Kansas to enact "Life starts at fertilization" abortion law

[Liriena]

NO...you are a sentient, self-suficient bunch of almost perfectly organized cells.

SAPIENT. NOT SENTIENT, SAPIENT. A DOG IS SENTIENT. AN ELEPHANT IS SENTIENT. A HUMAN IS SAPIENT. LEARN THE DIFFERENCE.

Sorry... *feels shame for failing*

[Cosara]

(Image)

No.

And monthly? More like weekly.

More like daily.

[Hathradic States]

And we drive for reasons other than hurting someone. But if we do, we still pay for it.

If you can't understand the difference between inflicting harm on another person and having autonomy over your own body then I really don't think there is much we can do here.

Bodily autonomy? Its another human being growing inside of you, for fucking Christ sake.

[Zweite Alaje]

And we drive for reasons other than hurting someone. But if we do, we still pay for it.

If you can't understand the difference between inflicting harm on another person and having autonomy over your own body then I really don't think there is much we can do here.

Autonomy over your body doesn't mean shit when it comes to killing a fellow human.

[Liriena]

NO...you are a sentient, self-suficient bunch of almost perfectly organized cells.

alright I know this does not have to do with abortion but humor me for a second, what if a sentient person is not self-sufficient are they entitled to life? and please show me proof that the unborn are not sentient.

Your own source proved that the unborn are not sapient, and they are only fully sentient in the latter stages (around the time when, according to Roe v. Wade, abortion's get kinda iffy). Besides, a fetus being capable of feeling pain changes nothing. We have drugs to prevent pain.

As for a person who is not self-sufficient, that person would still match the necessary criteria to be a person.

[Parhe]

SAPIENT. NOT SENTIENT, SAPIENT. A DOG IS SENTIENT. AN ELEPHANT IS SENTIENT. A HUMAN IS SAPIENT. LEARN THE DIFFERENCE.

Sorry... *feels shame for failing*

While on the subject, sort of, somewhat kind of, is your flag suppose to have any sexual connotations or is my mind just in the gutter?

[Cosara]

alright I know this does not have to do with abortion but humor me for a second, what if a sentient person is not self-sufficient are they entitled to life? and please show me proof that the unborn are not sentient.

Your own source proved that the unborn are not sapient, and they are only fully sentient in the latter stages (around the time when, according to Roe v. Wade, abortion's get kinda iffy). Besides, a fetus being capable of feeling pain changes nothing. We have drugs to prevent pain.

As for a person who is not self-sufficient, that person would still match the necessary criteria to be a person.

Giving fetuses drugs to stop them from feeling pain so that they cannot be considered alive and can be aborted.

Sounds like something the feminist equivalent of Dr. Evil would do...

[Condunum]

alright I know this does not have to do with abortion but humor me for a second, what if a sentient person is not self-sufficient are they entitled to life? and please show me proof that the unborn are not sentient.

Your own source proved that the unborn are not sapient, and they are only fully sentient in the latter stages (around the time when, according to Roe v. Wade, abortion's get kinda iffy). Besides, a fetus being capable of feeling pain changes nothing. We have drugs to prevent pain.

As for a person who is not self-sufficient, that person would still match the necessary criteria to be a person.

They aren't even fully sentient. Being sentient actually requires you to be able to perceive subjectivity, and you can't even achieve that until around the age of 2 or 3.

[Condunum]

Your own source proved that the unborn are not sapient, and they are only fully sentient in the latter stages (around the time when, according to Roe v. Wade, abortion's get kinda iffy). Besides, a fetus being capable of feeling pain changes nothing. We have drugs to prevent pain.

As for a person who is not self-sufficient, that person would still match the necessary criteria to be a person.

Giving fetuses drugs to stop them from feeling pain so that they cannot be considered alive and can be aborted.

Sounds like something the feminist equivalent of Dr. Evil would do...

He never said anything about that.

[Republic of Neighpal]

KILL KANSAS! KILL IT WITH FIRE!

[Liriena]

Sorry... *feels shame for failing*

While on the subject, sort of, somewhat kind of, is your flag suppose to have any sexual connotations or is my mind just in the gutter?

The original picture had strong sexual connotations, but I edited them out for the sake of being able to use it as my flag. I only like the design, and the sexual connotations are a somewhat undesired side-effect.

[Liriena]

Your own source proved that the unborn are not sapient, and they are only fully sentient in the latter stages (around the time when, according to Roe v. Wade, abortion's get kinda iffy). Besides, a fetus being capable of feeling pain changes nothing. We have drugs to prevent pain.

As for a person who is not self-sufficient, that person would still match the necessary criteria to be a person.

Giving fetuses drugs to stop them from feeling pain so that they cannot be considered alive and can be aborted.

Sounds like something the feminist equivalent of Dr. Evil would do...

Hahaha...no.

[Dilange]

Oh god damn it.

[Liriena]

Oh god damn it.

So...?

[Enadail]

If you can't understand the difference between inflicting harm on another person and having autonomy over your own body then I really don't think there is much we can do here.

Autonomy over your body doesn't mean shit when it comes to killing a fellow human.

See, the problem with that argument is its easily extendable. We obviously value bodily autonomy over the survival of others, otherwise someone could commandeer your body to keep themselves alive, as long as it doesn't kill you. Why are fetuses so special they get that right that no one else has?

[Enadail]

If you can't understand the difference between inflicting harm on another person and having autonomy over your own body then I really don't think there is much we can do here.

Bodily autonomy? Its another human being growing inside of you, for fucking Christ sake.

So?

I presented this a few pages back: should women have the right to take any action that could harm the fetus revoked while pregnant? After all, allowing a woman to continue working could place undue stress on the body and lead to a miscarriage. She may eat something that could harm the fetus. Why can she place the fetus in harms way but not remove the fetus? Seems that either its about the fetus and you want to revoke rights, or its about personal control and fuck logic.

[The Black Forrest]

Oh god damn it.

Well? They do get 90 or so tornadoes a year so.......

[Cosara]

Bodily autonomy? Its another human being growing inside of you, for fucking Christ sake.

So?

I presented this a few pages back: should women have the right to take any action that could harm the fetus revoked while pregnant? After all, allowing a woman to continue working could place undue stress on the body and lead to a miscarriage. She may eat something that could harm the fetus. Why can she place the fetus in harms way but not remove the fetus? Seems that either its about the fetus and you want to revoke rights, or its about personal control and fuck logic.

Using your logic, instead of sending soldiers in to battle, we should just line them up against a wall and shoot them.

[Hathradic States]

Autonomy over your body doesn't mean shit when it comes to killing a fellow human.

See, the problem with that argument is its easily extendable. We obviously value bodily autonomy over the survival of others, otherwise someone could commandeer your body to keep themselves alive, as long as it doesn't kill you. Why are fetuses so special they get that right that no one else has?

They are necessary for the continuation of the species? And they don't exactly go out of their way to kill you, like others do.

Bodily autonomy? Its another human being growing inside of you, for fucking Christ sake.

So?

I presented this a few pages back: should women have the right to take any action that could harm the fetus revoked while pregnant? After all, allowing a woman to continue working could place undue stress on the body and lead to a miscarriage. She may eat something that could harm the fetus. Why can she place the fetus in harms way but not remove the fetus? Seems that either its about the fetus and you want to revoke rights, or its about personal control and fuck logic.

It's about respect to life, just like how I'm not going to fucking plug somebody because they inconvenience me. Now, if the fetus threatens the mothers life, or she was raped, then she should be allowed to.

[Liriena]

So?

I presented this a few pages back: should women have the right to take any action that could harm the fetus revoked while pregnant? After all, allowing a woman to continue working could place undue stress on the body and lead to a miscarriage. She may eat something that could harm the fetus. Why can she place the fetus in harms way but not remove the fetus? Seems that either its about the fetus and you want to revoke rights, or its about personal control and fuck logic.

Using your logic, instead of sending soldiers in to battle, we should just line them up against a wall and shoot them.

No. Not even close to a valid analogy. But nice try, Cosara.

[The God-Realm]

So?

I presented this a few pages back: should women have the right to take any action that could harm the fetus revoked while pregnant? After all, allowing a woman to continue working could place undue stress on the body and lead to a miscarriage. She may eat something that could harm the fetus. Why can she place the fetus in harms way but not remove the fetus? Seems that either its about the fetus and you want to revoke rights, or its about personal control and fuck logic.

Using your logic, instead of sending soldiers in to battle, we should just line them up against a wall and shoot them.

We kind of did that in the musket years.

[Cosara]

Using your logic, instead of sending soldiers in to battle, we should just line them up against a wall and shoot them.

We kind of did that in the musket years.

[Liriena]

See, the problem with that argument is its easily extendable. We obviously value bodily autonomy over the survival of others, otherwise someone could commandeer your body to keep themselves alive, as long as it doesn't kill you. Why are fetuses so special they get that right that no one else has?

They are necessary for the continuation of the species? And they don't exactly go out of their way to kill you, like others do.

By that logic, the state should force everyone to reproduce, regardless of whether they want to have children at that time or any other time, and regardless of their sexual orientation, or mental or physical health.

So?

I presented this a few pages back: should women have the right to take any action that could harm the fetus revoked while pregnant? After all, allowing a woman to continue working could place undue stress on the body and lead to a miscarriage. She may eat something that could harm the fetus. Why can she place the fetus in harms way but not remove the fetus? Seems that either its about the fetus and you want to revoke rights, or its about personal control and fuck logic.

It's about respect to life, just like how I'm not going to fucking plug somebody because they inconvenience me. Now, if the fetus threatens the mothers life, or she was raped, then she should be allowed to.

"Respect to life" is a very vague statement. Taking into account how debatable the humanity (let alone the personhood) of a fetus is, your "respect to life" could encompass all living creatures, including cattle, crops and vermin.

[Cosara]

If you can't understand the difference between inflicting harm on another person and having autonomy over your own body then I really don't think there is much we can do here.

Autonomy over your body doesn't mean shit when it comes to killing a fellow human.

Exactly!

[Liriena]

Autonomy over your body doesn't mean shit when it comes to killing a fellow human.

Exactly!

Which is why we are lucky fetuses are not human beings.