cancel
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 
Advisor

This would make the choice a lot easier

65 Replies
Senior Advisor

Re: This would make the choice a lot easier

I guess mayor Pete thinks those babies in the womb are all God's mistakes. And the moral and Christian thing to do is slaughter them before they have a chance to draw their first breath.

Senior Contributor

Re: This would make the choice a lot easier

You need to reword that to make sense 3020

 

A fetus is not a baby UNTIL it has taken it's first breath

Veteran Advisor

Re: This would make the choice a lot easier

Unless you're at fault in a car accident where a "fetus" gets killed, then it's manslaughter.

Senior Advisor

Re: This would make the choice a lot easier

Some more of that Bruce Jenner is a girl science. The child has it's own heart beat and own DNA. The child has civil rights. One of them is the right to breath. To deny that fact is to deny the child is human.

Highlighted
Senior Contributor

Re: This would make the choice a lot easier

So you would force a woman to keep the fetus alive therefor you would be in favour of taking one of your kidneys against your desire to keep someone that is already walking and talking alive.

Senior Advisor

Re: This would make the choice a lot easier

Talk about deflection. Has zero to do with your kidney. The child is a human being and has civil rights just like the rest of us. One of those rights is the right to breathe. To deny that fact is to deny the child is human.

Senior Contributor

Re: This would make the choice a lot easier

Ok   ..... a child is a human.

We agree on that.

 

Now what does that have to do with forcing a woman to carry a fetus to term?

My post was not a deflection, you want to force a woman to support a fetus until it is born alive and I asked what if we passed a law forcing YOU to give one of your kidneys to another human who is already walking and talking?

You would not be tied up for only a short time to recuperate unlike the woman who would be committed to at least 9 months and then likely many years of supporting a baby and then a child.

Senior Contributor

Re: This would make the choice a lot easier

(Ok   ..... a child is a human.

We agree on that.

Now what does that have to do with forcing a woman to carry a fetus to term?

My post was not a deflection, you want to force a woman to support a fetus until it is born alive and I asked what if we passed a law forcing YOU to give one of your kidneys to another human who is already walking and talking?

You would not be tied up for only a short time to recuperate unlike the woman who would be committed to at least 9 months and then likely many years of supporting a baby and then a child.)

 

If deflection doesn't work once, why in your belief and opinion would it work on the 2nd try?

Gotta terminate those unborn babies heartbeats. 

Keep giving them those socialist payments, you know because tax exempt democrat political action groups like not planned parenthood need those socialists payments.

Senior Contributor

Re: This would make the choice a lot easier

What is the difference in forcing  a person to carry a fetus just because it has the potential to become a human and forcing YOU to give up one of your kidneys to save the life of a human that is already on the earth walking and talking?

 

that is not deflection it is a very similar situation.

If you can force one person to carry a fetus then you should be able to force anyone else to give an organ to save another human. Even less time committed for giving the kidney.