Abortion Up Until Birth Act Fails In Senate.

BMS said:
What do.you mean by women? You made your bes now lie in it. Unless you can get your understanding corrected, you.cant debate with us.
Click to expand...
Thank you for this utterly meaningless waste of electrons. Any further response would be pointless.
 
BMS said:
What do you mean by strawman?
Click to expand...
Ask @Carol. She used it first. Normally it means an irrelevant argument brought in because you can't deal with the substantive point. I think she uses it more as a pejorative that indicates a relevant argument that she cannot deal with. But she will clarify I'm sure.
 
Harry Leggs said:
www.christianpost.com

Pro-lifers praise Senate's defeat of bill to codify abortion rights into federal law

As a bill that would have codified the right to abortion into federal law failed to advance in the U S Senate Monday, pro-life advocates contend that Senate Democrats who supported the bill are ...
www.christianpost.com www.christianpost.com

Supported by almost all Democrats including the White House, Schumer, and Pelosi, the Women's Health Protection Act passed in the House but failed in the Senate. It would have made abortion up to birth legal in all states? This one was under the radar and do not notice a lot of coverage in the legacy media. All Repubs in both Houses opposed this bill. (y)
Click to expand...
Thanks for the post, I was unaware of the bill, as it's out of the media as stated

Pure evil, glad to see it failed!
 
Harry Leggs said:

Senate Defeats Democrat Bill to Legalize Abortions Up to Birth Nationwide - LifeNews.com

Senate Republicans, with the help of Democrat Senator Joe Manchin, voted to defeat a Democrat bill that would overturn every pro-life law in America and legalize abortions up to birth. Lawmakers voted 48-46 against cloture — against ending debate and allowing a vote on the the misnamed Women’s...
www.lifenews.com

The bill would:

Eliminate all state and federal parental consent laws in relation to abortion
  • Eliminate all state informed consent laws, including those that allow women to view an ultrasound prior to abortion
  • Prevent states from passing laws to protect babies at 20 weeks, thereby joining countries like North Korea, China, Vietnam, Singapore, Canada, and the Netherlands in not protecting unborn children later in development
  • Force doctors and nurses opposed to abortion to lose their jobs, and Catholic hospitals could lose public funds unless they perform abortions
  • Eliminate decades-long limitations on direct taxpayer funding of abortion – including the popular Hyde Amendment, which has saved more than 2 million lives since enacted
In short, the legislation would overturn all federal and state pro-life laws and make it illegal for elected officials to even introduce pro-life legislation.

Wow!
Click to expand...
Pure Evil!
 
Temujin said:
Thank you for your incoherent and vacuous response, to which no further comment is necessary.
Click to expand...
Just pointing out the inconsistencies in your claims, and seeing as you made them I expect others to see the incoherent is your response.

Significantly you didnt say why you thought my response was incoherent. Do you not know about the recent bill in the UK or can you not understand it? Is it a case of inability or unwillingness on your part?
 
Temujin said:
Don't be ridiculous. Firstly, I specifically said 20 weeks, not 8 months. Perhaps you struggle with the maths. I fully acknowledge that the 19 week foetus is living and human like me, but it is not a person like me because it is insufficiently developed to be considered a person like me. All the stuff about slaves is just hyperbolic bollocks.

On the contrary. Any human being surviving outside the uterus is a person, and has all the rights os any other person, in my view. Slavery has bugger all to do with abortion. It is just a strawman.

Which you haven't bothered to provide.

If you say so. It depends on what the end is and what the means are. As you are incapable of providing either, it is pointless to speculate.
Click to expand...
It is a person like you, not least because you are a person and you were at your foetal stage at one time.

Are you even you? ?
 
BMS said:
Just pointing out the inconsistencies in your claims, and seeing as you made them I expect others to see the incoherent is your response.

Significantly you didnt say why you thought my response was incoherent. Do you not know about the recent bill in the UK or can you not understand it? Is it a case of inability or unwillingness on your part?
Click to expand...
Just read the post I was replying to. If you cannot see why it is incoherent, you need to brush up your English. Some odd errors are fair enough, but when they confuse your meaning, then there is no point in just guessing.

To be quite clear, any attempt by you to equate the abortion debate in the UK with the abortion debate in the US would be false. There is no debate in the UK at all. A few die hard weirdos waving placards and introducing no-chance hopelessly flawed bills to parliament every fifteen years or so, is not equivalent to the debate raging in the US. There is no chance whatsoever of the Abortion Act in the UK being revoked or significantly amended in the foreseeable future. Anything you say contrary to that would be false. Abortion in the UK is done and dusted as an issue. Everyone knows where they stand, what their rights are and are content, if not ecstatic about the status quo. What happens in America is their business. All I seek to do is point out that there is a form of legislation that the vast majority of people here accept. People in America are not that different. The problem there is passing the legislation, which is no business of mine, or yours.
 
BMS said:
It is a person like you, not least because you are a person and you were at your foetal stage at one time.

Are you even you? ?
Click to expand...
Back to stupidity. You have argued yourself into the ground on this subject several times. I can't be bothered. You are wrong. It is that simple.
 
Temujin said:
Just read the post I was replying to. If you cannot see why it is incoherent, you need to brush up your English. Some odd errors are fair enough, but when they confuse your meaning, then there is no point in just guessing.

To be quite clear, any attempt by you to equate the abortion debate in the UK with the abortion debate in the US would be false. There is no debate in the UK at all. A few die hard weirdos waving placards and introducing no-chance hopelessly flawed bills to parliament every fifteen years or so, is not equivalent to the debate raging in the US. There is no chance whatsoever of the Abortion Act in the UK being revoked or significantly amended in the foreseeable future. Anything you say contrary to that would be false. Abortion in the UK is done and dusted as an issue. Everyone knows where they stand, what their rights are and are content, if not ecstatic about the status quo. What happens in America is their business. All I seek to do is point out that there is a form of legislation that the vast majority of people here accept. People in America are not that different. The problem there is passing the legislation, which is no business of mine, or yours.
Click to expand...
Clealry a bill in the US and a bill in the UK both within a couple of months, to allow abortion up until birth is something that can be equated. Your post is incoherent and illogical.
 
Temujin said:
Back to stupidity. You have argued yourself into the ground on this subject several times. I can't be bothered. You are wrong. It is that simple.
Click to expand...
Back to stupidity indeed. You deny the human being in the womb is a person but we point out its the same entity so it must be.
 
Michael R2 said:
You've hit on the point that is most contentious when it comes to Roe v Wade. Fetal viability is generally considered to be about 24 weeks, but with modern NICUs and procedures it can be lowered to approximately 21 weeks (where the facilities are available). The bill did not, and should not have, addressed that issue. It is a medical decision with fuzzy boundaries.
Click to expand...
Traditionally humans aren't viable until they're about 16 but since Obamacare other generally not available until about 26.
 
BMS said:
Clealry a bill in the US and a bill in the UK both within a couple of months, to allow abortion up until birth is something that can be equated. Your post is incoherent and illogical.
Click to expand...
Clearly you haven't bothered to read, or more likely, lack the capacity to understand, my post. There is no bill in the UK. Abortion up to birth is theoretically already allowed here in exceptional circumstances, such as an immediate threat to the life of the mother and no chance of the foetus surviving. That is not going to change here.
 
BMS said:
Back to stupidity indeed. You deny the human being in the womb is a person but we point out its the same entity so it must be.
Click to expand...
You are not "we". You are a singular person, arguing a singularly stupid point for a singularly long period of time. Get over yourself and grasp the fact that a great many things, including human beings, change their nature over time. Being a person is one of those things that changes. You may be of the opinion that it doesn't, but you have no facts to support that idiotic view.
 
Thistle said:
Traditionally humans aren't viable until they're about 16 but since Obamacare other generally not available until about 26.
Click to expand...
Sorry I didn't look at this before hitting send the last part should read "but since Obamacare they're generally not viable until about 26."
 
Temujin said:
Clearly you haven't bothered to read, or more likely, lack the capacity to understand, my post. There is no bill in the UK. Abortion up to birth is theoretically already allowed here in exceptional circumstances, such as an immediate threat to the life of the mother and no chance of the foetus surviving. That is not going to change here.
Click to expand...
So what is your definition of equate?
The UK proposed bill was in Sept 2021, so yes there is a bill. Your continued misinformation on the UK should be noted by our US posters
 
Temujin said:
You are not "we". You are a singular person, arguing a singularly stupid point for a singularly long period of time. Get over yourself and grasp the fact that a great many things, including human beings, change their nature over time. Being a person is one of those things that changes. You may be of the opinion that it doesn't, but you have no facts to support that idiotic view.
Click to expand...
Your opinion is faulty and error because we as persons have all been through a foetal stage of our lives. If you choose not to recognise that, that is up to you, but not an argument you can make to us.
 
BMS said:
So what is your definition of equate?
The UK proposed bill was in Sept 2021, so yes there is a bill. Your continued misinformation on the UK should be noted by our US posters
Click to expand...
And where is it now? Who sponsored it? What happened? You do know that all kinds of bills can be introduced? There is even a lottery system to allow some to be discussed.
 
BMS said:
Your opinion is faulty and error because we as persons have all been through a foetal stage of our lives. If you choose not to recognise that, that is up to you, but not an argument you can make to us.
Click to expand...
So you assert. You being singular. In more senses than one.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top