Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Why Stop At Birth?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Originally posted by glorydaz View Post
    Not a "substantive comment". JFYI
    Neither is this, so what's your point?

    Comment


    • Originally posted by JudgeRightly View Post
      Ectopic pregnancies are survivable, and have been for some time now.

      http://www.personhoodinitiative.com/...pregnancy.html
      I have to question the veracity of that article, but will certainly check into it further.

      Comment


      • Originally posted by glorydaz View Post
        I have to question the veracity of that article, but will certainly check into it further.
        Also this... http://americanrtl.org/life-of-the-mother-exception

        Comment


        • Originally posted by JudgeRightly View Post
          Neither is this, so what's your point?

          My "point" is that it looks like the rules may be changing again, and I want to be up to speed.
          Do you blame me for wanting to know what is allowable and what isn't?

          Am I not allowed to make observations about possible rule violations?
          Am I forbidden to warn others of possible rule violations?

          I speak of Truster's warning.
          How is his post any different ....what makes it NOT SUBSTANTIVE?

          How can we post here unless we understand the RULES?

          Comment


          • Originally posted by glorydaz View Post
            Unless, of course, a case like you already mentioned....an ectopic pregnancy where the baby is growing in the fallopian tube. That is obviously a case of the life of the mother being endangered and no hope for the baby, either.
            Babies survive ectopic pregnancies. It might be more common to survive that situation than not.
            Where is the evidence for a global flood?
            E≈mc2
            "the best maths don't need no stinkin' numbers"

            "The waters under the 'expanse' were under the crust."
            -Bob B.

            Comment


            • Originally posted by JudgeRightly View Post
              Look a little further... http://americanrtl.org/files/docs/Jo...transplant.pdf

              "Does it not look possible..." he says, that baby that begins in the tube can be transplanted into the uterus.

              Anything is possible...flying without an airplane might seem possible, too.

              Comment


              • Originally posted by Stripe View Post
                Babies survive ectopic pregnancies. It might be more common to survive that situation than not.
                How? There is no room to grow in a fallopian tube. Transplant them to the uterus? I'm not seeing any documented cases of that being done.

                Comment


                • Originally posted by glorydaz View Post
                  How? There is no room to grow in a fallopian tube. Transplant them to the uterus? I'm not seeing any documented cases of that being done.
                  Not sure how. They can survive without help. Even undiagnosed.
                  Where is the evidence for a global flood?
                  E≈mc2
                  "the best maths don't need no stinkin' numbers"

                  "The waters under the 'expanse' were under the crust."
                  -Bob B.

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by Stripe View Post
                    Not sure how. They can survive without help. Even undiagnosed.
                    There are two or three examples of a baby growing outside the womb... the abdominal cavity, for instance, when the women didn't even know they were pregnant. They had no pain from a baby trying to grow in the fallopian tube that would inevitable rupture.

                    I'd say "undiagnosed" equates to lack of symptoms of pregnancy, and those were so rare that they shouldn't even be brought up as an example in the anti abortion argument. They are flat out flukes. Period.

                    So, are we so desperate to stand against abortion that we dare to suggest ectopic pregnancies must be endured by a woman in spite of the facts? I certainly hope not.

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by glorydaz View Post
                      Are we so desperate to stand against abortion that we dare to suggest ectopic pregnancies must be endured by a woman in spite of the facts? I certainly hope not.
                      Nobody has said that.

                      Furthermore, the ectopic pregnancy argument is raised by people trying to defend late-term abortion.
                      Where is the evidence for a global flood?
                      E≈mc2
                      "the best maths don't need no stinkin' numbers"

                      "The waters under the 'expanse' were under the crust."
                      -Bob B.

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by Stripe View Post
                        Nobody has said that.
                        Good, I'm glad to hear that.

                        Furthermore, the ectopic pregnancy argument is raised by people trying to defend late-term abortion.
                        Then that just shows how stupid they are. Just scoff at them.

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by glorydaz View Post
                          Good, I'm glad to hear that.
                          I think the important thing is that abortion is seen as the answer to ectopic pregnancies when medical investigation and advance might save these mothers and kids.

                          However, pro-aborts only have an eye for justifying childkilling.
                          Where is the evidence for a global flood?
                          E≈mc2
                          "the best maths don't need no stinkin' numbers"

                          "The waters under the 'expanse' were under the crust."
                          -Bob B.

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by JudgeRightly View Post
                            Saying it doesn't make it so.



                            Doesn't change the fact that it's a baby.

                            Listen to yourself. Even you call it a child.

                            Abortion is wrong because it's a baby, and it's always wrong to kill a baby.



                            There are no valid reasons.

                            If you think otherwise, feel free to name some.
                            So, if a fetus becomes a danger to the mother, she should risk her life to carry it to term? Are you serious?

                            Also, at a larger scale, if you neither condone contraceptives nor legalized abortions for unwanted children, how do you ever implement population control? We have grown to 7 billion on this planet AT THE EXPENSE OF OTHER SPECIES!! Numerous species have gone extinct just in the last century as a direct result of human overbreeding. And right-wingers just seem to want to preach abstinence and wash their hands off addressing the actual problem. Help the beings that are already born!

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by Amyrich View Post
                              So, if a fetus becomes a danger to the mother, she should risk her life to carry it to term?
                              Try reading the thread before reacting.

                              Also, at a larger scale, if you neither condone contraceptives nor legalized abortions for unwanted children, how do you ever implement population control?
                              We don't.

                              Keep the easy questions coming. They're, well, easy.

                              We have grown to 7 billion on this planet AT THE EXPENSE OF OTHER SPECIES!!
                              What's taken us so long?

                              That's a rhetorical question. It's Darwinists, socialists and pro-aborts who have retarded the human population.

                              Help the beings that are already born!
                              And you want to kill the unborn.
                              Last edited by Stripe; March 14th, 2019, 07:32 AM.
                              Where is the evidence for a global flood?
                              E≈mc2
                              "the best maths don't need no stinkin' numbers"

                              "The waters under the 'expanse' were under the crust."
                              -Bob B.

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by Amyrich View Post
                                So, if a fetus becomes a danger to the mother, she should risk her life to carry it to term? Are you serious?
                                if a baby is in a burning house and the mother would have to put herself at risk to rescue it, do you think she would hesitate? Are you serious?

                                Also, at a larger scale, if you neither condone contraceptives
                                nobody has mentioned contraceptives in this thread so far

                                nor legalized abortions for unwanted children
                                of course we don't condone legalized murder of children, regardless of whether they are wanted or not


                                [MENTION=20895]Amyrich[/MENTION]

                                if a mother decides she no longer wants to be burdened with an infant or a toddler, should she be allowed to kill it?

                                if not, why not?



                                , how do you ever implement population control?
                                by raising the standard of living


                                We have grown to 7 billion on this planet AT THE EXPENSE OF OTHER SPECIES!!
                                some have benefited, some haven't

                                Numerous species have gone extinct just in the last century as a direct result of human overbreeding.
                                cite?

                                And right-wingers just seem to want to preach abstinence
                                is there any reason not to consider abstinence?

                                and wash their hands off addressing the actual problem.
                                explain

                                Help the beings that are already born!
                                human beings?

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X