Question for our gun enthusiast friends.

Well, many of us do, but we are not elected ppl deciding life and death shit based on a 5000-yo collection of goat-herder myths.

Excellent article. I'll link to it after the quote.

" .... the issue is what that “heartbeat” actually is. “At six weeks, the embryo is forming what will eventually develop into mature systems. There’s an immature neurological system, and there’s a very immature cardiovascular system,” says Jennifer Kerns, an ob-gyn at UC San Francisco and director of research in obstetrics and gynecology at Zuckerberg San Francisco General Hospital. The rhythm specified in the six-week abortion bans, she says, “is a group of cells with electrical activity. That’s what the heartbeat is at that stage of gestation … We are in no way talking about any kind of cardiovascular system.”"

https://www.wired.com/story/heartbeat-bills-get-the-science-of-fetal-heartbeats-all-wrong/

BTW, at this stage of development the fetus is less than half an inch long. As the article points out, the so-called "pro-life" (really, "forced-birthers") use the heartbeat to evoke emotion and give the impression that the fetus is somehow a baby at this point.

ZR0obkx.jpg

So having a heart doesn't mean life? Hopefully yours will stop beating.
 
Laws don't stop anyone; because if they did, no one would run stop signs or red lights, no one would drive faster then the posted speed limit, no one would steal from someone else, no one would kill someone else, there would be no bank robberies, etc., etc..

So does that mean a law against abortion is pointless?
 
That said, when there was less gun control (back when you could mail order a rifle from Sears), why wasn't there the gun crime that we see now?

So you're saying gun control didn't reduce gun crime.
Do you also think laws against abortion won't reduce abortions?
 
If banning guns is pointless because people can just get guns on the black market, is banning abortion also pointless?

I would hardly call a violation of the constitution pointless.........and since I already know your comeback, no abortion is NOT protected in the constitution.......only in the fantasies of five guys who got appointed to the SC......
 
I would hardly call a violation of the constitution pointless.........and since I already know your comeback, no abortion is NOT protected in the constitution.......only in the fantasies of five guys who got appointed to the SC......

We're not talking about muh constitution, though. We're talking about if the law would make a difference.
 
So you're saying gun control didn't reduce gun crime.
Do you also think laws against abortion won't reduce abortions?


Yes, that's exactly what I'm saying.

Again, abortion has nothing to do with guns. Why is that so difficult to comprehend?
 
Yes, that's exactly what I'm saying.

Again, abortion has nothing to do with guns. Why is that so difficult to comprehend?

You're not understanding. I'm not saying the two are the same. I'm saying that if laws won't stop one, why would they stop the other?

So if laws against abortions won't reduce abortions, we probably shouldn't have said laws.
 
You're not understanding. I'm not saying the two are the same. I'm saying that if laws won't stop one, why would they stop the other?

So if laws against abortions won't reduce abortions, we probably shouldn't have said laws.

They are two entirely different issues. There is no comparison.
 
Back
Top