Abortion Remains Illegal in Argentina

Topic's posts
Posts in total: 65
--> @ethang5
Sure. An organism lacking anything meaningfully resembling consciousness or higher neural activity isn't a person and thus IDGAF if a woman doesnt want to carry it to term. 
And let me guess, you picked "personhood" as your definition of human?

Sure.
OK. As long as you understand that I don't share your delusion that ones personal choice makes reality.

An organism lacking anything meaningfully resembling consciousness or higher neural activity isn't a person...
I'll alert people in comas and the severely mentally retarded, though your personhood is now in doubt.
--> @ethang5
There is no relationship between the two.
--> @ethang5
I don't share your delusion that ones personal choice makes reality.
Oh but you do when it's your personal choice, otherwise you would be aware of the fantasy in which you reside.

severely mentally retarded
Is funny coming from you.
246 days later
--> @disgusted
Yes I can

 hypocrite

I spelled it!
--> @Dr.Franklin
you have two accounts on dart, you know that's against the rules?
--> @disgusted
no I don't lol, do you have any ebidence
--> @disgusted
As your post shows you are happy to kill anyone who disagrees with you but claim to be antiabortion.
He wanted people with abortions to be put to death, not all pro abortion rights people.  Even if he favored life imprisonment instead of the death penalty, the left would not be satisfied.  The left will never be satisfied until they get unrestricted abortion access until 20 weeks.

Can you spell hypocrite?
Both sides appear to their opponents as hypocrites.  The Right for example, thinks it's hypocritical for someone to be against the death penalty for murderers, no matter how many people support it.  But they support the death penalty for a fetus if one person (the woman) is fine with it.

Even if the Right was against the death penalty as a compromise, the left would not allow abortion to be banned.
--> @Alec
But they support the death penalty for a fetus if one person (the woman) is fine with it.
It is an organism of the woman and her choice, so please keep your friggin immmoral nose out womens bodily business.

I view your type as being perverted and immoral.

--> @mustardness
I view your type as being perverted and immoral.
You view anyone who disagrees with you on any political issue as being evil.  This is fascist behavior.
--> @Alec
You view anyone who disagrees with you on any political issue as being evil.  This is fascist behavior.
Here it is again and maybe you can begin to grasp relativly simple comment in English.


.."It is an organism of the woman and her choice, so please keep your friggin immmoral nose out womens bodily business.

I view your type as being perverted and immoral."...


--> @mustardness
please keep your friggin immmoral nose out womens bodily business.
Let's be consistent about this.  If a woman ought to have the right to kill a baby, should a rapist be allowed to rape a woman?  Because abortion is worse then rape.  If I said in response to a hypothetical rape legalization debate, "please keep your friggin immmoral nose out rapists bodily business." I would essentially be crazy.  Just like you are since you fail to take into account the rights a fetus ought to have.  You also drop every point I present to you and you instead go back to an argument that I just roasted.

--> @Alec
Stop with the childish arguments and try the truth.
If a woman doesn't have the right to remove a growth then you don't have that right.
You're always waffling about compromise so here's one.
You give up any bodily autonomy and one woman does the same. Then you just have to convince enough men and the exact number of women to join you and hey presto you commit to dying from any illness and the women agree to let you and your fellow males take all the unwanted babies and bring them up.
Oh btw you've never even addressed the real question ie bodily autonomy, you only ever pretend a fetus has rights.
You give up any bodily autonomy and one woman does the same.
Define bodily autonomy.  If by bodily autonomy, you mean the right to have sex before marriage, then I'm fine with both men and women being prohibited from having sex until marriage.

 Then you just have to convince enough men and the exact number of women to join you and hey presto you commit to dying from any illness and the women agree to let you and your fellow males take all the unwanted babies and bring them up.
Very few abortions are due to the mother's life being at genuine risk.  We both know that even if I allowed abortions where the mother was going to die, it wouldn't be enough to satisfy you.  Moreover, if you give the babies to the males to raise, they would set the kids up for adoption, just like what the males would be fine with the females doing.

Oh btw you've never even addressed the real question ie bodily autonomy, you only ever pretend a fetus has rights.
Define bodily autonomy.  A fetus ought to have the right to their body.

--> @Alec
Let's be consistent about this.  If a woman ought to have the right to kill a baby, should a rapist be allowed to rape a woman?

1} consistence is irrelevant to your comments above,

2} the issue is conceptuallized egg, fetus, fetus/baby and you have yet to EVER exhibit these facts via you lack of  moral and intellectual integrity on making these distincitions in your comments, Sad :--(,

Just like you are since you fail to take into account the rights a fetus ought to have.

False.  Conceptualized egg, fetus and fetus/baby are organism of the pregnant woman and  you have yet to EVER exhibit this fact via your lack of moral and intellectual integrity on making these distinction in your comments.

The only thing you roast i more and intellectual integrity. You have niether in regards to pregnant women. Sad :--(