Arizona bans abortion except to save life of mother

[Temujin]

I thought you said it was possible. See below:

Some abortions are unavoidable . A foetus so malformed that it cannot survive birth for example, or where the mother's life is endangered. Removing an ectopic pregnancy is an abortion, albeit a special case.

 

[Grace]

This is my point as well.

We all want to end abortion.

We just have different ideas on how to get it done.

I think we should unite on this point (to end abortion) and stop allowing this issue to be deliberately weaponized against us… to keep us divided.

If you read the posts of those who claim to not be pro abortion, you'll see that in fact they ARE pro abortion and that is what keeps us divided. They want mothers to have the right to murder their children in the womb at any time for any reason. I'm against that!

 

[Temujin]

If you read the posts of those who claim to not be pro abortion, you'll see that in fact they ARE pro abortion and that is what keeps us divided. They want mothers to have the right to murder their children in the womb at any time for any reason. I'm against that!

You have the right to murder the meaning of the English language with your hyperbolic sentimentality. I'm against that!
What I am for is the right for women to do what they wish with their own bodies, even if I personally don't agree with their choice. I am for a sane description of a foetus, including a clear and sensible definition of what stage of pregnancy constitutes sufficient development for it to be considered a person. I am for abortion to be treated as any other medical procedure, regulated by the medical profession with clear guidelines on what is and is not appropriate treatment in given situations. I am for appropriate punishment for medical malpractice breaching those regulations. I am for spending taxpayers money on reducing the demand for abortion including massively reducing the cost of childbirth and antenatal care. I am for detoxification of this debate by removing asinine comments about murdering children.

We know what you are against. What are you for? Do you recognise that compromise is essential to resolve the issue, or would you rather the issue were not resolved so that you could still scream your objections from the rooftops, earning brownie points from your fellow zealots? Above all, do you realise that those who oppose your position hold equally strong views, are equally convinced of the moral correctness of their own position and that your overblown language can, and hopefully will, galvanise the majority view on abortion to bury your nonsense for good and all at the ballot box?

 

[Grace]

You have the right to murder the meaning of the English language with your hyperbolic sentimentality. I'm against that!
What I am for is the right for women to do what they wish with their own bodies, even if I personally don't agree with their choice. I am for a sane description of a foetus, including a clear and sensible definition of what stage of pregnancy constitutes sufficient development for it to be considered a person. I am for abortion to be treated as any other medical procedure, regulated by the medical profession with clear guidelines on what is and is not appropriate treatment in given situations. I am for appropriate punishment for medical malpractice breaching those regulations. I am for spending taxpayers money on reducing the demand for abortion including massively reducing the cost of childbirth and antenatal care. I am for detoxification of this debate by removing asinine comments about murdering children.

A fetus is defined as offspring. Offspring is defined as a person's child or children.

You are for abortion for any reason the mother may choose at any time. If that's not true, please clarify.

We know what you are against. What are you for? Do you recognise that compromise is essential to resolve the issue, or would you rather the issue were not resolved so that you could still scream your objections from the rooftops, earning brownie points from your fellow zealots? Above all, do you realise that those who oppose your position hold equally strong views, are equally convinced of the moral correctness of their own position and that your overblown language can, and hopefully will, galvanise the majority view on abortion to bury your nonsense for good and all at the ballot box?

I'm against the mother killing her unborn child for any reason. If a miscarriage happens, I'm for swift medical treatment. If the pregnancy endangers the life of the mother (which is rare), I'm for swift medical treatment.

I'm against abortion for alleged mental health reasons. It's a loophole for the unrestricted taking of the life of the unborn child. Unborn children should have rights as well.

 

[Grace]

It's actually how the Abortion Act in the UK is framed. It's remarkably successful, putting an end to the frenetic nonsense over abortion we see in your country. For sixty years we have been looking at you bemused by your total inability to sort out a compromise. How much longer one wonders?

Haughty "we are better than you" posts don't impress me much.

The UK is a mess!

 

[Grace]

In saying abortion is a “necessary evil”, you’ve finally confessed that your type of “good” is fundamentally evil in sheep skins. Thanks for your admission

Indeed!

 

[Temujin]

A fetus is defined as offspring. Offspring is defined as a person's child or children.

Nonsense. When was the last time you heard about the cost of sending your foetus to college, or someone boasting about how good their foetus is at reading. You have been fooled by the board fantasist. Foetus, or fetus, is an English word meaning the developing unborn of a mammal, in this instance a human being. It refers specifically to the period from none weeks pregnancy until birth.

You are for abortion for any reason the mother may choose at any time. If that's not true, please clarify.

No. I would place almost no restrictions at all up to twelve weeks, when abortion can be safely administered at home using medication. 12 to 20 weeks I would require two doctors to certify that abortion is in the best interests of the pregnant person. After 20 weeks I would only allow abortion in cases of acute danger to the mother or where the foetus is too malformed to survive birth. If there's a chance of a caesarian section saving a viable foetus, then it should be taken. I would not allow abortion for the purpose of sex selection, except for the purpose of avoiding a genetic condition.

I'm against the mother killing her unborn child for any reason. If a miscarriage happens, I'm for swift medical treatment. If the pregnancy endangers the life of the mother (which is rare), I'm for swift medical treatment.

I understand that position.

I'm against abortion for alleged mental health reasons. It's a loophole for the unrestricted taking of the life of the unborn child. Unborn children should have rights as well.

I disagree. Firstly, mental health conditions are no more alleged than physical ones. Untreated mental health conditions can kill. If a pregnancy is contributing to clinical depression, then that's a perfectly acceptable reason for an abortion up to 20 weeks.

Unborn children should have no rights at all until they are viable, i.e. can survive outside the uterus. After that they should have the right to be born, if that can be achieved without endangering the life of the mother. Post birth, a baby should have the same rights as it does now.

 

[Grace]

Nonsense. When was the last time you heard about the cost of sending your foetus to college, or someone boasting about how good their foetus is at reading. You have been fooled by the board fantasist. Foetus, or fetus, is an English word meaning the developing unborn of a mammal, in this instance a human being. It refers specifically to the period from none weeks pregnancy until birth.

Fetus is defined as offspring. I understand you want to use a different definition, but that IS the definition.

No. I would place almost no restrictions at all up to twelve weeks, when abortion can be safely administered at home using medication. 12 to 20 weeks I would require two doctors to certify that abortion is in the best interests of the pregnant person. After 20 weeks I would only allow abortion in cases of acute danger to the mother or where the foetus is too malformed to survive birth. If there's a chance of a caesarian section saving a viable foetus, then it should be taken. I would not allow abortion for the purpose of sex selection, except for the purpose of avoiding a genetic condition.

"Acute danger" means whatever the mother wants it to be.

I disagree. Firstly, mental health conditions are no more alleged than physical ones. Untreated mental health conditions can kill. If a pregnancy is contributing to clinical depression, then that's a perfectly acceptable reason for an abortion up to 20 weeks.

Yes, mental health conditions can kill. But there's no reason to kill the child because mommy is stressed! At 10 weeks , your baby is no longer an embryo. It is now a fetus, the stage of development up until birth.

Unborn children should have no rights at all until they are viable, i.e. can survive outside the uterus. After that they should have the right to be born, if that can be achieved without endangering the life of the mother. Post birth, a baby should have the same rights as it does now.

Thank you for confirming I was right about your position.

 

[Temujin]

Fetus is defined as offspring. I understand you want to use a different definition, but that IS the definition.

foetus
an offspring of a human or other mammal in the stages of prenatal development that follow the embryo stage (in humans taken as beginning eight weeks after conception)
"adequate folic acid is important for the developing fetus"
Can you quote a different definition? I understand that you want it to have a different definition, but unfortunately for you, we are corresponding in English, not Latin.

"Acute danger" means whatever the mother wants it to be.

It means whatever the mother and her doctors conclude it means. Are all your doctors doormats? Or are they motivated purely by profit? Perhaps you should consider a publicly funded healthcare system which is more objective, as well as being cheaper.

Yes, mental health conditions can kill. But there's no reason to kill the child because mommy is stressed!

Unless a doctor agrees that it is appropriate.

At 10 weeks , your baby is no longer an embryo. It is now a fetus, the stage of development up until birth.

See above. Other authorities say eight weeks. Some say nine. So what?

Thank you for confirming I was right about your position.

Thank you for confirming your inability to be honest on this subject.

 

[Grace]

foetus
an offspring of a human or other mammal in the stages of prenatal development that follow the embryo stage (in humans taken as beginning eight weeks after conception)
"adequate folic acid is important for the developing fetus"

Is that offspring human? If so, why do you want to kill it?

Can you quote a different definition? I understand that you want it to have a different definition, but unfortunately for you, we are corresponding in English, not Latin.

Now look up the definition of offspring.

It means whatever the mother and her doctors conclude it means. Are all your doctors doormats? Or are they motivated purely by profit?

Mothers who want to kill their children are indeed mentally ill. That doesn't mean we should allow them.

Perhaps you should consider a publicly funded healthcare system which is more objective, as well as being cheaper.
Unless a doctor agrees that it is appropriate.See above. Other authorities say eight weeks. Some say nine. So what?
Thank you for confirming your inability to be honest on this subject.

The healthcare system in the UK is terrible!

NHS: UK now has one of the worst healthcare systems in the developed world, according to OECD report​

 

[Temujin]

Is that offspring human? If so, why do you want to kill it?

Now look up the definition of offspring.

Good grief, don't you understand the qualifying clause? I even highlighted it for you. Try and stay honest.

The healthcare system in the UK is terrible!

NHS: UK now has one of the worst healthcare systems in the developed world, according to OECD report​

I'm not surprised. This is due to an abandonment of it's founding principles and an underhand attempt by a Conservative government to reintroduced a failed private health system. On there hand, look at the best healthcare systems in the world.https://worldpopulationreview.com/country-rankings/best-healthcare-in-the-world
The UK is actually ranked at 35 just below Canada and most European countries. The US is at 69, between Algeria and Armenia. The US is particularly weak on infant and postpartum mortality. If your antenatal care was better, you might have fewer abortions, but of course that would cost money, and we wouldn't want to put our money where our mout is, would we?

 

[BMS]

In the same way that amputation and paracetamol are necessary evils. Don't get your knickers in a twist over an innocuous bit of idiom.

Paracetamol and amputation almost always kill people?

Just trying to.understand what nonsense is going on in your mind that you cant follow discussion

 

[DaGeo]

Nonsense.

Said the court jester

When was the last time you heard about the cost of sending your foetus to college, or someone boasting about how good their foetus is at reading.

RIDICULES Only a total fool would argue like this Let me help you understand how foolish your uninformed unintelligent arguments are. You may as well argue: “When was the last time you heard about the cost of sending your infant to college or someone boasting about how good their infant is at reading”

Are you so dense you can’t understand distinctions between developmental stages of human life

You have been fooled by the board fantasist.

Says the court jester

Foetus, or fetus, is an English word meaning the developing unborn of a mammal, in this instance a human being. It refers specifically to the period from none weeks pregnancy until birth.

Don’t you even understand what you just said You just said, “…developing unborn…”, “…human being.”. OBVIOUSLY this is a developing human being and a developing human being is a developing person The person is in a specific stage of development
SHEEEEESH

No. I would place almost no restrictions at all up to twelve weeks, when abortion can be safely administered at home using medication.

“SAFLY” One person just experienced a brutal murder and you call that “safely”

12 to 20 weeks I would require two doctors to certify that abortion is in the best interests of the pregnant person.

Yeah, just make sure the “doctors” are hardened chamber operators who believe taking life is a money making sport

After 20 weeks I would only allow abortion in cases of acute danger to the mother or where the foetus is too malformed to survive birth.

Who made you god

If there's a chance of a caesarian section saving a viable foetus, then it should be taken. I would not allow abortion for the purpose of sex selection, except for the purpose of avoiding a genetic condition.

Oh how comforting. The Temujin god extends the right to life to certain individuals that only he considers worthy

I understand that position.
I disagree.

Divine fiat says the self made god

Firstly, mental health conditions are no more alleged than physical ones. Untreated mental health conditions can kill. If a pregnancy is contributing to clinical depression, then that's a perfectly acceptable reason for an abortion up to 20 weeks.

Oh ok, so if a murder gets emotionally distressed because he can’t kill someone, then the Temujin god says it’s ok for that murder to relieve his emotional distress by killing his victim Folks you can’t make this stuff up

Unborn children should have no rights at all until they are viable, i.e. can survive outside the uterus.

So declares the almighty Temujin god

After that they should have the right to be born, if that can be achieved without endangering the life of the mother. Post birth, a baby should have the same rights as it does now.

This nut actually believes he’s a god

 

[BMS]

Some abortions are unavoidable . A foetus so malformed that it cannot survive birth for example, or where the mother's life is endangered. Advisable you mean. All abortions are avoidable. But I agree with this scenario.
But that it not pro.choice
You cant hold a conversation, you just spout whats on your mind.

 

[BMS]

Said the court jester

RIDICULES Only a total fool would argue like this Let me help you understand how foolish your uninformed unintelligent arguments are. You may as well argue: “When was the last time you heard about the cost of sending your infant to college or someone boasting about how good their infant is at reading”

Are you so dense you can’t understand distinctions between developmental stages of human life

Says the court jester

Don’t you even understand what you just said You just said, “…developing unborn…”, “…human being.”. OBVIOUSLY this is a developing human being and a developing human being is a developing person The person is in a specific stage of development
SHEEEEESH

“SAFLY” One person just experienced a brutal murder and you call that “safely”

Yeah, just make sure the “doctors” are hardened chamber operators who believe taking life is a money making sport

Who made you god

Oh how comforting. The Temujin god extends the right to life to certain individuals that only he considers worthy

Divine fiat says the self made god

Oh ok, so if a murder gets emotionally distressed because he can’t kill someone, then the Temujin god says it’s ok for that murder to relieve his emotional distress by killing his victim Folks you can’t make this stuff up

So declares the almighty Temujin god

This nut actually believes he’s a god

Well Temujin probably doesnt believe he is God, though he is playing it. Temujin is unable to follow the gist of the conversation

 

[DeSanto]

Some abortions are unavoidable . A foetus so malformed that it cannot survive birth for example, or where the mother's life is endangered. Removing an ectopic pregnancy is an abortion, albeit a special case.

If the babies life is in danger and the mothers life is in danger, you should do whatever you can to save both lives. But I do understand you may only be able to save one.

I don’t think we should conflate this, with “elective” abortions. It only helps to complicate a discussion seeking to resolve the main issue.

 

[DaGeo]

Well Temujin probably doesnt believe he is God, though he is playing it. Temujin is unable to follow the gist of the conversation

You’re right, he’s not the real God but he behaves like some sort of self-appointed god, (ie an evil little god), who defends the stealing of life from the real God’s children.

The Temujin god doesn’t seem to realize that the real God is graciously offering the self-appointed Temujin god an opportunity to repent for all his abortion (ie pro-murder) hype and his daily rebellion against the real God’s laws.

 

[DaGeo]

Good grief, don't you understand the qualifying clause? I even highlighted it for you. Try and stay honest.

I'm not surprised. This is due to an abandonment of it's founding principles and an underhand attempt by a Conservative government to reintroduced a failed private health system. On there hand, look at the best healthcare systems in the world.https://worldpopulationreview.com/country-rankings/best-healthcare-in-the-world
The UK is actually ranked at 35 just below Canada and most European countries. The US is at 69, between Algeria and Armenia. The US is particularly weak on infant and postpartum mortality. If your antenatal care was better, you might have fewer abortions, but of course that would cost money, and we wouldn't want to put our money where our mout is, would we?

Question for you Temujin, are you a Marxist, sure sounds like it. Be honest. What are your political leanings?

 

[DaGeo]

What a pointless comment!!!

No, actually it’s very accurate

 

[DaGeo]

In the same way that amputation and paracetamol are necessary evils. Don't get your knickers in a twist over an innocuous bit of idiom.

Let me help you with making more accurate distinctions between differing kinds of words and concepts.

Softening up murder by abortion and calling it a “necessary evil” is problematic. Furthermore, describing any type of tragic death as simply “innocuously idiomatic” is harsh—as only you would suggest.

In your case, you would be more honest if you exchanged the term idiom for euphemism.

In the case of amputation to save a life, this reality is not just a “necessary evil” unless you believe saving a live is a necessary evil.