LITEROTICA PODCAST
LIT CAMS (200 Free Tokens)ADULT TOYSVOD MOVIES

Abortion

docoral said:
Well well well, if it isn't the Queen of Mean calling us stupid again. I would have thought you could understand the moral issue here, I guess that cold Canadian air is affecting your brain. So let's try this again. Your ignorance rings hollow again. I guess you being an agnostic you have no clue that there is a moral side to this argument, but you have to have a moral compass to engage with that idea. It seems your favorite tactic is to paint everything with a broad brush and oversimplify things to benefit your argument.

So, let me try to understand what you're spouting off here. So, if you are pro life then you don't have a clue as to how a woman's reproductive system works. You could argue that women who have unprotected sex don't understand either,[ MAN- WOMAN- SEX- BABY ] that insinuation is pretty far fetch, even coming from you, actually, that's pretty ridiculous. What's really sad is that if we disagree with you we're stupid, I guess in Canada the way to win arguments is to just call everybody who disagree's with you 'STUPID'

You see, some people around here feel pretty strongly about protecting the defenseless and the innocent. Now most reasonable people would agree that a fetus gone wrong leading to a crippling defect requires hard analysis between the doctor and mother on allowing this fetus to come to full term and the effects it would have on both ( child and mother ). I believe that discussion starts and ends in that office and is no one else's business. The percentage of those abortions equate to approximately 2.66% of all abortions nation wide, a very small number, but you could argue a valid reason for abortion. Only the hardest of the pro life would argue against an abortion, one being the Catholic church, which is against all abortions. Once again save your 'priest are pettifiles' for a rainy day argument.

I can smell your teeny teeny weeny brain working overtime now. So let's choose some other categories of abortion, a previous year's statistics,

1. <0.5% victim of rape
2. 4% physical health problems ( mother )
3. 2.6% abnormal fetus
4. 0.001 INCEST

TOTAL 7.2 % ( approximately ) most reasonable people would accept as legitimate.

Other reasons:

1. 4% would interfere with college
2. 7% not mature enough to raise a child
3. 8% don't want to be a single mother
4. 19% don't want more children
5. 23% can't afford another baby
6. 25% not ready for a child
7. 6% other

Total 92.8%....... pro life would consider unacceptable, irresponsible and immoral. Planned parenthood's bread and butter! Kill the little girl or guy for money for the sake of women's right to choose. It's not about women's rights, it about taking the easy way out because they fucked up. I want to say one other thing, GUYS WHO WALK AWAY FROM THAT WOMAN AFTER THE DEED IS DONE AND DON'T ACCEPT EQUAL SHARE OF THE RESPONSIBILITY ARE THE ABSOLUTE LOWEST FORMS OF LIFE ON THE PLANET, PIECES OF SHIT!!!..... A little planning goes a long way. Want to play but not pay. It's not like there is no place for these babies to go, there are many thousands of couples who would take then in a heartbeat. Just think BADBABYTSITTER!!! If your mom changed her mind about you, well, we would certainly miss all your B__L S__T, *** JUST SAYING***.

Approximately 51% abort by week seven, but then the argument becomes, when is a baby a baby?
Click to expand...


This is not about BIRTH CONTROL
 
Matthew Craig said:
Circular argument fucktard. Here we are at the start again. For your peanut brain.. Human babies CANNOT survive unaided.
Click to expand...


A fetus is dependent upon another human being for nutrients and oxygen.

It's worth noting that many of the anti-abortion folks raise the false equivalency that because a newborn infant is also dependent upon another for nutrients and oxygen, a fetus should be considered the functional equivalent of a newborn.

This shows an inability to distinguish between the concepts of "physical independence" and "social independence".
  • Social independence is where a child depends on society to feed, clothe and nuture him/her.
  • Physical independence, on the other hand, is when something depends directly on the physical body of another for its continued existence.
 
docoral said:
Well well well, if it isn't the Queen of Mean calling us stupid again. I would have thought you could understand the moral issue here
Click to expand...

Fuck your morality, your beliefs do not trump science


docoral said:
, I guess that cold Canadian air is affecting your brain. So let's try this again. Your ignorance rings hollow again. I guess you being an agnostic you have no clue that there is a moral side to this argument, but you have to have a moral compass to engage with that idea. It seems your favorite tactic is to paint everything with a broad brush and oversimplify things to benefit your argument.
Click to expand...

Fuck your feelings, your beliefs do not trump science

docoral said:
So, let me try to understand what you're spouting off here. So, if you are pro life then you don't have a clue as to how a woman's reproductive system works. You could argue that women who have unprotected sex don't understand either,[ MAN- WOMAN- SEX- BABY ] that insinuation is pretty far fetch, even coming from you, actually, that's pretty ridiculous. What's really sad is that if we disagree with you we're stupid, I guess in Canada the way to win arguments is to just call everybody who disagree's with you 'STUPID'
Click to expand...


Fuck your feelings, your beliefs do not trump sceince

docoral said:
You see, some people around here feel pretty strongly about protecting the defenseless and the innocent. Now most reasonable people would agree that a fetus gone wrong leading to a crippling defect requires hard analysis between the doctor and mother on allowing this fetus to come to full term and the effects it would have on both ( child and mother ). I believe that discussion starts and ends in that office and is no one else's business. The percentage of those abortions equate to approximately 2.66% of all abortions nation wide, a very small number, but you could argue a valid reason for abortion. Only the hardest of the pro life would argue against an abortion, one being the Catholic church, which is against all abortions. Once again save your 'priest are pettifiles' for a rainy day argument.
Click to expand...

Fuck your feelings, your beliefs do not trump science

docoral said:
I can smell your teeny teeny weeny brain working overtime now. So let's choose some other categories of abortion, a previous year's statistics,

1. <0.5% victim of rape
2. 4% physical health problems ( mother )
3. 2.6% abnormal fetus
4. 0.001 INCEST

TOTAL 7.2 % ( approximately ) most reasonable people would accept as legitimate.

Other reasons:

1. 4% would interfere with college
2. 7% not mature enough to raise a child
3. 8% don't want to be a single mother
4. 19% don't want more children
5. 23% can't afford another baby
6. 25% not ready for a child
7. 6% other
Click to expand...


Fuck your feelings, your feelings do not trump science

docoral said:
Total 92.8%....... pro life would consider unacceptable, irresponsible and immoral. Planned parenthood's bread and butter! Kill the little girl or guy for money for the sake of women's right to choose. It's not about women's rights, it about taking the easy way out because they fucked up. I want to say one other thing, GUYS WHO WALK AWAY FROM THAT WOMAN AFTER THE DEED IS DONE AND DON'T ACCEPT EQUAL SHARE OF THE RESPONSIBILITY ARE THE ABSOLUTE LOWEST FORMS OF LIFE ON THE PLANET, PIECES OF SHIT!!!..... A little planning goes a long way. Want to play but not pay. It's not like there is no place for these babies to go, there are many thousands of couples who would take then in a heartbeat. Just think BADBABYTSITTER!!! If your mom changed her mind about you, well, we would certainly miss all your B__L S__T, *** JUST SAYING***.
Click to expand...


Fuck your feelings, your crybaby bullshit does not trump science

docoral said:
Approximately 51% abort by week seven, but then the argument becomes, when is a baby a baby?
Click to expand...

When it can survive outside the mother unaided, jesus fuck, how many times does that have to be repeated
 
Last edited:
The Right has arbitrarily decided that a "fetal heartbeat" is the decider between when it's ok to abort and not.

The "fetal" part is a misnomer, or at least misleading. At the stage we're talking about, around 6 weeks, the growth in the womb is still considered an embryo.

But since the entity where activity can be detected is called the fetal pole (in the embryo), I guess that can slide. There's no fetus, but technically, something is "fetal".

The "heartbeat" is likewise a misnomer. There is no heart. There's no unit pumping blood or even anything close to it.

There are fetal pole cardiac spasms.

But that doesn't cut it for the emotional argument, so they get poetic.

Anyway, even if it was a heart (it's not) in a fetus (it's not) and it did beat (it doesn't, really) there's no rational explanation for why that is the defining line.

Why this organ, and not the spleen? Why this organ, and not the brain?

Because "heartbeat" SOUNDS right. This is legislation based on feelings, not facts.
 
badbabysitter said:
Don't be a dumbass, please

I said survive unaided.. at that point in development it doesn't need the mother survive

Need

Do you know what need means?
Click to expand...

I sure do. I’m raising both my kids without their sorry ass mothers who walked away from their kids and have nothing to do with them. Granted, I couldn’t breast feed them, but they didn’t starve to death. So, yes, I know what they need and I know what they don’t need.
🐾Kant
 
RobDownSouth said:
A fetus is dependent upon another human being for nutrients and oxygen.

It's worth noting that many of the anti-abortion folks raise the false equivalency that because a newborn infant is also dependent upon another for nutrients and oxygen, a fetus should be considered the functional equivalent of a newborn.

This shows an inability to distinguish between the concepts of "physical independence" and "social independence".
  • Social independence is where a child depends on society to feed, clothe and nuture him/her.
  • Physical independence, on the other hand, is when something depends directly on the physical body of another for its continued existence.
Click to expand...
It's ALL physical dependance idiot, fuck off with this redefining libtard fuckology.
 
Kantarii said:
I sure do. I’m raising both my kids without their sorry ass mothers who walked away from their kids and have nothing to do with them. Granted, I couldn’t breast feed them, but they didn’t starve to death. So, yes, I know what they need and I know what they don’t need.
🐾Kant
Click to expand...

Good for you

still doesn't change that a fetus is not a person
 
Kantarii said:
An you haven’t convinced me a fetus is not a human being.
Click to expand...

And you haven't convinced us that it is.

Still you support invasive legislation based upon a premise there is not agreement upon.

So here we are.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

C
“Mindful masturbation” as an alternative to porn consumption – who has experience with this concept?
Replies
3
Views
133
ynhmai
Y
C
Got a sort of “story” I want to tell and then expound upon with NSFW talk
Replies
1
Views
129
elsasmith
E
A
Mistress here looking for a long term sub boy
Replies
1
Views
120
Asmondena10
A
Plasmaball
Are women more mature than men?
2
Replies
33
Views
1K
Nicefella
Nicefella
H
New and looking to make connections.
Replies
11
Views
346
Hollow1988
H
Back
Top