Ha, propaganda videos. Lol
It does not matter if you agree about abortions. Making a law about it is bad. If you don't like abortions then don't have one.
So it is always an arbitrary line drawn from an unknown exact instant of conception. Even the first trimester boundary can not be completely accurately determined. It's always a guess.
Oh true, it is a vague line. It has nothing to do with personhood though. My only issue is the man involved has no say on the issue. Je should also have a choice about parenthood.
If they allow it to ever be considered human, then the problem is that there's no single clearly defined event where it changes from non-human to human because it is a gradual process.
Birth is when it is a person.
That's why pro-abortion groups can't admit that an unborn child is ever a human, not even up to the day before birth, sometimes not even right after birth.
Actually birth is the point when a the fetus becomes a baby. It's not that pro-abortion groups can not define it, it is that it is irrelevant.
Location dictates personhood? Does a woman own you penis, once you put it inside of her? Can she destroy it while it is there?
It is not simply a location. It's not as if a full baby magically appear inside a woman the day after conception. The actual person is growing a fetus. The woman is the person.
Why are premature babies people? Can you kill someone's premature baby and it is only a property crime?
Assaulting a pregnant woman would be the crime, not a property crime. The discussion centers on the woman who has the baby inside her more than the baby itself.
A premature baby is one that is born preterm. They are no longer attached to the mother.
The job of a pro-abortionist is to convince the anti-abortionist that the fetus is not a human. Any other argument will never succeed in convincing anyone to allow abortion.
To the pro-abortionist that is irrelevant. All that matters is why the woman should have the right over her body denied to her. You must show why a womans body does not belong to her.
That's a bad argument. If you believe an unborn infant is a person, then you can't ignore someone else killing it. That's akin to "If you don't like child abuse, don't abuse children."
Personhood of the fetus seems irrelevant. Even if it is a person a woman should still have the right to an abortion. That is the point behind the classic pianist argument.
What is my argument?
You have yet to give one.
We got a miscommunication there 😂
Maybe I never noticed it. Seems to me you declared it wrong, and called that an argument.
I replied to SILENTSAM, not you. He's arguing it is a victimless crime because he does not believe in the personhood of an unborn child.
Not a crime, and victimless is not brought up as it is irrelevant.
If a person would die unless connected to your circulatory system you should not be forced to have them connected.
Your concept of not being a person till you pass a magic line doesn't make much sense. Which conjoined twin is a human, & which isn't. Simply declaring irrelevance isn't sufficient.
Birth is a very objective line. The issue of personhood is irrelevant because it changes nothing. Sure, call a fetus a person, but abortion is still fine.
You are arguing circles. A baby would not die if it was removed from the circulatory system the day before it would be born. Therefore, you just declared it a human.
The day before it is to be born is irrelevant as abortions happen during the first trimester.
In a late term abortion, it is required to kill the baby before it is removed, otherwise it magically becomes a baby if it was removed alive.
Late term abortions are rare, and usually only happen due to medical complications. They are irrelevant as they would happen even if regular abortions were illegal.
You contradict yourself a lot.
Can you point out one time I have done so?
"...abortions happen during the first trimester."
"Late term abortions are rare..."
That's just the one I was talking about here.
That is not a contradiction at all. Abortions happen during the first trimester, except in extreme situations. Late term abortions are irrelevant to the issue of abortion rights.
My bad. 😂 Got carried away there.
I just had the same confusion. Memo now gives you notifications of replies to replies of yours, which makes it seem sometimes that someone is talking to you. Not sure I like it.
Says the guy who watch CNN all day. Oh man that's rich 😂
I actually do not waste money on cable, so not sure why you enjoy this assumption so much. Do you think FOX is a viable news source?
At what stage should abortion be illegal?
Seems the answer is after the first trimester. Sounds like a good point. Later abortions are only allowed for medical reasons, despite what Alex Jones claims.
Why are they fighting about saving babies that survived abortion? Anyway, what about gender based abortion? Is that ok?
Show me where they are actually doing that. Of course gender based abortions are wrong.
Why is gender based abortion wrong?
😂😂😂 don't have the guts to watch it ha? Stay ignorant.
Watching the video didn't help your position.
