Supreme Court overturns Roe v. Wade, eliminating constitutional right to abortion

The following are the American Medical Associations’ age designations:

• Neonates or newborns (birth to 1 month)
• Infants (1 month to 1 year)
• Children (1 year through 12 years)
• Adolescents (13 years through 17 years. They may also be referred to as teenagers depending on the context.)
• Adults (18 years or older)
• Older adults (65 and older)*

*The National Institute on Aging’s guidance considers 65 and older an older adult, but understandings and definitions about this age range vary by source. When an official or organization uses one of these terms, ask for specifics.
https://www.nih.gov/nih-style-guide/age#:~:text=The following are the American,1 year through 12 years)

 

So we can only use the language of the American Medical Association, and the definitions in the dictionary (you know, collections of words with the definitions in common usage) are off limits?

 

They aren't children. They're reproducing cells.

It proves you aren't pro-life. You don't support any thing that is actually pro-life. You're only pro-forced-birth.

 

Yep. Once babies are born I care more about them than the "pro-life" crowd. I have no need to control the reproductive rights of women, increase the maternal deathrate of pregnant woman who can't get the care they need. Free education, free health care, less wars for oil and power mean less kids going off to die... those positions are all are all Pro-life.

Don't get confused you aren't pro-life. You're only pro-forced-birth and pro-control of women.

 

Dictionary.com
child
[ chahyld ]
See synonyms for child on Thesaurus.com
noun,plural chil·dren [chil-druhn].

1. a person between birth and puberty or full growth

Never mind replying. You zealots will never change your mind and your MO on this board is to argue just to argue and I don't have time for it.

 

I guess you don't like the OED or Merriam-Webster or Wikipedia for definitions, because all of them include unborn humans in their definitions for child. I have changed my mind on a number of issues, but no, I probably won't suddenly decide killing children is okay.

 

What is your father's ejaculation date? I'd like to send him a card and congratulate him on his orgasm. I wonder why mom and pop waited ~9 months before celebrating your birth?

You aren't pro-life. You're pro birth and have no problem with the it was the deprivation of freedom, humanity, and dignity you force upon women.

No one is advocating the killing of children. Once more life doesn't begin at conception. Until a group of cells becomes a fetus can viably survive apart from it's host it is not alive.

I have no problem with anyone deciding to terminate their pregnancy, its none of my business and doesn't affect my life in the slightest.

God (if there is one) is the greatest abortionist of all time.

 

Dang, you completely ignored the child in utero except to deny them ANY future.

You've made innocent deaths fair trades-off for reproductive rights (never mind responsibilities),exaggerated demands for abortion on demand for health of the mother claims (a lot of pro-Life people support that painful exception when there is a true need, but it is abused).

You have only appropriated a movement's term "pro-Life" which was adopted for a very specific situation and attempt to smear it with specious extrapolations-- you have no right to be so self-serving.

 

DOUBLE POST

 

Wrong. Removal of a clump of cells in the first or second trimester, that have zero chance of viability of life outside the womb of its host, is not a death. God does it all the time. Why would god abort all those children?

If you were pro-life you would support free education, heath care, neo-natal care, and less war sending kids off to die. But you don't.

You've been brainwashed. You're not pro-life. You're only pro-forced birth.

 

Question for pro lifers, should the government force sterilize women with multiple miscarriages (or even one miscarriage) to prevent more child deaths?

Curious why or why not.

 

Symbiotic relationships usually involve different species. Every one of those cells has human DNA. We protect all kinds of vulnerable people: the injured, the sick, and some of us the pre-born.

Your pathetic attempts to invoke God on your side are sad.

I've been brainwashed? Occam's Razor. Look at all the manipulations you must concoct to justify and sustain your position.

 

What ever you need to tell yourself to make you feel good at night. I'll be voting for the party that wants to give 4th graders free lunch, not the party that would want to force them to give birth in the case of rape. Your God is the all time abortion leader and it's not even close. Take it up with him (or her).

 

So do cancer cells. Do we protect them?

NO MORE CANCER TREATMENTS!!!!

 

No - the anti-abortion side cares about them until they are born, but then doesn't give a **** about them once they are out of the birth canal.

 

Murder is still a crime after birth.

 

TINSTAAFL

 

Yes - but negligence is not.

 

It's a symptom of our bifurcated and polarized political system that one side is against abortion (usually on religious grounds) and almost all social safety nets while the other is in favor of abortion access, access to birth control, public health insurance, parental leave, etc.

I'd respect the anti-abortion side's stance a lot more if they advocated for anything that makes it more appealing and affordable to have children. Instead, their political party of choice fights tooth and nail against any social safety measure that would make people think they could afford to have children and give them a bright future.

 

Isn't it though?