Should abortion be legal?

John_C_87

YeshuaBought said:

I say yes. Bodily choice is a right, and a zygote is not a baby. If abortion is banned, women will die. Prolifers tend to be very conservative, so their compassion stops at birth.

The problem is you are tell a basic lie as a woman, abortion is made on a birth a possible result of pregnancy. Births are not a true united state of pregnancy they are an attempt at birth. The pregnancy takes place before the process of abortion starts. A pregnancy is aborted by a woman not medical doctor. The start of abortion is undertaken in truth to end birth not pregnancy. A female specific amputation documents a stop made to immigration and is used to create all woman as equal.

No pro-lifers are not the problem woman are making a choice not to preserve the basic principle which is a state set to be united as a United State American Constitution. all woman are created equal by their creator. In this case the creator happens to be the united state of pregnancy that can end in a birth or not.

xlJ_dolphin_473

I believe that abortion is legal, and that it is morally justified to kill an unborn baby in order to save a mother. I know there are a lot of people who will strongly disagree with me, so I will first do a little pre-emptive rebuttal.

• Banning abortion would simply open a black market of illegal abortionists, often charging up to four times as much for the same procedure.
• Abortion, in the vast majority of cases, does not damage the long term emotional health of a mother. A recent study shows that, five years after an abortion, not a single mother participating in the survey felt that it was a bad choice.
• I think that the fundamental right for a woman to control her own body is always more important than to give a small chance of life to a baby that is unborn.
• Abortions are often to prevent the child from having life-threatening complications. Would a mother want their child to forever curse them for giving birth to them?

Now, onto my own arguments.

• If a woman does not want to have a child, why should she be forced to against her will? That is borderline oppression. We can never have a functioning, free society if oppression is taking place.
• Many accidental pregnancies take place because of a failure of contraceptives. People should be able to enjoy sex without a risk of getting pregnant. Some say that the solution to this is to develop more effective contraceptives, but no contraceptive can ever be 100% effective.
• A pregnancy is one of the most consequential events in a woman's life. It disrupts her education, employment and social life. Therefore, it should always be 100% a woman's choice if she wants to have a child, and go through all this disruption in order to do so.

YeshuaBought

xlJ_dolphin_473 said:

I believe that abortion is legal, and that it is morally justified to kill an unborn baby in order to save a mother. I know there are a lot of people who will strongly disagree with me, so I will first do a little pre-emptive rebuttal.

• Banning abortion would simply open a black market of illegal abortionists, often charging up to four times as much for the same procedure.
• Abortion, in the vast majority of cases, does not damage the long term emotional health of a mother. A recent study shows that, five years after an abortion, not a single mother participating in the survey felt that it was a bad choice.
• I think that the fundamental right for a woman to control her own body is always more important than to give a small chance of life to a baby that is unborn.
• Abortions are often to prevent the child from having life-threatening complications. Would a mother want their child to forever curse them for giving birth to them?

Now, onto my own arguments.

• If a woman does not want to have a child, why should she be forced to against her will? That is borderline oppression. We can never have a functioning, free society if oppression is taking place.
• Many accidental pregnancies take place because of a failure of contraceptives. People should be able to enjoy sex without a risk of getting pregnant. Some say that the solution to this is to develop more effective contraceptives, but no contraceptive can ever be 100% effective.
• A pregnancy is one of the most consequential events in a woman's life. It disrupts her education, employment and social life. Therefore, it should always be 100% a woman's choice if she wants to have a child, and go through all this disruption in order to do so.

xlJ_dolphin_473 said:

I believe that abortion is legal, and that it is morally justified to kill an unborn baby in order to save a mother. I know there are a lot of people who will strongly disagree with me, so I will first do a little pre-emptive rebuttal.

• Banning abortion would simply open a black market of illegal abortionists, often charging up to four times as much for the same procedure.
• Abortion, in the vast majority of cases, does not damage the long term emotional health of a mother. A recent study shows that, five years after an abortion, not a single mother participating in the survey felt that it was a bad choice.
• I think that the fundamental right for a woman to control her own body is always more important than to give a small chance of life to a baby that is unborn.
• Abortions are often to prevent the child from having life-threatening complications. Would a mother want their child to forever curse them for giving birth to them?

Now, onto my own arguments.

• If a woman does not want to have a child, why should she be forced to against her will? That is borderline oppression. We can never have a functioning, free society if oppression is taking place.
• Many accidental pregnancies take place because of a failure of contraceptives. People should be able to enjoy sex without a risk of getting pregnant. Some say that the solution to this is to develop more effective contraceptives, but no contraceptive can ever be 100% effective.
• A pregnancy is one of the most consequential events in a woman's life. It disrupts her education, employment and social life. Therefore, it should always be 100% a woman's choice if she wants to have a child, and go through all this disruption in order to do so.

I agree. I highly value bodily choice.

YeshuaBought

John_C_87 said:

YeshuaBought said:

I say yes. Bodily choice is a right, and a zygote is not a baby. If abortion is banned, women will die. Prolifers tend to be very conservative, so their compassion stops at birth.

The problem is you are tell a basic lie as a woman, abortion is made on a birth a possible result of pregnancy. Births are not a true united state of pregnancy they are an attempt at birth. The pregnancy takes place before the process of abortion starts. A pregnancy is aborted by a woman not medical doctor. The start of abortion is undertaken in truth to end birth not pregnancy. A female specific amputation documents a stop made to immigration and is used to create all woman as equal.

No pro-lifers are not the problem woman are making a choice not to preserve the basic principle which is a state set to be united as a United State American Constitution. all woman are created equal by their creator. In this case the creator happens to be the united state of pregnancy that can end in a birth or not.

Bodily choice is a human right, you don't have the right to my body.

John_C_87

@xlJ_dolphin_473 ;
By banning abortion doesn't mean a woman would be forced to give birth. banning pregnancy abortion means woman as a united state must address truth as a group. Aborting pregnancy is in simple words aborting birth, a woman has a united state constitutional duty to legally recognize the border of a nation to which they live. 

YeshuaBought

John_C_87 said:

@xlJ_dolphin_473 ;
By banning abortion doesn't mean a woman would be forced to give birth. banning pregnancy abortion means woman as a united state must address truth as a group. Aborting pregnancy is in simple words aborting birth, a woman has a united state constitutional duty to legally recognize the border of a nation to which they live. 

Yes it does.

John_C_87

@YeshuaBought ;

"No it doesn't mean any woman is forced to give birth. It means woman as Presadera have failed to give testimony as a legal witness before United State Constitution on a union made between all woman and pregnancy which creates all woman as equal with the use of a state of the Union address."

The common defense.

 A change and stop only directs a treatment of all woman as equal. A woman does not have a pregnancy abortion when having a female specific amputation so the view held does nothing to convince anyone abortion is a united state that proclaims a presumption of innocence in both natural or necessary termination of birth. A woman stops pregnancy by aborting sex, or yes even stopping a artificial fertilizations made on her behalf. A woman is ordering a medical doctor to official perform either a female specific amputation, or a the official stop of birth by pregnancy abortion. Murder.

The idea of a ban on abortion is that a military tribunal can not convene to discharge this unconstitutional action. Being a threat to woman is to give an idea of simply no other solution could be made when addressing a court order finding abortion as unconstitutional.

YeshuaBought

John_C_87 said:

@YeshuaBought ;

"No it doesn't mean any woman is forced to give birth. It means woman as Presadera have failed to give testimony as a legal witness before United State Constitution on a union made between all woman and pregnancy which creates all woman as equal with the use of a state of the Union address."

The common defense.

 A change and stop only directs a treatment of all woman as equal. A woman does not have a pregnancy abortion when having a female specific amputation so the view held does nothing to convince anyone abortion is a united state that proclaims a presumption of innocence in both natural or necessary termination of birth. A woman stops pregnancy by aborting sex, or yes even stopping a artificial fertilizations made on her behalf. A woman is ordering a medical doctor to official perform either a female specific amputation, or a the official stop of birth by pregnancy abortion. Murder.

The idea of a ban on abortion is that a military tribunal can not convene to discharge this unconstitutional action. Being a threat to woman is to give an idea of simply no other solution could be made when addressing a court order finding abortion as unconstitutional.

You don't have the right to a woman's body. Bodily choice is a human right.

John_C_87

@xlJ_dolphin_473 ;

All a ban on abortion means is that pregnancy abortion and birth abortion have been found to be the same thing. A basic self-incrimination to describe murder as united state a cause of loss to female medical privacy.

John_C_87

I have a right to file verbal grievance against a woman whom is prejudice against woman.

YeshuaBought

John_C_87 said:

I have a right to file verbal grievance against a woman whom is prejudice against woman.

You don't have the right to force your opinion on other people.

John_C_87

I have a constitutional duty to bring forth the common defense to a Congressional Armed Service who has been entrusted to insure the United States Constitution on the behalf of posterity a woman can both receive and be given order to undertake female specific amputation while under obligation of that service.

YeshuaBought

John_C_87 said:

I have a constitutional duty to bring forth the common defense to a Congressional Armed Service who has been entrusted to insure the United States Constitution on the behalf of posterity a woman can both receive and be given order to undertake female specific amputation while under obligation of that service.

You don't have the right to force your opinion on other people, and you don't have the right to a woman's body. Bodily choice is a human right. I honestly think prolifers are worse than rapists.

John_C_87

YeshuaBought said:

John_C_87 said:

I have a right to file verbal grievance against a woman whom is prejudice against woman.

You don't have the right to force your opinion on other people.

Its not a opinion it is a grievance addressing preservation of constitution as you use the word legal which does not mean a single definition must be made on what makes abortion illegal under law as fact with fixed united state.


The mistake is in you focus of debate by not address the connection pregnancy abortion holds with a statement like abortion of birth. I am not telling what to do the united States constitutional address only describes one solution. The choice made other hand has been focusing all effort in justification for unconstitutional action.

YeshuaBought

John_C_87 said:

YeshuaBought said:

John_C_87 said:

I have a right to file verbal grievance against a woman whom is prejudice against woman.

You don't have the right to force your opinion on other people.

Its not a opinion it is a grievance addressing preservation of constitution as you use the word legal which does not mean a single definition must be made on what makes abortion illegal under law as fact with fixed united state.


The mistake is in you focus of debate by not address the connection pregnancy abortion holds with a statement like abortion of birth. I am not telling what to do the united States constitutional address only describes one solution. The choice made other hand has been focusing all effort in justification for unconstitutional action.

You need to mind your own business. I have the right to choose what to do with my body.

John_C_87

But you are now make a choice of what all woman do with their bodies......

YeshuaBought

John_C_87 said:

But you are now make a choice of what all woman do with their bodies......

Strawman fallacy, that is a lie. I am saying every woman should be able to choose whether to have a baby or not. I never said abortion should be forced. You are a .

John_C_87

Female specific amputation does not make a strawman fallacy as it is removing self-incrimination. A lie is that an abortion is to stop pregnancy it stops only the birth in how you describe its use. By choice I might add this is not a human right at all. Ever. You are attempting to teach it is a human right. Constitutional basic principle and legal precedent do not lie the basic principles can be wrong or right. The refuse to proceed is not a strawman fallacy it is refusal to either explain a woman's wrong clear as right or it remains a woman's wrong. You never provide a common defense to all woman why an order to stop birth is human right for all woman to chose. Rape does not work for all woman unless some woman lie and all woman are raped that have children. Not all woman lie.

Yes you are correct I am a . However I lie because I do not know the truth, the whole truth so help me, we need not God a respect for a woman's medical privacy will do. How I know is by court ruling, woman help all woman when providing me her constitutional common defense of human specific amputation. In questioning my honor in knowing when a lie is simple a mistake and when it is perjury appears as a popular legal malpractice in the House of Representatives and the door it came through is the door of civil court.

John_C_87

Anything else you need to know in my de-briefing?

MayCaesar

Women will die whether abortion is legal or not. There is no evidence to suggest that "prolifers' compassion stops at birth": there are billions prolifers on Earth with very different views, and compassion can manifest in many different ways.

I agree that abortion should be legal, but your argument is pretty weak.

John_C_87

Abortion is legal as long as it is not legislated in law.

YeshuaBought

MayCaesar said:

Women will die whether abortion is legal or not. There is no evidence to suggest that "prolifers' compassion stops at birth": there are billions prolifers on Earth with very different views, and compassion can manifest in many different ways.

I agree that abortion should be legal, but your argument is pretty weak.

You have the right to your opinion, but you don't have the right to your own facts. No one has the right to someone else's body. Prolifers support forced organ donation, because they force the woman to allow the fetus to use her uterus. You don't have the right to make choices for other people. if you truly support small government, you oppose the government forcing a woman to have an unwanted baby.

John_C_87

Okay,
1. I use the First Amendment to weight free speech word spoken without cost or without charge against the cost or charges made of grievance.
2. Woman tell others they stop pregnancy, not say they in fact stop birth with abortion. This is where the organized religion becomes stuck due to lack of constitutional representation by Presdient and not religious deity.
3. A woman aborts pregnancy when see does not have sex, or does not order a fertilized egg from medical process.
4. Pregnancy abortion written on paper as a medical request is a self-incrimination exposing treatment privacy targeted woman.
5. What I need to know in debriefing is a woman stops an immigration across an international border that places her life in danger.

YeshuaBought

John_C_87 said:

Okay,
1. I use the First Amendment to weight free speech word spoken without cost or without charge against the cost or charges made of grievance.
2. Woman tell others they stop pregnancy, not say they in fact stop birth with abortion. This is where the organized religion becomes stuck due to lack of constitutional representation by Presdient and not religious deity.
3. A woman aborts pregnancy when see does not have sex, or does not order a fertilized egg from medical process.
4. Pregnancy abortion written on paper as a medical request is a self-incrimination exposing treatment privacy targeted woman.
5. What I need to know in debriefing is a woman stops an immigration across an international border that places her life in danger.

You don't have the right to someone else's body, so mind your own business.

RickeyD

@YeshuaBought ; Science and God confirm that life begins at conception; therefore, referring to a baby as a zygote does not nullify the truism that abortion is murder/infanticide and violates the mutilated baby's 5th and 14th Amendment "due process" protections; therefore, Roe/73 is wholly unconstitutional and every mommy that conspires with an abortionist to murder their baby is guilty before God for murder and only by repenting of this sin and trusting in Jesus Christ as Lord for the mediation of said sin will the mother, the abortionist, the facility administration providing access to infanticide, find forgiveness and life in Eternity.

US Government Now Says: Life begins at conception

https://tonic.vice.com/en_us/article/yw397w/government-hhs-now-says-life-begins-at-conception

smoothie

@RickeyD The developing baby is not a citizen of the United States according to the law. The child needs to be born to be granted citizenship and amendment protections. Your argument is void and unconstitutional.

According to the government: "There are two general ways to obtain citizenship through U.S. citizen parents: at birth, and after birth but before the age of 18"

https://www.thedailybeast.com/the-founding-fathers-knew-a-fetus-is-not-an-american-person

https://www.uscis.gov/us-citizenship/citizenship-through-parents

YeshuaBought

RickeyD said:

@YeshuaBought ; Science and God confirm that life begins at conception; therefore, referring to a baby as a zygote does not nullify the truism that abortion is murder/infanticide and violates the mutilated baby's 5th and 14th Amendment "due process" protections; therefore, Roe/73 is wholly unconstitutional and every mommy that conspires with an abortionist to murder their baby is guilty before God for murder and only by repenting of this sin and trusting in Jesus Christ as Lord for the mediation of said sin will the mother, the abortionist, the facility administration providing access to infanticide, find forgiveness and life in Eternity.

US Government Now Says: Life begins at conception

https://tonic.vice.com/en_us/article/yw397w/government-hhs-now-says-life-begins-at-conception

No they actually don't. A zygote is not a baby, and does not have the right to live, end of story. Bodily choice is a human right, but forced organ donation isn't.

John_C_87

@RickeyD ;

Science describes life starting before fertilization on a single cell level, it is a double standard to say also at fertilization. Where YeshuaBought insists as a woman  who smuggles a baby into the united states up her whew-ha she has the United State Constitutional right to discriminate against woman.

Roe Vs. Wade

Ruled the discrimination is an unconstitutional action which violates a woman’s medical privacy. It doesn’t matter when you think life starts because the birth is what is aborted not the pregnancy which is in basic what you are saying RickeyD. Had the House of Representatives followed a separation of church and state a political understanding would of recognized the lie as perjury this entered when adding Abortion to legislation as aborting pregnancy and not birth. Science has established no United State which describes human life begins at conception.

@YeshuaBought

I have, and had right to a woman's body and I honor the responsibility it comes with.

  

YeshuaBought

John_C_87 said:

@RickeyD ;

Science describes life starting before fertilization on a single cell level, it is a double standard to say also at fertilization. Where YeshuaBought insists as a woman  who smuggles a baby into the united states up her whew-ha she has the United State Constitutional right to discriminate against woman.

Roe Vs. Wade

Ruled the discrimination is an unconstitutional action which violates a woman’s medical privacy. It doesn’t matter when you think life starts because the birth is what is aborted not the pregnancy which is in basic what you are saying RickeyD. Had the House of Representatives followed a separation of church and state a political understanding would of recognized the lie as perjury this entered when adding Abortion to legislation as aborting pregnancy and not birth. Science has established no United State which describes human life begins at conception.

@YeshuaBought

I have, and had right to a woman's body and I honor the responsibility it comes with.

  

No you don't. Only a rapist would feel entitled to a woman's reproductive organs.

John_C_87

"No you don't. Only a rapist would feel entitled to a woman's reproductive organs."

That is not true, a man does not need to use all woman's reproductive organs to place them in a Constitutional United State with woman. You expose all woman who have been sexual assaulted by addressing attacks of that nature with self-incrimination. The lie any woman makes takes place as soon as direction given her states she is official stopping pregnancy, birth is the target of pregnancy abortion.

Do you wish to contest this fact?

YeshuaBought

John_C_87 said:

"No you don't. Only a rapist would feel entitled to a woman's reproductive organs."

That is not true, a man does not need to use all woman's reproductive organs to place them in a Constitutional United State with woman. You expose all woman who have been sexual assaulted by addressing attacks of that nature with self-incrimination. The lie any woman makes takes place as soon as direction given her states she is official stopping pregnancy, birth is the target of pregnancy abortion.

Do you wish to contest this fact?

Go to Hell, you effing troll! Permablocked.

John_C_87

That went better than expected.
What makes people believe travel is a necessity in reaching hell when some many people have a goal of bringing hell to others. 

John_C_87

@smoothie ;

"The developing baby is not a citizen of the United States according to the law." 
The crime is not the loss of babies life. The crime is the perjury that has all woman lie by saying that are having a pregnancy abortion. When pregnancy abortion is really birth abortion, and according to fact when creating all woman as equal is female specific amputation.

A baby does not need to be a citizen of any nation to have a United State constitutional right America does not hold exclusive intellectual ownership on the formation of united state or constitutional principle they are international. Any nation that has a court system and legal history can be a facilitator of United State Constitutional Right its not limited by American Independence and its United State Constitution.

RickeyD

@John_C_87 ; Abortion is NOT medical privacy...it's murder. 

RickeyD

@smoothie ; Once again you seek to defend the demonic and you are wrong, once again. If the preborn child does not possess Constitutional rights, why does America's model penal code articulate fetal homicide laws? How can fetal homicide laws, based on the Bill of Rights, be "constitutional" if the child in the womb is absent personhood? You are evil and a servant of Satan.  No one possessing at least a modicum of moral turpitude, common decency, humanity, advocates for the murder and mutilation of our most innocent...this is demonic.

Fetal Homicide Laws

http://www.ncsl.org/research/health/fetal-homicide-state-laws.aspx

YeshuaBought

RickeyD said:

@John_C_87 ; Abortion is NOT medical privacy...it's murder. 

Bodily choice is a human right.

RickeyD

@YeshuaBought ; There is no "human right" to murder another human being. You are living in the demonic.

YeshuaBought

RickeyD said:

@YeshuaBought ; There is no "human right" to murder another human being. You are living in the demonic.

It's not a human being, and I have the right to choose, what to do with my body. I honestly think prolifers are worse than rapists, because they try to use a woman's reproductive organs by force. You don't have the right to make choices for other people.

smoothie

RickeyD said:

@smoothie ; Once again you seek to defend the demonic and you are wrong, once again. If the preborn child does not possess Constitutional rights, why does America's model penal code articulate fetal homicide laws? How can fetal homicide laws, based on the Bill of Rights, be "constitutional" if the child in the womb is absent personhood? You are evil and a servant of Satan.  No one possessing at least a modicum of moral turpitude, common decency, humanity, advocates for the murder and mutilation of our most innocent...this is demonic.

Fetal Homicide Laws

http://www.ncsl.org/research/health/fetal-homicide-state-laws.aspx

The fetus is still, not a citizen.

Preborn children do not possess constitutional rights that are granted by citizenship.

Literally from your source: "For the purposes of this webpage, NCSL describes these types of legislation as “penalty-enhancement for crimes against pregnant women.”

Fetal homicide laws do not grant any constitutional rights to fetuses and definitely does not make them citizens. You are making connections that don't make any legal sense.

John_C_87

@RickeyD ;

"It’s about escaping the consequences of your choices by taking away the choice of the most innocent among us."

The presumption of innocence is to be equal there is not a murder in the world who has not come before us as a blessing of GOD, a baby.

1. Does a woman have a basic right to female specific amputation as medical treatment?

2. Abortion describes a murder because it is linked to an official stop of birth and this is not a presumption of innocence in any way.

3. A Supreme Court ruling dictated that all woman are obligated to create themselves equal in the united state of pregnancy and medical treatment.
How many years has this order been ignored? Had woman been kept form official armed service to preserve American United State Constitution there may have been less harm by the neglect.

4. At no time is an American united state Constitutional right to file grievance being removed.

5. You as a woman have failed to create all woman equal in grievance with this conjecture it is suggested you address your prayer's to the woman who have died at the expense of this negligence as a baby lives at the cost of their lives live willingly. 

6. You as a female are not alone nor are you the only person who holds equal blame.

7. Every egg a woman does not knowingly fertilize kills a baby by a basic neglect you share with all females. Any woman who must make a choice is no less a woman for that same choice. Are you clear in understanding the responsibility, are you going to create all woman as equal or continue to make excuses.

John_C_87

It is truth that describes a baby at any stage human and the combination of religion and medically need that have the life declared as any different. None of this has a constitutional bearing on the Roe Vs Wade ruling that woman must create all woman as equal. I apologize for the blunt nature of any direction of argument as the discrimination held between woman themselves can be visible seen on the level of pregnancy.