, was the placenta torn from the uterus and hemorrhaging occur? Did the placenta not fully pass? Etc, etc, etc.

That's why I asked what constitutes a "simple assault". I gave you an example of what could happen regarding a punch in the stomach. A stomach punch can result in anything from minor discomfort to a lengthy hospital stay to death depending on the severity and treatment. A ruptured intestine will cause infection and death if not treated in a timely manner.

There's assault, assault and battery, assault with intent, aggravated assault.....

Now do you understand why I asked for clarification? Is the perp spending 30 days or five years in prison?
Click to expand...

So if she was 8 months and 2 weeks along and the punch resulted in the fetus in being something no longer viable, you would have no problem with him just being charged with punching your wife.
As long as she didn't suffer any other injuries.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top