13

This is what abortion has led to

Posted by ycandrea 6 years, 2 months ago to Government
595 comments | Share | Flag

OK. I just vomited and I am still very shaken up when I heard that the governors of Virginia and New York want to kill babies after they are born in the name of abortion rights. I am really upset. I have always believed a baby is a human being with the right to live from the point of conception. Yes, a woman has a right to make choices about her body, but she does not have the right to kill another human being. She can give it up for adoption if she doesn’t want the baby. But now they can kill the child after it is born. Isn’t that murder? So, how do all of you who think it's OK to kill humans inside the womb think about killing them outside the womb feel? To me, there is no difference but some of you rationalize it. So did Ayn Rand. This is one issue I did not agree with her about and this is why. This is where your rights to abortion/murder have led. There should be a category for morality.

All Comments

Previous comments...   You are currently on page 18.
  • Posted by Solver 6 years, 2 months ago
    After hearing this democratic suggestion about killing babies after they are born, my first question was, “how long after they are born? (10 minutes, 10 days, 10 years?)
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by $ AJAshinoff 6 years, 2 months ago in reply to this comment.
    To me at the first sign of mitosis the process toward human life has begun. While events could still thwart the continued development into a child to say its not human, at any part of the life cycle is denying reality.
    My 2 bits.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • -1
    Posted by PeterSmith 6 years, 2 months ago in reply to this comment.
    "You keep trying to redefine the issue into "regulating peoples sex lives" and as if some religion has something to do with it, but that is pure BS! "
    What do you mean? You're the one that said, "The choice was whether or not to have sex in the first place," thus betraying what the true motivation here is, from you religious leftists.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by hattrup 6 years, 2 months ago in reply to this comment.
    You neglected offering any info on how (absurd) one should (or should be forced to) act to protect the zygote. Zygote nor embryos cannot reproduce themselves either. Your main argument regarding gametes may be flawed.

    (My comment regarding Roe was referring to WHEN in the embryos' development our current legal system will begin to give the embryo some rights. I was not particularly referring to the Roe process, nor how it might trample States' rights. In other words, a State deciding an embryo develops rights around 24 weeks is the legal decision determine when an "innocent life" actually exists and the State gets to decide what you eat, how long you sleep, what you drink, how often you see a doctor at your neighbors expense, when and how you should delver and how closely you should be monitored via your Apple Watch or BigBrother, etc.).
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by mccannon01 6 years, 2 months ago in reply to this comment.
    You keep trying to redefine the issue into "regulating peoples sex lives" and as if some religion has something to do with it, but that is pure BS! It has been made clear that people are free to have all the sex they want, but there may be resultant consequences and responsibilities inherent to the act of having sex. There's a real world cause and effect in play here, whether you like it or not, and it cannot be denied.

    Sex can be like a loaded gun. A person chooses to pull the trigger and once the round leaves the chamber that person has to own what it does.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by mccannon01 6 years, 2 months ago in reply to this comment.
    "I do not recognize her authority to determine what is potential vs actual." Nicely stated here! +1
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by PeterSmith 6 years, 2 months ago in reply to this comment.
    Abortion can't lead to infanticide, that's a non-sequitur.
    It's like saying, "free markets lead to corruption."
    It's nonsense.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by ycandrea 6 years, 2 months ago in reply to this comment.
    I do not recognize her authority to determine what is potential vs actual. Ayn Rand does not have the knowledge to understand this. If what is growing inside a human woman is not a human life, then what is it? Especially when it has a brain, and a nervous system? This argument has never made sense to me and is grounded in faulty thinking. Just my two cents.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by Eyecu2 6 years, 2 months ago
    While I support abortion being legal, I most assuredly do not support this.

    To clarify my support for abortion. I believe abortion should be Legal, Discouraged, Stigmatized and RARE. I only support it being legal because it is better to have it legal and done by medical professionals than illegal and done as it was years ago on the DL. Many women died from badly preformed procedures.

    With this said however I would support Post Birth Abortions for High Level Democrats and Liberals....I am joking before anyone gets bent out of shape.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by $ AJAshinoff 6 years, 2 months ago
    Whats happening is absolutely vile and those who condone it are less than animals. Disgusting.
    This pic attached to this link shows the progressive politics that brought us where we are. Apologies, I can't post it directly.
    https://1drv.ms/u/s!AoEhhif6eYPVhkXdb...
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by PeterSmith 6 years, 2 months ago in reply to this comment.
    No not me. Obviously.
    But regulating peoples sex lives is the real agenda behind the anti-abortionists, who are religious leftists.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • -2
    Posted by PeterSmith 6 years, 2 months ago in reply to this comment.
    "You are trying to divert away from the true choice in the matter: whether or not have sex. "
    If that's what you think the matter is about, then why bring up abortion at all?
    You are a religious leftist, that wants to regulate peoples sex lives.
    Just be honest about it.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by Solver 6 years, 2 months ago in reply to this comment.
    What life is not self-sustaining and does not have self-generated action?
    If a life has help, it does not mean that that life itself magically ceases to exist. Not unless the above stops. Rand’s definition seems right.
    But the real question should be about human life.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by $ blarman 6 years, 2 months ago in reply to this comment.
    Ah, so you are a member of the "religious leftist conservative movement" (an oxymoron if I've ever seen one) and you are confiding to everyone about your plans to take over the world? Thanks for at least being honest!
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by $ blarman 6 years, 2 months ago in reply to this comment.
    That would only be true if the State also sanctioned, encourage, or perpetrated rape. You are trying to divert away from the true choice in the matter: whether or not have sex. That is the real choice. You can't get pregnant if you don't have sex. If you have sex, you run the risk of getting pregnant and everything that goes with pregnancy.

    I'm not against choice, I'm against trying to divest choice from consequence.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • -2
    Posted by PeterSmith 6 years, 2 months ago in reply to this comment.
    You're missing the point.
    Whether you think the state can force you to carry to term, or force you to have certain abortions, you're on the SAME side.
    Those of us who support rights protecting government, oppose any government involvement in the matter.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by PeterSmith 6 years, 2 months ago in reply to this comment.
    Yes, regulating peoples sex lives is what the issue is actually about to the religious leftists of the conservative movement.
    Reply | Permalink  

  • Comment hidden. Undo