Outrage: Virginia abortion bill sponsor saying plan would allow termination up until birth

[Tsing Tao]

Incorrect. The claim is that the embryo is part of the woman's body. That's your argument. It is scientifically incorrect.

Where did I say that? Go ahead, I'll wait while you quote from my posts.

If you cut yourself, that blood with be an exact DNA with the rest of your body. If a pregnant woman cuts herself, the DNA in that blood WILL NOT MATCH any part of that unborn child. The unborn child is one entity, the mother is an entirely different entity. This model is scientifically accurate. It supersedes your view.

So what? I never discussed matching my DNA. I simply said "contains human DNA". The blood that falls from my body matches human DNA but is not a human being. An embryo will match human DNA but is not yet a human being. It is a multi cell organism. That is all I said.

You're the one going on and on (and on again) about being separate from the mother. I'm not disputing that.

I've also reported your posts with the pictures of the aborted fetuses. It is possible to make your argument without posting such graphic and disturbing/disgusting photos like that. I'm letting you know so when the mods contact you, it was me who reported it (I don't hide behind my complaints).

 

[wildchild]

Where did I say that? Go ahead, I'll wait while you quote from my posts.

For the record, I am pro-choice because I am a libertarian and believe in the individual's right to choose.

Plan as day. How can one person have a right to choose over another? It is scientifically proven that woman and fetus are different. Does not sound very libertarian to me!

So what? I never discussed matching my DNA. I simply said "con[tains human DNA". The blood that falls from my body matches human DNA but is not a human being. An embryo will match human DNA but is not yet a human being. It is a multi cell organism. That is all I said.

You're the one going on and on (and on again) about being separate from the mother. I'm not disputing that.

It has nothing to do with weather it contains human DNA or not. It has to do with the fact that the DNA is different in woman and child. Clearly scientifically indicating two separate people.

I've also reported your posts with the pictures of the aborted fetuses. It is possible to make your argument without posting such graphic and disturbing/disgusting photos like that. I'm letting you know so when the mods contact you, it was me who reported it (I don't hide behind my complaints).

It is a medical procedure. I didn't know you were so anti-science that you could look at a medical procedure. You support it. Those are the consequences. If the procedure is so offensive to you, maybe that should tell you something.

BTW, I love how you think I should be censored because I highlighted a medical procedure. Very openminded and libertarian of you. You are now officially full of shit.

 

[Tsing Tao]

Plan as day. How can one person have a right to choose over another? It is scientifically proven that woman and fetus are different. Does not sound very libertarian to me!

You keep moving the goal posts. We were talking about embryos, not fetuses.

It has nothing to do with weather it contains human DNA or not. It has to do with the fact that the DNA is different in woman and child. Clearly scientifically indicating two separate people.

"Whether". Weather is what it is doing outside your window. You're using the term "people" and that's where I'm drawing the distinction. The embryo is not a "person". Not yet.

It is a medical procedure. I didn't know you were so anti-science that you could look at a medical procedure. You support it. Those are the consequences. If the procedure is so offensive to you, maybe that should tell you something.

BTW, I love how you think I should be censored because I highlighted a medical procedure. Very openminded and libertarian of you. You are now officially full of shit.

I can be libertarian and disgusted by graphic pictures some ape decides to post because he is unable to make his point with text. Apparently my standards were shared by the moderator - for if the mod thought it was acceptable, he would not have removed it.

 

[wildchild]

You keep moving the goal posts. We were talking about embryos, not fetuses.



"Whether". Weather is what it is doing outside your window. You're using the term "people" and that's where I'm drawing the distinction. The embryo is not a "person". Not yet.



I can be libertarian and disgusted by graphic pictures some ape decides to post because he is unable to make his point with text. Apparently my standards were shared by the moderator - for if the mod thought it was acceptable, he would not have removed it.

Hey snowflake, nobody is moving goal posts. Abortionist want fetuses aborted. This is fact, and is not an area of dispute. The embryo, fetus, baby, and so on are all identified by the same genetic code, that differs from their mother, from conception. It is a scientific fact, that you refuse to acknowledge and it shows your ignorance.

Ohhh haha, yeah I wrote 'weather' instead of 'whether'. You really scored major points there, douchebag.

You cannot be a libertarian and suppress images of medical procedures that you advocate. According to your logic its okay to go and murder a child as long as nobody shows any picture of it. Abortion is what you support. If you cant stand images of it, then that makes you a snowflake. You know who else didnt want pictures released? The Nazis.

I am going to address this with the mods. If you are allowed to come on here and make a pro-abortion arguement, then I should be allowed to post images of the procedures you support.

I am libertarian and support the rights of the individual. You cannot support abortion and support the rights of the individual.

Science does not support your claims.

 

[Tsing Tao]

Hey snowflake, nobody is moving goal posts. Abortionist want fetuses aborted. This is fact, and is not an area of dispute. The embryo, fetus, baby, and so on are all identified by the same genetic code, that differs from their mother, from conception. It is a scientific fact, that you refuse to acknowledge and it shows your ignorance.

I'm not arguing the scientific fact that they are the same genetic code. Only that an embryo is not a human being yet. Maybe if I made a coloring book, you could understand this?

You cannot be a libertarian and suppress images of medical procedures that you advocate. According to your logic its okay to go and murder a child as long as nobody shows any picture of it. Abortion is what you support. If you cant stand images of it, then that makes you a snowflake. You know who else didnt want pictures released? The Nazis.

While you have a right to post whatever you want, it has to confirm to the standards this forum has in place. Libertarians don't believe in anarchy. If someone posted hardcore porn, that would also not meet with the requirements of the forum and would be deleted. You don't just get to do whatever you do.

I am going to address this with the mods. If you are allowed to come on here and make a pro-abortion arguement, then I should be allowed to post images of the procedures you support.

I am libertarian and support the rights of the individual. You cannot support abortion and support the rights of the individual.

You can when it is just about the individual and not another human. This is the part you cannot seem to grasp.

Science does not support your claims.

What claim? That, at the point of conception, the embryo is not a human being? It isn't, and science doesn't claim that. It claims that the genetic code is the same as a human beings, but it takes more than just cells to identify someone as a human being.

 

[El OchoCinco]

I am going to address this with the mods. If you are allowed to come on here and make a pro-abortion arguement, then I should be allowed to post images of the procedures you support. .

This is not your site and the mods can delete anything they want, even you.

 

[gwb-trading]

I am going to address this with the mods. If you are allowed to come on here and make a pro-abortion arguement, then I should be allowed to post images of the procedures you support.

Do you see others coming on ET who oppose murderous MS-13 gang members crossing our open border by posting graphic pictures of their murdered victims? No.

The same thing holds true with other graphic pictures. There are lines that should not be crossed when discussing the issues.

 

[El OchoCinco]

What I find interesting is many conservatives judges have said Roe v. Wade is the law of the land and they respect precedent and thier personal beliefs on the subject cannot control their legal reasoning. So Democrats need to ask themselves truly how could judges simply come in and overturn the decision and why are they spreading such a panic about that.

This is not a case of Brown v. Board of Education overturning Plessy v. Fergunson or the Kawamatsu case being deemd wrong later on. In these cases we have clear discriminatory rationales supporting unfair laws in the open that were easy to overturn under even cursory review.

However in the case of Roe v. Wade, even if you had 9 conservative Christian judges, overturning that case would require far more than renewed legal analysis to find the decision "wrong" and clearly overturned.

The battle is in the moving line of when to cut off abortions and how much they can be regulated. These issues have been deferred to the State Legislatures and at most Circuit Courts for many reasons and i would bet anything that the SC will never take one of those appeals unless a lower court acted ultra vires.

So the Dem movement to pass expansive abortion laws such as in NY and Va in a claim to get ahead of the eventual overturning of Roe v. Wade comes across as a scare tactic to get is base behind such legislation.

 

[Wallet]

Do you see others coming on ET who oppose murderous MS-13 gang members crossing our open border by posting graphic pictures of their murdered victims? No.

The same thing holds true with other graphic pictures. There are lines that should not be crossed when discussing the issues.

You deem the pictures of murdered victims over the line, I agree. That's why the pictures Wildchild were so offensive, those weren't pictures of a gallbladder, appendix etc. they were babies.

It's ugly sometimes when we are exposed to the truth, especially when it comes to abortion. This is why when a mother is shown an ultrasound of her baby 70% choose life. It's like 90% for fathers.

I couldn't look at the pictures, they made me sick and there's a reason why.

 

[TreeFrogTrader]

If Dems are worried about the current (or a future court with another conservative/moderate added) placing restrictions on abortion/infanticide "rights," then, yup, that is something they need to worry about.