Who Wants To Defeat FOCA And Save Babies?

[Ricette]

Look, 73 percent of the country is pro-choice. Its how it is and also, while I see a couple issues with the whole FOCA thing, I rather like the ling where it says only liicensed physicians would perform them., Less chance of mother dying. Also, what about us who are pregnant with children who will be stillborn? Would you still object to an abortion? Welll, wait, yeah I am sure a few would. Me, I am a pro-choicer. And yes I have been faced with the choice ot abort and I am taking it. Not because I do nto want the baby, because I want to be a mother, but, when you are told that your child has a genetic defect that will not allow it to even live outside th womb and you are not able to handle that as a first timer, a termination is something ot do. Its why I chose. You want ot condemn me? Look abortions will happen and this act, if you find a way to ban its passing will give rise to more back alley rusty hanger clinics with quacks who will kill mother and baby. You say you want to preserve life, well, stop fighting this act. Yes it can open doors for more careless teens and adults to abort because they were too moronic to use birth control, but also, for those of us who have a medical reason to do it, this would help us. Not all who go for abortions do so for stupid reasons like a carelss moment of passion and not wanting ot be responsible. Besides the adoption system is already very full with children who need homes and many who will nto get them before they turn 18. We don't need ot add to this by fighting this act. Thats my take, hate me or not.  

[ShideKnight]

Ricette

Look, 73 percent of the country is pro-choice. Its how it is and also, while I see a couple issues with the whole FOCA thing, I rather like the ling where it says only liicensed physicians would perform them., Less chance of mother dying. Also, what about us who are pregnant with children who will be stillborn? Would you still object to an abortion? Welll, wait, yeah I am sure a few would. Me, I am a pro-choicer. And yes I have been faced with the choice ot abort and I am taking it. Not because I do nto want the baby, because I want to be a mother, but, when you are told that your child has a genetic defect that will not allow it to even live outside th womb and you are not able to handle that as a first timer, a termination is something ot do. Its why I chose. You want ot condemn me? Look abortions will happen and this act, if you find a way to ban its passing will give rise to more back alley rusty hanger clinics with quacks who will kill mother and baby. You say you want to preserve life, well, stop fighting this act. Yes it can open doors for more careless teens and adults to abort because they were too moronic to use birth control, but also, for those of us who have a medical reason to do it, this would help us. Not all who go for abortions do so for stupid reasons like a carelss moment of passion and not wanting ot be responsible. Besides the adoption system is already very full with children who need homes and many who will nto get them before they turn 18. We don't need ot add to this by fighting this act. Thats my take, hate me or not.

I think the main problem people have with this whole thing is that some ridiculously high percentage of abortions performed are not for a medical reason. They're just... out of what at first thought I want to call irresponsibility or convenience.

Meh. I suppose I should look up what the law says specifically.  

[divineseraph]

Dark Angel Rai

divineseraph

Dark Angel Rai

So you would take away the right to choose to do whatever we want to save a single celled organism? That's really...smart?

Also if it turns out that fetus is gay, would you still fight for it's rights?

Feti are not single-celled. You may want to try biology.



And yes, absolutely.

Also, I am anti-war and largely anti-death penalty. (Depending on the situation- Folks like Dahmer and Bundy types are probably better off being killed.)

When they start out. They are single celled organism. They're almost microscopic in the beginning. You don't conceive and boom you have a pregger stomach. It's a process. Like anything else in this world.

And if Dahmer and Bundy really wanted to die, they could easily take a cord or rope and hang themselves. Or start a fight with other prisoners.

Wait, wait, wait... So abortions happen RIGHT after conception? That or feti are kept single-celled until they're born, when they miraculously gain mass AND human life value? Now that's a good trick. Point being, your "Single Cell" bullshit is just that- bullshit. Especially considering that FOCA allows for LATE TERM abortions.  

[Neferet -House of Night-]

divineseraph

Dark Angel Rai

divineseraph

Dark Angel Rai

So you would take away the right to choose to do whatever we want to save a single celled organism? That's really...smart?

Also if it turns out that fetus is gay, would you still fight for it's rights?

Feti are not single-celled. You may want to try biology.



And yes, absolutely.

Also, I am anti-war and largely anti-death penalty. (Depending on the situation- Folks like Dahmer and Bundy types are probably better off being killed.)

When they start out. They are single celled organism. They're almost microscopic in the beginning. You don't conceive and boom you have a pregger stomach. It's a process. Like anything else in this world.

And if Dahmer and Bundy really wanted to die, they could easily take a cord or rope and hang themselves. Or start a fight with other prisoners.

Wait, wait, wait... So abortions happen RIGHT after conception? That or feti are kept single-celled until they're born, when they miraculously gain mass AND human life value? Now that's a good trick. Point being, your "Single Cell" bullshit is just that- bullshit. Especially considering that FOCA allows for LATE TERM abortions.

I'm talking about first term abortions here. I'm against late-term abortions. I think that's really retarded UNLESS the mother is about to die or in Ricette's case, the baby has a birth defect that cannot allow them to function outside the womb like being stillborn or fatal, fetual alcohol syndrome..>.< gah I don't remember what it's called now. It has to do with when the fetus gets damaged due to the mother drinking alcohol.

To put it short, I'm only for late term abortions if it's a very serious medical case. Like Ricette's.  

[divineseraph]

Dark Angel Rai

divineseraph

Dark Angel Rai

divineseraph

Dark Angel Rai

So you would take away the right to choose to do whatever we want to save a single celled organism? That's really...smart?

Also if it turns out that fetus is gay, would you still fight for it's rights?

Feti are not single-celled. You may want to try biology.



And yes, absolutely.

Also, I am anti-war and largely anti-death penalty. (Depending on the situation- Folks like Dahmer and Bundy types are probably better off being killed.)

When they start out. They are single celled organism. They're almost microscopic in the beginning. You don't conceive and boom you have a pregger stomach. It's a process. Like anything else in this world.

And if Dahmer and Bundy really wanted to die, they could easily take a cord or rope and hang themselves. Or start a fight with other prisoners.

Wait, wait, wait... So abortions happen RIGHT after conception? That or feti are kept single-celled until they're born, when they miraculously gain mass AND human life value? Now that's a good trick. Point being, your "Single Cell" bullshit is just that- bullshit. Especially considering that FOCA allows for LATE TERM abortions.

I'm talking about first term abortions here. I'm against late-term abortions. I think that's really retarded UNLESS the mother is about to die or in Ricette's case, the baby has a birth defect that cannot allow them to function outside the womb like being stillborn or fatal, fetual alcohol syndrome..>.< gah I don't remember what it's called now. It has to do with when the fetus gets damaged due to the mother drinking alcohol.

To put it short, I'm only for late term abortions if it's a very serious medical case. Like Ricette's.

But current laws allow first trimester abortion. FOCA allows late term abortion.

As for life of the mother, I agree there.

But back to your first-trimester point, even then the fetus is not single-celled. In fact, by that point it has a heartbeat.  

[Neferet -House of Night-]

divineseraph

Dark Angel Rai

divineseraph

Dark Angel Rai

divineseraph

Dark Angel Rai

So you would take away the right to choose to do whatever we want to save a single celled organism? That's really...smart?

Also if it turns out that fetus is gay, would you still fight for it's rights?

Feti are not single-celled. You may want to try biology.



And yes, absolutely.

Also, I am anti-war and largely anti-death penalty. (Depending on the situation- Folks like Dahmer and Bundy types are probably better off being killed.)

When they start out. They are single celled organism. They're almost microscopic in the beginning. You don't conceive and boom you have a pregger stomach. It's a process. Like anything else in this world.

And if Dahmer and Bundy really wanted to die, they could easily take a cord or rope and hang themselves. Or start a fight with other prisoners.

Wait, wait, wait... So abortions happen RIGHT after conception? That or feti are kept single-celled until they're born, when they miraculously gain mass AND human life value? Now that's a good trick. Point being, your "Single Cell" bullshit is just that- bullshit. Especially considering that FOCA allows for LATE TERM abortions.

I'm talking about first term abortions here. I'm against late-term abortions. I think that's really retarded UNLESS the mother is about to die or in Ricette's case, the baby has a birth defect that cannot allow them to function outside the womb like being stillborn or fatal, fetual alcohol syndrome..>.< gah I don't remember what it's called now. It has to do with when the fetus gets damaged due to the mother drinking alcohol.

To put it short, I'm only for late term abortions if it's a very serious medical case. Like Ricette's.

But current laws allow first trimester abortion. FOCA allows late term abortion.

As for life of the mother, I agree there.

But back to your first-trimester point, even then the fetus is not single-celled. In fact, by that point it has a heartbeat.

Depends on how late in the first trimester though.  

[divineseraph]

Dark Angel Rai

divineseraph

Dark Angel Rai

divineseraph

Dark Angel Rai

When they start out. They are single celled organism. They're almost microscopic in the beginning. You don't conceive and boom you have a pregger stomach. It's a process. Like anything else in this world.

And if Dahmer and Bundy really wanted to die, they could easily take a cord or rope and hang themselves. Or start a fight with other prisoners.

Wait, wait, wait... So abortions happen RIGHT after conception? That or feti are kept single-celled until they're born, when they miraculously gain mass AND human life value? Now that's a good trick. Point being, your "Single Cell" bullshit is just that- bullshit. Especially considering that FOCA allows for LATE TERM abortions.

I'm talking about first term abortions here. I'm against late-term abortions. I think that's really retarded UNLESS the mother is about to die or in Ricette's case, the baby has a birth defect that cannot allow them to function outside the womb like being stillborn or fatal, fetual alcohol syndrome..>.< gah I don't remember what it's called now. It has to do with when the fetus gets damaged due to the mother drinking alcohol.

To put it short, I'm only for late term abortions if it's a very serious medical case. Like Ricette's.

But current laws allow first trimester abortion. FOCA allows late term abortion.

As for life of the mother, I agree there.

But back to your first-trimester point, even then the fetus is not single-celled. In fact, by that point it has a heartbeat.

Depends on how late in the first trimester though.

The earliest abortions can't take place until at least 6 weeks. By then, it has a heartbeat.  

[Lady Kayura]

Definition: (TOO-mer) An abnormal mass of tissue that results from excessive cell division (mitotic activity). Tumors perform no useful body function. They may be either benign or malignant.

Look at a zygote, fast growing cluster of cells that performs no useful body function. Sounds malignant to me.  

[ShideKnight]

I hardly think pregnancy is abnormal, though. In fact it's a very established body function.  

[divineseraph]

Lady Kayura

Definition: (TOO-mer) An abnormal mass of tissue that results from excessive cell division (mitotic activity). Tumors perform no useful body function. They may be either benign or malignant.

Look at a zygote, fast growing cluster of cells that performs no useful body function. Sounds malignant to me.

Feti are malignant to their selves?  

[Prismatic Butterflies]

well, abortion is a serious topic. I can't say I'm fully against it, but I can't say I'm all for it either. It really depends on the case, there are different kinds and there are times when it's necessary, and other times when I don't fully agree with it. I've never gone through the same thing, never gotten pregnant, so I can't really speak for others. Sometimes, though, people have abortions when the baby is pretty much developed and soon to be born, I don't agree with that. But there are cases in which the pregnancy has to be terminated, there are still borns, ectopic pregnancies, etc. Again, it's a hard issue and definitely not something that is black-and-white, it really depends.  

[Lady Kayura]

divineseraph

Lady Kayura

Definition: (TOO-mer) An abnormal mass of tissue that results from excessive cell division (mitotic activity). Tumors perform no useful body function. They may be either benign or malignant.

Look at a zygote, fast growing cluster of cells that performs no useful body function. Sounds malignant to me.

Feti are malignant to their selves?

They are malignant to their host, the organism they leech life from, silly. Since you're clearly missing the tumor references, perhaps I should liken them to a parasite. Or I should just dumb down the big words.

Quote:

ma⋅lig⋅nant
   /məˈlɪgnənt/ Show Spelled Pronunciation [muh-lig-nuhnt] Show IPA Pronunciation
–adjective
1. disposed to cause harm, suffering, or distress deliberately; feeling or showing ill will or hatred.
2. very dangerous or harmful in influence or effect.
3. Pathology.
a. tending to produce death, as bubonic plague.
b. (of a tumor) characterized by uncontrolled growth; cancerous, invasive, or metastatic.

In case it's not exceptionally clear, I rather like the bolded definition. Can't debate that a fetus is invasive! biggrin  

[ShideKnight]

Quote:

ma⋅lig⋅nant
   /məˈlɪgnənt/ Show Spelled Pronunciation [muh-lig-nuhnt] Show IPA Pronunciation
–adjective
1. disposed to cause harm, suffering, or distress deliberately; feeling or showing ill will or hatred.
2. very dangerous or harmful in influence or effect.
3. Pathology.
a. tending to produce death, as bubonic plague.
b. (of a tumor) characterized by uncontrolled growth; cancerous, invasive, or metastatic.

In case it's not exceptionally clear, I rather like the bolded definition. Can't debate that a fetus is invasive! biggrin

The bolded definition relies on the subject being a tumor though, correct?  

[divineseraph]

Lady Kayura

divineseraph

Lady Kayura

Definition: (TOO-mer) An abnormal mass of tissue that results from excessive cell division (mitotic activity). Tumors perform no useful body function. They may be either benign or malignant.

Look at a zygote, fast growing cluster of cells that performs no useful body function. Sounds malignant to me.

Feti are malignant to their selves?

They are malignant to their host, the organism they leech life from, silly. Since you're clearly missing the tumor references, perhaps I should liken them to a parasite. Or I should just dumb down the big words.

Quote:

ma⋅lig⋅nant
   /məˈlɪgnənt/ Show Spelled Pronunciation [muh-lig-nuhnt] Show IPA Pronunciation
–adjective
1. disposed to cause harm, suffering, or distress deliberately; feeling or showing ill will or hatred.
2. very dangerous or harmful in influence or effect.
3. Pathology.
a. tending to produce death, as bubonic plague.
b. (of a tumor) characterized by uncontrolled growth; cancerous, invasive, or metastatic.

In case it's not exceptionally clear, I rather like the bolded definition. Can't debate that a fetus is invasive! biggrin

Feti will continue to grow indefinitely in the womb, forever sucking resources as parasites from a host? And even then, a feti is a separate life, a separate human life. If it can be considered a tumor for not directly aiding another human being then you, as an american, are a tumor to indonesians. I mean, you're leaching their labor and giving them nothing- in fact, your money provides for their cruel dictatorships.

I'm sorry, your idea of how reproduction works is a little off. Either that or your ability to understand things is deeply hampered.  

[Mein Kulturkampf]

Let me clear up a problem in the OP. Private facilities and faith-based hospitals will not have to perform abortions. This act only applies to government funded facilities.

That said, it seems a lot of you are missing out on one very basic tenet of American rights; the right to bodily domain. Basically, if someone is invading a woman's bodily domain, whatever the circumstances, she is authorized to use deadly force to remove the person. Yes, even if they`re having sex and she changes her mind, if he doesn`t pull out immediately, she is authorized to kill him if necessary to remove him.

A fetus, by definition, is invading a woman's bodily domain. If she wishes, she may remove the fetus from her body by any means necessary. This is a basic human right. If the fetus cannot survive outside the womb, so be it, but she has no obligation whatsoever to keep it in there.