Page 3 of 12 FirstFirst 12345 ... LastLast
Results 25 to 36 of 138
  1. #25
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    21,926
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: A response to "infanticide".

    Quote Originally Posted by TecmoRaven View Post
    You want me to research medical terms for any of the very rare conditions that can develop that threaten the mother? Abnormalities is not an evil word.


    Sent from my Moto G (5S) Plus using Tapatalk
    No, I want you to find a reason to support a belief that you have.

    You think 3rd trimester abortions should be legal so the mother can have 1 if her life is in danger. So which medical reason would require an abortion in the 3rd trimester to save her life?


    Since you won't look, I'll tell you. There isn't 1, not ONE. A 3rd trimester abortion can take 3 days, maybe 4. What medical emergency can wait 3 -4 days? You know what you do in a medical emergency? C - section, it takes an hour. Mom and baby both saved.


    There is no reason to kill the baby to save the mother in the 3rd trimester. You're take on this is totally bunk.





  2. #26
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    21,926
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: A response to "infanticide".

    Here is a video describing a 3rd trimester abortion and why it takes so long. And why you should have a C-section instead if there is a medical emergency






  3. #27
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Frederick, MD
    Posts
    61,310
    Blog Entries
    4

    Re: A response to "infanticide".

    Medical things and Religion aside, I look at this from the lens of a "less than savory" federal government intent on staying in power for as long as possible. Seriously, stop and think about it for a second. Why is it that most of the "oh shit" highly controversial debates are about things that (in the grand scheme of life) aren't really impacting most people in America? It's manufactured and it's done so to keep certain groups of people in power and keep attention away from things that actually matter and actually DO impact our lives.

    Maybe it's a bit "tinfoil hat-ish" of me, but I don't think abortion rights has anything to do with women's rights. It has to do with population control. Considering that funded abortion clinics started under the "auspices" of eugenics philosophy (see Margaret Sanger), I don't think it's very hard to take that next step in suggesting that "abortion rights" are really about controlling Black population in America. Black women have abortions at nearly 3 times the rate of White women in America.

    According to 2010 census bureau statistics, 79% of surgical planned parenthood facilities are within walking distance of Black communities in America.



    Also, as others have mentioned, if you don't want kids...don't put that "thing" in "there" without that "other thing" covering it. Oh yea, also, birth control is free and there are multiple options for birth control because different hormonal treatments affect women differently.

    It's not like people don't know what happens when you put that "thing" in "there" with no contraceptives in place.
    Disclaimer: The content posted is of my own opinion.





  4. #28

    Re: A response to "infanticide".

    Quote Originally Posted by TecmoRaven View Post
    You want me to research medical terms for any of the very rare conditions that can develop that threaten the mother? Abnormalities is not an evil word.
    So, you can't back up your argument because you don't want to look for evidence to back it up? Really?

    Inferring that it's ok to kill a 3rd trimester baby because of "abnormalities" is vile.





  5. #29

    Re: A response to "infanticide".

    Quote Originally Posted by wickedsolo View Post
    Medical things and Religion aside, I look at this from the lens of a "less than savory" federal government intent on staying in power for as long as possible. Seriously, stop and think about it for a second. Why is it that most of the "oh shit" highly controversial debates are about things that (in the grand scheme of life) aren't really impacting most people in America? It's manufactured and it's done so to keep certain groups of people in power.

    Maybe it's a bit "tinfoil hat-ish" of me, but I don't think abortion rights has anything to do with women's rights. It has to do with population control. Considering that funded abortion clinics started under the "auspices" of eugenics philosophy (see Margaret Sanger), I don't think it's very hard to take that next step in suggesting that "abortion rights" are really about controlling Black population in America. Black women have abortions at nearly 3 times the rate of White women in America.

    According to 2010 census bureau statistics, 79% of surgical planned parenthood facilities are within walking distance of Black communities in America.



    Also, as others have mentioned, if you don't want kids...don't put that "thing" in "there" without that "other thing" covering it. Oh yea, also, birth control is free and there are multiple options for birth control because different hormonal treatments affect women differently.
    This.

    The purpose of PP's creation was to kill AA children. That's not an opinion. That's a fact. Since they kill a higher % of AA children than anyone else...has the purpose changed? I'd love to hear someone argue otherwise. Intelligently argue.


    Quote Originally Posted by NCRAVEN View Post
    No, I want you to find a reason to support a belief that you have.

    You think 3rd trimester abortions should be legal so the mother can have 1 if her life is in danger. So which medical reason would require an abortion in the 3rd trimester to save her life?


    Since you won't look, I'll tell you. There isn't 1, not ONE. A 3rd trimester abortion can take 3 days, maybe 4. What medical emergency can wait 3 -4 days? You know what you do in a medical emergency? C - section, it takes an hour. Mom and baby both saved.


    There is no reason to kill the baby to save the mother in the 3rd trimester. You're take on this is totally bunk.
    100% factually correct.





  6. #30

    Re: A response to "infanticide".

    Quote Originally Posted by ravenmaniac4life View Post
    So, you can't back up your argument because you don't want to look for evidence to back it up? Really?

    Inferring that it's ok to kill a 3rd trimester baby because of "abnormalities" is vile.
    "Abnormalities that can endanger the mother".
    Stop villifying, it's a bad look.

    Sent from my Moto G (5S) Plus using Tapatalk





  7. #31

    Re: A response to "infanticide".

    Is villifying a word?

    Sent from my Moto G (5S) Plus using Tapatalk





  8. #32

    Re: A response to "infanticide".

    Oh, it's one l. Vilifying.

    Sent from my Moto G (5S) Plus using Tapatalk





  9. #33
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    21,926
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: A response to "infanticide".

    Quote Originally Posted by wickedsolo View Post
    Medical things and Religion aside, I look at this from the lens of a "less than savory" federal government intent on staying in power for as long as possible. Seriously, stop and think about it for a second. Why is it that most of the "oh shit" highly controversial debates are about things that (in the grand scheme of life) aren't really impacting most people in America? It's manufactured and it's done so to keep certain groups of people in power and keep attention away from things that actually matter and actually DO impact our lives.

    Maybe it's a bit "tinfoil hat-ish" of me, but I don't think abortion rights has anything to do with women's rights. It has to do with population control. Considering that funded abortion clinics started under the "auspices" of eugenics philosophy (see Margaret Sanger), I don't think it's very hard to take that next step in suggesting that "abortion rights" are really about controlling Black population in America. Black women have abortions at nearly 3 times the rate of White women in America.

    According to 2010 census bureau statistics, 79% of surgical planned parenthood facilities are within walking distance of Black communities in America.



    Also, as others have mentioned, if you don't want kids...don't put that "thing" in "there" without that "other thing" covering it. Oh yea, also, birth control is free and there are multiple options for birth control because different hormonal treatments affect women differently.

    It's not like people don't know what happens when you put that "thing" in "there" with no contraceptives in place.
    I think it's about that. And money. PP gets billions of taxpayer money. PP donates to democrats.

    That's one major part of it.





  10. #34
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    21,926
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: A response to "infanticide".

    Quote Originally Posted by TecmoRaven View Post
    "Abnormalities that can endanger the mother".
    Stop villifying, it's a bad look.

    Sent from my Moto G (5S) Plus using Tapatalk
    No "abnormality require you to kill a kid in the 3rd trimester to save the mother.

    Quote Originally Posted by NCRAVEN View Post
    No, I want you to find a reason to support a belief that you have.

    You think 3rd trimester abortions should be legal so the mother can have 1 if her life is in danger. So which medical reason would require an abortion in the 3rd trimester to save her life?


    Since you won't look, I'll tell you. There isn't 1, not ONE. A 3rd trimester abortion can take 3 days, maybe 4. What medical emergency can wait 3 -4 days? You know what you do in a medical emergency? C - section, it takes an hour. Mom and baby both saved.


    There is no reason to kill the baby to save the mother in the 3rd trimester. You're take on this is totally bunk.





  11. #35

    Re: A response to "infanticide".

    Quote Originally Posted by wickedsolo View Post
    Medical things and Religion aside, I look at this from the lens of a "less than savory" federal government intent on staying in power for as long as possible. Seriously, stop and think about it for a second. Why is it that most of the "oh shit" highly controversial debates are about things that (in the grand scheme of life) aren't really impacting most people in America? It's manufactured and it's done so to keep certain groups of people in power and keep attention away from things that actually matter and actually DO impact our lives.

    Maybe it's a bit "tinfoil hat-ish" of me, but I don't think abortion rights has anything to do with women's rights. It has to do with population control. Considering that funded abortion clinics started under the "auspices" of eugenics philosophy (see Margaret Sanger), I don't think it's very hard to take that next step in suggesting that "abortion rights" are really about controlling Black population in America. Black women have abortions at nearly 3 times the rate of White women in America.

    According to 2010 census bureau statistics, 79% of surgical planned parenthood facilities are within walking distance of Black communities in America.



    Also, as others have mentioned, if you don't want kids...don't put that "thing" in "there" without that "other thing" covering it. Oh yea, also, birth control is free and there are multiple options for birth control because different hormonal treatments affect women differently.

    It's not like people don't know what happens when you put that "thing" in "there" with no contraceptives in place.
    I definitely agree with your first paragraph. As for African Americans, half the population lives in inner cities, which tend to be walking distance from a ton of stuff.

    Sent from my Moto G (5S) Plus using Tapatalk





  12. #36

    Re: A response to "infanticide".

    Quote Originally Posted by TecmoRaven View Post
    "Abnormalities that can endanger the mother".
    Stop villifying, it's a bad look.
    I believe you said the following...
    Quote Originally Posted by TecmoRaven View Post
    "Abnormalities" occur.
    What abnormalities endanger the mother?

    There isn't an "abnormality" that exists which would require you to kill a baby in the 3rd trimester to save the mother. Will you acknowledge that? Or...if you don't...prove that such an abnormality exists.

    This isn't complicated.





Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Link To Mobile Site
var infolinks_pid = 3297965; var infolinks_wsid = 0; //—->