Radical Leftist struggles to defend 3rd trimester abortions.
Posts
Total:
25
Of particular note, I would like to see the rational argument debating the claim that "There is no such thing as a medically necessary abortion" as the death of the child while trying to save the mother in normal circumstances should never be intentional and thus, never considered an abortion.
-->
@Greyparrot
I support retroactive abortions for a lot of the people on this site.
-->
@Sidewalker
I support retroactive abortions for a lot of the people on this site.
Not that uncommon of an opinion. I have seen a lot of people argue for post birth abortions. I think the word for it is euthanasia.
I support retroactive abortions for a lot of the people on this site.Not that uncommon of an opinion. I have seen a lot of people argue for post birth abortions. I think the word for it is euthanasia.
Euthanasia is for pussies, I'm advocating genocide.
-->
@Sidewalker
Euthanasia is for pussies, I'm advocating genocide.
Against who. I don't want to sign up until I HAVE MORE information
-->
@PREZ-HILTON
Euthanasia is for pussies, I'm advocating genocide.Against who. I don't want to sign up until I HAVE MORE information
We can worry about that later, right now we need to adress the technical issues.
I think we need to abolish the electric chair, and replace it with electric bleachers..
What’s my dog doing here posting about abortion?
What’s my dog doing here posting about abortion?
So what happens if I report this? This isn't debate, it's not discussion, it's just pure derision. Waste of vertical space.
-->
@ADreamOfLiberty
He is a net detriment to the site and every report against him helps me as I build a case against him in thee mod PM.
"3rd trimester abortions"
Chopping unborn baby to pieces is a bit difficult to defend.
-->
@Greyparrot
I would suggest that most rational people would be uneasy about late abortion.
I would further suggest that for most people the scale of unethicality increases relative to tissue development.
Which is why I as an atheist and pro-choicer still personally think that legally permissive abortion should come with very strict time limits.
10 to 13 weeks, which is also when most natural terminations will occur.
In most cases of unprotected sex, morning after medication is usually available anyway.
So to wait 28 weeks to decide is somewhat stupid and thoughtless.
NB. There will undoubtedly be rare and unusual circumstances, where late abortion is clinically advised.
And let the genocide begin in Trumpland America.
Only joking Sidey.
-->
@zedvictor4
And let the genocide begin in Trumpland America.
If you watched the videos, there were more yearly 3rd trimester abortions than gun deaths in America before Trumpyland.
"Let it continue" is what you meant.
Meet the new Trump, same as the old Trump.
So to wait 28 weeks to decide is somewhat stupid and thoughtless.
This is why unprotected sex outside of marriage is stupid and thoughtless. Even if you are in a "serious relationship"
-->
@Greyparrot
Yep for sure, there are a lot of stupid and thoughtless people about.
Do we really want to have all their kids running around too.
That's the best pro-abortion argument I've heard in a long time.
Well thought up Mr G Parrot.
-->
@Sidewalker
Everything is a two way street, why should you be allowed to exist? What do you contribute to humanity other than lip service?
-->
@Greyparrot
Pre-term delivery is sometimes required, but typically an abortion is performed in a way that directly kills the child. For example, at 24 weeks, the baby might need to be delivered pre-term and might not be able to survive. But an abortion, as typically defined and performed, would guarantee the death of the child for no good reason. There's the question of whether it's ethical to deliver a nonviable child, but that's not what's being referred to here.
Defenses of abortion end to refer to the complications of pregnancy, but there's no reason to prefer abortion over a pre-term delivery, especially when the child will likely survive the delivery. In these cases, it seems like people are just trying to get rid of the inconvenience of raising a child via infanticide, rather than having actual medical concerns.
EDIT: Actually, it looks like this is what you were saying. But I'll leave this up as a source.
-->
@Savant
What do you think of post number 2?
-->
@Greyparrot
Yeah, I misread that one and thought you were asking someone to defend the claim "There is no such thing as a medically necessary abortion." It looks like we're on the same page though.
-->
@Greyparrot
It comes before post number 3 and after post number 1.
Similarly post number 15 comes after post number 14 and before post number 16.
Where’s my dog?
-->
@zedvictor4
Ha!
-->
@Savant
Yeah, I misread that one and thought you were asking someone to defend the claim "There is no such thing as a medically necessary abortion." It looks like we're on the same page though.
It's okay, just looking for the counter argument to this.
-->
@Greyparrot
If I understad your question correctly. I think that guy got twisted a little because I come to same conclusion as you. Unless he is trying to say, " there is no medically necessary abortion because there is no abortion at that point, if there is a medical need to remove the kid from the womb while kid is vital outside of womb during late term pregnancy.
... Does that sound like what he was going for? He is trying to explain the other guys point, who was argueing there is no need to abort because you can just birth or c section. If these options are taken and baby dies unintentially during that process, then its still not an abortion
I thought he was going to say no such thing as medically necessary late term abortion because the kid can just be delivered/extracted without being killed first.
-->
@Sidewalker
Might as well go all in