• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Texas bans abortion.

Status
Not open for further replies.
Warp12 said:
I am not sure what you don't understand.
Click to expand...
If you believe nothing else, believe this: Nothing you've posted has been misunderstood. You didn't invent the dishonest game you're playing. We've seen it all before.
 
Babbylonian said:
If you believe nothing else, believe this: Nothing you've posted has been misunderstood. You didn't invent the dishonest game you're playing. We've seen it all before.
Click to expand...

Steve-bingo.gif
 
Fast Eddie B said:
Asked of a person in the street*:

“There are some who speak of a developing fetus as a non-human parasite. Similar in many respects to cancer. Thoughts?”

What percentage would agree? It’s de facto pejorative, regardless of dictionary definitions.


*Or a woman who just suffered a miscarriage.
Click to expand...

So what? As if the person on the street is a reflection of intellectual prowess.

I give you Jimmy Jimmy Kimmel's man on the street series.


A parasite may be thought of as something alien. But the fact is, it isn't. It is an organism that's very existence is dependent on it's host. Without which the organism will die.
But also like many parasites, a fetus takes a health toll on its host. Sometimes even death.
 
acbytesla said:
So what? As if the person on the street is a reflection of intellectual prowess.

I give you Jimmy Jimmy Kimmel's man on the street series.


A parasite may be thought of as something alien. But the fact is, it isn't. It is an organism that's very existence is dependent on it's host. Without which the organism will die.
But also like many parasites, a fetus takes a health toll on its host. Sometimes even death.
Click to expand...

OMG! How dare you say that! Stating facts about pregnancy that aren't all sunshine, lollipops and rainbows is...is...is...just inhuman!! Someone give me mah smelling salts. Ah do believe ah may swoon!

 
I hate to interrupt this stroke-session by posting something related to TX abortion laws, but this seems significant:

"New Texas law bans abortion-inducing drugs after seven weeks pregnancy"

By the end of the year Texas may have even more restrictions on the ability to get an abortion after its Republican governor, Greg Abbott, quietly signed into law new restrictions banning the mail-order provision of abortion medication seven weeks into pregnancy.

The law prevents providers from prescribing abortion-inducing drugs more than seven weeks into pregnancy, instead of 10 weeks, the current limit. It takes effect on 2 December.
Click to expand...

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2021/sep/22/texas-abortion-inducing-drugs-law-greg-abbott

From CNN:

Senate Bill 4, signed into law by Gov. Greg Abbott on Friday, prohibits a person "from providing an abortion‑inducing drug to a pregnant woman without satisfying the applicable informed consent requirements for abortions." The law requires physicians providing abortion drugs to comply with certain physician reporting requirements. Anyone who "intentionally, knowingly, or recklessly violates" the bill faces a state jail felony offense.
Click to expand...

https://www.cnn.com/2021/09/21/politics/texas-abbott-abortion-inducing-drugs-law/index.html

I know this is less controversial, overall. But, it's another victory for conservatives, I suppose?
 
Paul2 said:
Then it appears your position is this: a woman has two choices:

1. Have sex, even while using birth control that is never 100$ effective, and be required to not abort the baby, which is accepting the consequences of the decision to have sex; or

2. Not have sex and avoid the consequences in #1.

Do I have that right?
Click to expand...

No, you have it wrong. I don't support the TX law. Believe it or not, one may not favor abortion, but understand that things happen. However, it doesn't mean that there should be no focus on personal accountability. I know numerous people who have either had abortions, or carried "accidents" to term...when they chose not to use birth control. Some of them with multiple instances of each, sometimes by different fathers.

Instead of any reasonable position, though...we have people in here calling the unborn "parasites", talking about 40-week abortions, and espousing the benefits of abortion as related to population control.

It's ludicrous.
 
Last edited:
Warp12 said:
I hate to interrupt this stroke-session by posting something related to TX abortion laws, but this seems significant:

"New Texas law bans abortion-inducing drugs after seven weeks pregnancy"



https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2021/sep/22/texas-abortion-inducing-drugs-law-greg-abbott

From CNN:



https://www.cnn.com/2021/09/21/politics/texas-abbott-abortion-inducing-drugs-law/index.html

I know this is less controversial, overall. But, it's another victory for conservatives, I suppose?
Click to expand...

Not necessarily for conservatives as not all are anti-choice. It's a (temporary) victory for anti-choice proponents. Expect this to be challenged in court, too.
 
Warp12 said:
No, you have it wrong. I don't support the TX law. Believe it or not, one may not favor abortion, but understand that things happen. However, it doesn't mean that there should be no focus on personal accountability. I know numerous people who have either had abortions, or carried "accidents" to term...when they chose not to use birth control. Some of them with multiple instances of each, sometimes by different fathers.
Click to expand...

Are these the same people who traded their mail-in ballots for a six-pack of beer and/or snagged a bunch of mail-in ballots from the Post Office?

Instead of any reasonable position, though...we have people in here calling the unborn "parasites",
Click to expand...


Quick! To the Fainting Couches!

talking about 40-week abortions
Click to expand...

There's no such thing as a 40 week abortion. That would be an induced BIRTH as that's a full term, viable fetus.

Abortions later in pregnancy typically occur because of two general indications: lethal fetal anomalies or threats to the health of the mother. Some fetal development problems or genetic anomalies do not show up or develop until later in pregnancy. Some examples might include anencephaly (described above) or limb-body wall complex, when the organs develop outside of the body cavity. With conditions like these, the fetus cannot survive out of the uterus.

Likewise, when conditions progress or appear that severely compromise a woman’s health or life, abortion may be the safest, medically indicated procedure. These conditions can also reduce the possibility of fetal survival. They might include premature rupture of membranes (where the fluid surrounding the fetus is lost before labor), uterine infection, preeclampsia, placental abruption and placenta accreta. Women under these circumstances may have extensive blood loss or septic shock that can be fatal.

It’s important to note, if a woman’s health or life is at risk and the fetus is viable, delivery is pursued, not abortion.
Click to expand...

Levy: Abortion later in pregnancy is a very complex decision and, often, a very emotional one. We know that women who make the decision to have an abortion do so in a considered, deliberate fashion. This is especially true for women who have abortions later in pregnancy who are often facing devastating fetal diagnoses or life-threatening conditions that may introduce a multitude of clinical considerations into their decision-making.

Moreover, the ob-gyns who provide later in pregnancy abortion care have very specific training both in the technical procedure, as well as ethical decision-making in complex clinical circumstances.
Click to expand...
https://www.cnn.com/2019/02/06/health/late-term-abortion-explainer/index.html


and espousing the benefits of abortion as related to population control.
Click to expand...

No one here has ever espoused using abortion as a means of population control. Saying that, it is a fact that overpopulation creates and keeps people in poverty. Women in poor countries who do not have access to birth control struggle with feeding the children they have, often not being able to feed them. Or they should not be having any more children due to their own health. And before you go to the "then they shouldn't be having sex", these same countries are often patriarchal societies where women have little say because it's considered a husband's "right" to have sex.

It's ludicrous.
Click to expand...

Yes, claims that women are having abortions at 40 weeks is ludicrous. Continually harping on the use of the word "parasite" in order to ****stir is ludicrous.

OH...and please answer thaiboxerken's questions.
 
Stacyhs said:
There's no such thing as a 40 week abortion. That would be an induced BIRTH as that's a full term, viable fetus.
Click to expand...

I didn't claim there was...I claimed that some were referencing such things.

JimOfAllTrades said:
Six, eight, ten, twelve, or 40 weeks, this is a decision for the woman and her medical professionals.
Click to expand...

Warp12 said:
At 40 weeks, or even 36 weeks, who plays the trump card...the woman or the medical professionals, in your opinion?
Click to expand...

JimOfAllTrades said:
The woman can choose, but if the medical professionals don't agree, she's going to have a hard time getting it done.
Click to expand...


Clear?
 
Stacyhs said:
No one here has ever espoused using abortion as a means of population control.
Click to expand...

I said espoused its benefits, as related to population control.

acbytesla said:
You see, I look at this from a practical perspective.

More people means overcrowding,.
It means more demand.
It means higher prices
It means more homelessness
It means greater inequality.
It means more poverty
It means more pollution
Click to expand...

But hey, whatever you say. :thumbsup:
 
Last edited:
Warp12 said:
I didn't claim there was...I claimed that some were referencing such things.

Originally Posted by JimOfAllTrades View Post
Six, eight, ten, twelve, or 40 weeks, this is a decision for the woman and her medical professionals.
Click to expand...
Originally Posted by Warp12 View Post
At 40 weeks, or even 36 weeks, who plays the trump card...the woman or the medical professionals, in your opinion?
Click to expand...
Originally Posted by JimOfAllTrades View Post
The woman can choose, but if the medical professionals don't agree, she's going to have a hard time getting it done.
Click to expand...

Clear?
Click to expand...

Oh, it's clear all right: this is what it is you actually said: "we have people in here....talking about 40 week abortions," now becomes "some were referencing" 40 week abortions.

So ONE person is "some people" and he was obviously being hyperbolic to make a point. Yep. Perfectly clear.
 
Warp12 said:
I answered your deleted question, above.

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=13607416&postcount=1690

Not interested in any further debate with "thaiboxerken". I generally disregard his comments (I may have mentioned this already, in another thread).
Click to expand...

This is NOT AN ANSWER. IT IS A DODGE. An answer addresses the questions asked.

Here were the questions Paul asked you

Originally Posted by Paul2 View Post
Then it appears your position is this: a woman has two choices:

1. Have sex, even while using birth control that is never 100$ effective, and be required to not abort the baby, which is accepting the consequences of the decision to have sex; or

2. Not have sex and avoid the consequences in #1.
Click to expand...


Warp12 said:
Do I have that right?
No, you have it wrong. I don't support the TX law. Believe it or not, one may not favor abortion, but understand that things happen. However, it doesn't mean that there should be no focus on personal accountability. I know numerous people who have either had abortions, or carried "accidents" to term...when they chose not to use birth control. Some of them with multiple instances of each, sometimes by different fathers.

Instead of any reasonable position, though...we have people in here calling the unborn "parasites", talking about 40-week abortions, and espousing the benefits of abortion as related to population control.

It's ludicrous.
Click to expand...
What is ludicrous is you thinking these are answers.

You mentioned the need for personal responsibility/accountability at least a dozen times in this thread. And when asked by boxerken, paul, me and others you have deflected, pivoted, dodged and responded with facile remarks and sometimes silly images. Not once have you been willing to actually say in this forum what personal accountability is as it relates to pregnancy.

Maybe you should think about it, because it's an important facet to your pro-life stance.

Women and men as well as boys and girls are going to have sex and some of the time unwanted pregnancies will result regardless of the precautions taken.

Since you are demanding that they be personally accountable, it is only fair that you define what you mean.
 
Last edited:
Warp12 said:
I said espoused its benefits, as related to population control.



But hey, whatever you say. :thumbsup:
Click to expand...

You also left out this part of ac's post:

The most effective method to reduce poverty is to empower women starting with allowing them to be in charge of their sexual health.
And you want to do the opposite.
Click to expand...

He was talking about women's ability to control their own sexual health, not just abortion. That means birth control, too. But hey...whatever you "don't" say.:thumbsup:

I, too, want to hear what you mean exactly by "personal accountability". You seem very keen on it but also very keen on not telling us what you mean by that.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom