NationStates

Posted: **Sun Jan 20, 2019 2:43 pm**

Richtlant wrote:
The New California Republic wrote:Fetuses aren't people.

Yes they are people and there is no way you can disproof that. I mean, what you think, that they are some sort of aliens or plants?

I can actually. Fetuses do not satisfy the conditions for personhood. They are neither sapient or sentient until the late stages of gestation when their nervous systems have developed enough for some form of consciousness to arise. They also do not satisfy the legal definitions of a person.

Richtlant wrote:Why what? You quoted too many sentences. Idk which one do you mean. Or does that why apply to all of them?

The last sentence.

Posted: **Sun Jan 20, 2019 2:47 pm**

San Lumen wrote:
Richtlant wrote:When you abort a baby you basically execute innocent person without any accusation or trial. Well, I think that I can say now that if you approve such things you are worse than Stalin who was worse than Hitler. Just kidding, you aren't worse than Stalin. But seriously folks, don't do abortion, it's bullshit.

What right do you have to tell someone what they can and cannot do with their body? What about rape or incest?

A fetus is not a person. Did you know that for reasons unknown many fertilized eggs never implant in the uterus? I guess any women whose had more than one period is a serial killer

How dare you force a rape or incest victim to have their assailant's child

I have the right of free speech, duh. I was talking about what you can or can't do with the baby's body (not yours) anyway, so your argument is pointless. Besides that, you can always give the living baby you hate so much for an adoption. There are plenty of people who would like to have a child and they would have never thought about killing it when it is most vulnerable.
Of course the women aren't serial killers. Spontaneous abortions don't happen because the woman wants them to happen. The fact that your child accidentally dies doesn't make you a murderer.
Last but not least, I've never forced rape or incest victims to have their and their assailant's child, nor I ever advised them to kill it. You accuse me of things that I haven't done (yet), just like the GESTAPO and KGB did.

Posted: **Sun Jan 20, 2019 2:51 pm**

Richtlant wrote:
San Lumen wrote:
What right do you have to tell someone what they can and cannot do with their body? What about rape or incest?

A fetus is not a person. Did you know that for reasons unknown many fertilized eggs never implant in the uterus? I guess any women whose had more than one period is a serial killer

How dare you force a rape or incest victim to have their assailant's child

I have the right of free speech, duh. Besides that, you can always give the living baby you hate so much for an adoption. There are plenty of people who would like to have a child and they would have never thought about killing it when it is most vulnerable.
Of course the women aren't serial killers. Spontaneous abortions don't happen because the woman wants them to happen. The fact that your child accidentally dies doesn't make you a murderer.
Last but not least, I've never forced rape or incest victims to have their and their assailant's child, nor I ever advised them to kill it. You accuse me of things that I haven't done (yet), just like the GESTAPO and KGB did.

A fetus does not meet the definition of sentient until late in a pregnancy. Why should a rape or incest victim be forced to carry to term a pregnancy they don't want?

Posted: **Sun Jan 20, 2019 2:52 pm**

Richtlant wrote:Besides that, you can always give the living baby you hate so much for an adoption.

Except that the woman is enslaved to the fetus for 9 months if she is being forced to carry it to term, even though she does not want it there and if she has no legal recourse in that regard in the event of abortion being banned.

Posted: **Sun Jan 20, 2019 3:00 pm**

San Lumen wrote:
Richtlant wrote:
I have the right of free speech, duh. Besides that, you can always give the living baby you hate so much for an adoption. There are plenty of people who would like to have a child and they would have never thought about killing it when it is most vulnerable.
Of course the women aren't serial killers. Spontaneous abortions don't happen because the woman wants them to happen. The fact that your child accidentally dies doesn't make you a murderer.
Last but not least, I've never forced rape or incest victims to have their and their assailant's child, nor I ever advised them to kill it. You accuse me of things that I haven't done (yet), just like the GESTAPO and KGB did.

A fetus does not meet the definition of sentient until late in a pregnancy. Why should a rape or incest victim be forced to carry to term a pregnancy they don't want?

Why should they be permitted to end it?

Posted: **Sun Jan 20, 2019 3:05 pm**

Telconi wrote:
San Lumen wrote:
A fetus does not meet the definition of sentient until late in a pregnancy. Why should a rape or incest victim be forced to carry to term a pregnancy they don't want?

Why should they be permitted to end it?

Because its their body

Posted: **Sun Jan 20, 2019 3:05 pm**

San Lumen wrote:
Telconi wrote:
Why should they be permitted to end it?

Because its their body

So?

Posted: **Sun Jan 20, 2019 3:06 pm**

Telconi wrote:
San Lumen wrote:
Because its their body

So?

What right to you have to make medical decisions for others

Posted: **Sun Jan 20, 2019 3:06 pm**

To properly raise one child costs approximately $1 million.

Ultimately it is the decision of the woman carrying the fetus and her husband or man who impregnated her and whatever clergy member or deity that they are in contact with.

We should not allow archaic ancient laws to become the laws of today. The laws of then are the laws of then the laws of today are the laws of today.

Posted: **Sun Jan 20, 2019 3:09 pm**

San Lumen wrote:
Telconi wrote:
So?

What right to you have to make medical decisions for others

Is it a medical decision?

Posted: **Sun Jan 20, 2019 3:09 pm**

United States of Americanas wrote:Ultimately it is the decision of the woman carrying the fetus and her husband or man who impregnated her

Why should the man have anything to do with the decision regarding whether she remains pregnant or not?

Posted: **Sun Jan 20, 2019 3:12 pm**

Are we really gravedigging this nearly month-dead thread just to rehash the same bloody talking points from the last 110 pages in the same circles by the same bloody people?

Posted: **Sun Jan 20, 2019 3:12 pm**

Jebslund wrote:Are we really gravedigging this nearly month-dead thread just to rehash the same bloody talking points from the last 110 pages in the same circles by the same bloody people?

Well it's a thread on abortion, what do you expect?

Posted: **Sun Jan 20, 2019 3:15 pm**

Jebslund wrote:Are we really gravedigging this nearly month-dead thread just to rehash the same bloody talking points from the last 110 pages in the same circles by the same bloody people?

It was what seems to be a throwaway nation that dug the thread up; so it was either one of the regulars using a puppet or just a newbie that felt like performing a drive-by on the thread.

Posted: **Sun Jan 20, 2019 3:16 pm**

Telconi wrote:
San Lumen wrote:What right to you have to make medical decisions for others

Is it a medical decision?

Yes

Posted: **Sun Jan 20, 2019 3:18 pm**

Richtlant wrote:
San Lumen wrote:
What right do you have to tell someone what they can and cannot do with their body? What about rape or incest?

A fetus is not a person. Did you know that for reasons unknown many fertilized eggs never implant in the uterus? I guess any women whose had more than one period is a serial killer

How dare you force a rape or incest victim to have their assailant's child

I have the right of free speech, duh. I was talking about what you can or can't do with the baby's body (not yours) anyway, so your argument is pointless. Besides that, you can always give the living baby you hate so much for an adoption. There are plenty of people who would like to have a child and they would have never thought about killing it when it is most vulnerable.
Of course the women aren't serial killers. Spontaneous abortions don't happen because the woman wants them to happen. The fact that your child accidentally dies doesn't make you a murderer.
Last but not least, I've never forced rape or incest victims to have their and their assailant's child, nor I ever advised them to kill it. You accuse me of things that I haven't done (yet), just like the GESTAPO and KGB did.

This post was so edgy I cut myself just by looking at it.

Also nice job invoking Godwin's Law in just about every single post.

Posted: **Sun Jan 20, 2019 10:46 pm**

Richtlant wrote:
The New California Republic wrote:Fetuses aren't people.

Why?

Yes they are people and there is no way you can disproof that. I mean, what you think, that they are some sort of aliens or plants?

Why what? You quoted too many sentences. Idk which one do you mean. Or does that why apply to all of them?

Even if they were people they still have no right to use another person’s body without that other person’ consent.

Posted: **Sun Jan 20, 2019 10:48 pm**

Richtlant wrote:
San Lumen wrote:
What right do you have to tell someone what they can and cannot do with their body? What about rape or incest?

A fetus is not a person. Did you know that for reasons unknown many fertilized eggs never implant in the uterus? I guess any women whose had more than one period is a serial killer

How dare you force a rape or incest victim to have their assailant's child

I have the right of free speech, duh. I was talking about what you can or can't do with the baby's body (not yours) anyway, so your argument is pointless. Besides that, you can always give the living baby you hate so much for an adoption. There are plenty of people who would like to have a child and they would have never thought about killing it when it is most vulnerable.
Of course the women aren't serial killers. Spontaneous abortions don't happen because the woman wants them to happen. The fact that your child accidentally dies doesn't make you a murderer.
Last but not least, I've never forced rape or incest victims to have their and their assailant's child, nor I ever advised them to kill it. You accuse me of things that I haven't done (yet), just like the GESTAPO and KGB did.

Adoption does not resolve the problem of an unwanted PREGNANCY.

And going full godwin doesn’t help your case.

Posted: **Sun Jan 20, 2019 10:50 pm**

Jebslund wrote:Are we really gravedigging this nearly month-dead thread just to rehash the same bloody talking points from the last 110 pages in the same circles by the same bloody people?

It was only mostly dead, not all dead.

Posted: **Sun Jan 20, 2019 11:00 pm**

The Caleshan Valkyrie wrote:
Richtlant wrote:Yes they are people and there is no way you can disproof that. I mean, what you think, that they are some sort of aliens or plants?

Why what? You quoted too many sentences. Idk which one do you mean. Or does that why apply to all of them?

Even if they were people they still have no right to use another person’s body without that other person’ consent.

The irrelevance of personhood as a concept when medically using another person's body has been further enshrined in law by the case of McFall v. Shimp (1978).

In brief, Robert McFall had anaplastic anaemia. His only match was his first cousin (and best shot of survival -- up to 50-60% -- was a bone marrow donation).

McFall sued Shimp in an effort to force him to donate and lost. The Judge was deeply morally uncomfortable with his own decision (he actually found Shimp "morally indefensible"; which is not entirely dissimilar to how uncomfortable some pro-choice people are with abortion), but stated that forcing someone to donate bone marrow "would defeat the sanctity of the individual and would impose a rule which would know no limits, and one could not imagine where the line would be drawn". McFall subsequently died.

Was McFall less of a person than a foetus? Certainly not. In fact, legally, he was more of one (considering that most courts and the UN do not recognise the personhood of a foetus).

But I find it telling that pro-life groups are all rushing to overturn the right for women to choose abortion and none have campaigned for the dubious right to be forced to donate bone marrow, blood and organs to a born relative to whom they are the only match.

Posted: **Sun Jan 20, 2019 11:38 pm**

Just because I’ve been wanting to say it for a while
If anyone on this thread has had an abortion, you are loved. I don’t think less of you.

Posted: **Mon Jan 21, 2019 8:29 am**

Only about 0,5-1% of kids is aborted because of rape and/or incest. About 42% of kids are aborted either because the woman can't bare the responsibility of being a mother, or she just isn't feeling like giving birth. Why do you focus so much on mere 0,75% of causes, while you are totally missing the main cause of planned abortions?

I see that I have to repeat my self... I'm not telling you what you can or can not do with YOUR body, I'm just telling you what you shouldn't do with your CHILD'S body. It is wrong and cruel to kill your child whether it is inside your womb or elsewhere, weather it has 40 years or it is in its earliest stages of development.

And finally, please, reveal me the secret of what you thing a foetus, a HUMAN foetus, not a dog foetus, is if it isn't a human.

Posted: **Mon Jan 21, 2019 8:37 am**

Richtlant wrote:Only about 0,5-1% of kids is aborted because of rape and/or incest. About 42% of kids are aborted either because the woman can't bare the responsibility of being a mother, or she just isn't feeling like giving birth. Why do you focus so much on mere 0,75% of causes, while you are totally missing the main cause of planned abortions?

I see that I have to repeat my self... I'm not telling you what you can or can not do with YOUR body, I'm just telling you what you shouldn't do with your CHILD'S body. It is wrong and cruel to kill your child whether it is inside your womb or elsewhere, weather it has 40 years or it is in its earliest stages of development.

And finally, please, reveal me the secret of what you thing a foetus, a HUMAN foetus, not a dog foetus, is if it isn't a human.

It isn't the child's body, the fetus is not an independent life from the mother and up until the last months is incapable of living outside the mother.

Posted: **Mon Jan 21, 2019 8:41 am**

Richtlant wrote:reveal me the secret of what you thing a foetus, a HUMAN foetus, not a dog foetus, is if it isn't a human.

What the actual fuck?

Posted: **Mon Jan 21, 2019 8:47 am**

Richtlant wrote:Only about 0,5-1% of kids is aborted because of rape and/or incest. About 42% of kids are aborted either because the woman can't bare the responsibility of being a mother, or she just isn't feeling like giving birth. Why do you focus so much on mere 0,75% of causes, while you are totally missing the main cause of planned abortions?

I see that I have to repeat my self... I'm not telling you what you can or can not do with YOUR body, I'm just telling you what you shouldn't do with your CHILD'S body. It is wrong and cruel to kill your child whether it is inside your womb or elsewhere, weather it has 40 years or it is in its earliest stages of development.

And finally, please, reveal me the secret of what you thing a foetus, a HUMAN foetus, not a dog foetus, is if it isn't a human.

1- It doesn't matter why.
If my very brother was dying and he needed my blood, he couldn't force me to give him blood if I didn't want to. It's my body. I do what I want with it. Even if someone else would die.
If I choose not to give up any organs after I die (as in, specifically mention it somewhere), they can't take my organs. It's my body. I do what I want with it. Even after I am dead.
A living person (the mother) has more rights than a non-person. They certainly have more rights than a dead person. Anything else and it's slavery. No compromise here.

2- Nobody's denying it's a human or not. It's not a person. From a legal, philosophical, or judicial point of view.

NationStates

[Abortion Thread] (YET ANOTHER POLL!) Taking measure.