New Ohio Bill could criminalize miscarriages and death penalty for women who seek abortion

[Sapidus]

Nope. read it completely. And you went where I wanted you to.

Following your logic you're saying that until the point the umbilical cord is cut (healthy, live birth) the mother reserves the right to kill the baby?

I'm not foaming. But maybe you are.

--- End of line (MCP)

Again your reading comprehension is terrible.


The youngest premie born was 21 weeks and five days. The child then survived on its own with care given of course. I think that is a reasonable time 21 weeks to determine a fetus can survive birth.

 

[Yooper]

You mean the procedure most commonly done when either the woman or the child's life is at risk or the child is severely disabled? Whats your point?

You do see the problem here, right?

--- End of line (MCP)

 

[Yooper]

Again your reading comprehension is terrible.


The youngest premie born was 21 weeks and five days. The child then survived on its own with care given of course. I think that is a reasonable time 21 weeks to determine a fetus can survive birth.

Okay, so now we're getting somewhere.

We can now agree that we at least have a starting point to settle this all once and for all; that abortion should be limited to before 21 weeks gestation? So no more third-trimester abortions? And if science progresses (as it does) to allow for babies to survive at even younger terms of gestation that the "abortion window" should be revised downward? And since 21 weeks is mid-2d trimester, maybe we should err on the side of caution and no longer allow 2d trimester abortions? I'm still not fine with that, but I'm willing to admit it's a start....

This is now a profitable discussion, don't you think?

--- End of line (MCP)

 

[Sapidus]

You do see the problem here, right?

--- End of line (MCP)

No. If the fetus is going to die or dies why would you wait until the woman's body miscarries ( which could be days) when science and technology can help ease her pain, lessen the chance of sepsis or other infection and shorten the grief of carrying a dead fetus inside her. ?

 

[GURPS]

" partial Birth abortion" a term created by the National Right to Life Committee (NRLC) to make the procedure seem like it is worse then it is.

you mean the part where the infant is left with its head stuck in the birth canal, scissors used to sever the spinal column from the brain, killing the baby, then the brains are sucked out collapsing the skull


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intact_dilation_and_extraction

Feticidal injection of digoxin or potassium chloride may be administered at the beginning of the procedure to allow for softening of the fetal bones or to comply with relevant laws in the physician's jurisdiction.[4] During the surgery, the fetus is removed from the uterus in the breech position, with mechanical collapse of the fetal skull if it is too large to fit through the cervical canal.[5] Decompression of the skull can be accomplished by incision and suction of the contents, or by using forceps. If the fetus is in a vertex presentation, forceps can be used to turn it to a breech presentation while in the uterus (internal version).[4]

Good if that is really your perspective why try to police what others do?

where did I say I was ..... :shrug:
My Point is do not Lie to yourself ... use friendly euphemisms to cover the act of murder ....
BE Honest and Own It

You are selfish git who does not want to be 'inconvenienced' with a baby
You Are only concerned with YOUR Own well being

So is removing a tumor murder?

so in your mind a growing baby is a tumor ? Gotcha

 

[Sapidus]

Okay, so now we're getting somewhere.

We can now agree that we at least have a starting point to settle this all once and for all; that abortion should be limited to before 21 weeks gestation? So no more third-trimester abortions? And if science progresses (as it does) to allow for babies to survive at even younger terms of gestation that the "abortion window" should be revised downward? And since 21 weeks is mid-2d trimester, maybe we should err on the side of caution and no longer allow 2d trimester abortions? I'm still not fine with that, but I'm willing to admit it's a start....

This is now a profitable discussion, don't you think?

--- End of line (MCP)

No because as usual instead of agreeing and saying that is a reasonable way to look at it you then starting making speculations and idiotic barriers and boundaries based on nothing but conjecture like when you say that is almost 2nd trimester when it is clearly not the same thing.

It would only be logical to say that 21 weeks would mean mid trimester and thus good reason to limit abortions to 1st trimester if your end goal is limiting abortion. When you claim your goal is saving lives. There is not reason to limit abortions before 21 weeks as a clump of cells can not survive on its own anyway


Do you go to the cancer ward and try to save tumors older than 3 moths too?

How about teeth or ingrown hairs?

 

[Sapidus]

you mean the part where the infant is left with its head stuck in the birth canal, scissors used to sever the spinal column from the brain, killing the baby, then the brains are sucked out collapsing the skull


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intact_dilation_and_extraction

Feticidal injection of digoxin or potassium chloride may be administered at the beginning of the procedure to allow for softening of the fetal bones or to comply with relevant laws in the physician's jurisdiction.[4] During the surgery, the fetus is removed from the uterus in the breech position, with mechanical collapse of the fetal skull if it is too large to fit through the cervical canal.[5] Decompression of the skull can be accomplished by incision and suction of the contents, or by using forceps. If the fetus is in a vertex presentation, forceps can be used to turn it to a breech presentation while in the uterus (internal version).[4]

Yes. Exactly. I never claimed that what you quoted isn't happening. Only that the term was coined to try to deride the procedure.

Again you are basing your claims and decision on emotion not facts something you re constantly criticizing the left for doing hypocrite

 

[Yooper]

It is part of a woman body to do with as she pleases.

"My body, my choice." High marks for a very successful slogan. But losing steam as persuasion (yup, semantic satiation). Also, poor science.

A woman's stomach is part of her body. Her heart, her brain, the same. The baby, however, is not. It does not share the same DNA as the mother.

Science, baby. Science.

--- End of line (MCP)

 

[Yooper]

Yes. Exactly. I never claimed that what you quoted isn't happening. Only that the term was coined to try to deride the procedure.

Again you are basing your claims and decision on emotion not facts something you re constantly criticizing the left for doing hypocrite

Two observations.

First, Sappy, your response is incoherent.

Second, we can tell you losing whatever high ground you thought you had because your responses are devolving (in both content and tone).

--- End of line (MCP)

 

[Yooper]

No because as usual instead of agreeing and saying that is a reasonable way to look at it you then starting making speculations and idiotic barriers and boundaries based on nothing but conjecture like when you say that is almost 2nd trimester when it is clearly not the same thing.

It would only be logical to say that 21 weeks would mean mid trimester and thus good reason to limit abortions to 1st trimester if your end goal is limiting abortion. When you claim your goal is saving lives. There is not reason to limit abortions before 21 weeks as a clump of cells can not survive on its own anyway


Do you go to the cancer ward and try to save tumors older than 3 moths too?

How about teeth or ingrown hairs?

See post #49.

And now we see the truth: for you and yours babies hold the same equivalence as teeth, ingrown hairs and, cancer tumors?

Wow.

--- End of line (MCP)

 

[Sapidus]

"My body, my choice." High marks for a very successful slogan. But losing steam as persuasion (yup, semantic satiation). Also, poor science.

A woman's stomach is part of her body. Her heart, her brain, the same. The baby, however, is not. It does not share the same DNA as the mother.

Science, baby. Science.

--- End of line (MCP)

I don't think you read very much.

Because its hardly losing steam in fact support for abortion has remained relatively the same for the last two decades.

A fetus is wholly inside her body, attached to her body and fully dependent on her body. Not sure what your definition of the word " part" is but its certainly wrong if you don't believe a fetus is part of a woman body.


And why as a man you believe you have any right to regulate another persons body such less a woman body who you didn't even impregnate is completely baffling. Luckily elderly white men are losing the culture war and slow losing hold of this countries politics.

 

[Sapidus]

See post #49.

And now we see the truth: for you and yours babies hold the same equivalence as teeth, ingrown hairs and, cancer tumors?

Wow.

--- End of line (MCP)

Yep. Until the are able to thrive on their own which is generally after 22 weeks as discussed previously they are nothing but a clump of cells just like teeth, hair or nails.

Thats science not emotion

 

[Yooper]

[Babies] are nothing but a clump of cells just like teeth, hair or nails. Thats [sic] science not emotion

And don't forget, cancer tumors.

You win. I concede. We'll leave you with the last words. You came across crystal clear.

--- End of line (MCP)

 

[Gilligan]

You came across crystal clear.

 

[This_person]

Wrong again idiot. you forgot the part where i said attached to and wholly dependent on a host.

I know you live in your parents basement still and have the I.q. of a child but even you can feed your self and dress yourself i presume.

No, what you said was

Clumps of cells don't get to vote or make a choice

try again.

 

[This_person]

A fetus is wholly inside her body, attached to her body and fully dependent on her body.

And, a full and complete, whole, human being all on it's own.

Scientifically, and legally.

Please read Public Law 108-212. A caveat had to be made to federal law to allow for murder by mothers and mothers' agents:

(c) Nothing in this section shall be construed to permit the prosecution—

(1) of any person for conduct relating to an abortion for which the consent of the pregnant woman, or a person authorized by law to act on her behalf, has been obtained or for which such consent is implied by law;
(2) of any person for any medical treatment of the pregnant woman or her unborn child; or
(3) of any woman with respect to her unborn child.​

But, the law is very clear:

Ԥ1841. Protection of unborn children

(a)

(1) Whoever engages in conduct that violates any of the provisions of law listed in subsection (b) and thereby causes the death of, or bodily injury (as defined in section 1365) to, a child, who is in utero at the time the conduct takes place, is guilty of a separate offense under this section.
(2)

(A) Except as otherwise provided in this paragraph, the punishment for that separate offense is the same as the punishment provided under Federal law for that conduct had that injury or death occurred to the unborn child’s mother.
(B) An offense under this section does not require proof that—

(i) the person engaging in the conduct had knowledge or should have had knowledge that the victim of the underlying offense was pregnant; or
(ii) the defendant intended to cause the death of, or bodily injury to, the unborn child.​

(C) If the person engaging in the conduct thereby intentionally kills or attempts to kill the unborn child, that person shall instead of being punished under subparagraph (A), be punished as provided under sections 1111, 1112, and 1113 of this title for intentionally killing or attempting to kill a human being.
(D) Notwithstanding any other provision of law, the death penalty shall not be imposed for an offense under this section.​

So, as you can see, even federal law disagrees with you - unless it is the mom who kills her kid (or pays someone to do it). She's a special mythical being with the right to kill people, but no one else can kill that same person.

Makes sense (to you), right?

 

[This_person]

Yep. Until the are able to thrive on their own which is generally after 22 weeks as discussed previously they are nothing but a clump of cells just like teeth, hair or nails.

Thats science not emotion

Please show me the scientific, unbiased source that gives you this definition of human life.

 

[BOP]

Nothing says Pro life like threatening the death penalty to women who seek abortions..


https://hillreporter.com/a-pro-life...-in-ohio-could-criminalize-miscarriages-14823

So who's racist: the people in favor of abortion, which kills more African-American unborn babies per capita than any other population, or those who oppose abortion?

 

[GURPS]

So who's racist: the people in favor of abortion, which kills more African-American unborn babies per capita than any other population, or those who oppose abortion?

Margret Should Be Proud

 

[SamSpade]

No. If the fetus is going to die or dies why would you wait until the woman's body miscarries ( which could be days) when science and technology can help ease her pain, lessen the chance of sepsis or other infection and shorten the grief of carrying a dead fetus inside her. ?

You've apparently never dealt with a miscarriage - at least, one late in term - before.