Trump to become first president in history

[NCRAVEN]

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Love the new avatar picture by the way! haha

[Vlad the lad]

The problem is defining at what point between intercourse and birth that you decide life begins.

It's a slippery slope for sure.

Same slippery slope the left takes with guns.

For abortion to be legal until post birth like The Va gov was pushing, would be like alllowing citizens to justify handing tanks and nukes because of the 2nd amendment

Both are just crazy.

So you need a happy medium. The original framers of the 2nd amendment couldn’t have envisioned people wanting tanks and claiming 2nd amendment rights. Just like the original framers of abortion’s didn’t imagine a governor suggesting aborting a post birth child would be ok

Somewhere in the middle is probably logical for both

[BustOfPallas]

Somewhere in the middle is probably logical for both

I think hearbeat bills, things that seek to find a medium everyone can live with make a lot of sense. I think if you wait too long then it's on you and or I'm sorry, too bad you can't abort. Not everyone has the means but most, a very high percentage of people have the means and access to act responsibly to end an unwanted pregnancy very early on when the issue is not so gray.

The politics around it are absurd if you ask me. The extreme viewpoints are the ones often being shouted the loudest. The older I get the less I want to be in that sort of melee with anyone for any reason. At some point it's just a huge waste of energy that can be focused more positively.

[jonboy79]

I think hearbeat bills, things that seek to find a medium everyone can live with make a lot of sense. I think if you wait too long then it's on you and or I'm sorry, too bad you can't abort. Not everyone has the means but most, a very high percentage of people have the means and access to act responsibly to end an unwanted pregnancy very early on when the issue is not so gray.

The politics around it are absurd if you ask me. The extreme viewpoints are the ones often being shouted the loudest. The older I get the less I want to be in that sort of melee with anyone for any reason. At some point it's just a huge waste of energy that can be focused more positively.

Bingo..,


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[NCRAVEN]

I think hearbeat bills, things that seek to find a medium everyone can live with make a lot of sense. I think if you wait too long then it's on you and or I'm sorry, too bad you can't abort. Not everyone has the means but most, a very high percentage of people have the means and access to act responsibly to end an unwanted pregnancy very early on when the issue is not so gray.

The politics around it are absurd if you ask me. The extreme viewpoints are the ones often being shouted the loudest. The older I get the less I want to be in that sort of melee with anyone for any reason. At some point it's just a huge waste of energy that can be focused more positively.

We've had this conversation down here a number of times and I really didn't start this thread to argue, I just liked that Trump was speaking at the rally.

So I ask this not to argue, but cause I've never gotten an answer that makes sense. Why is it okay to abort early but not late? And if it's not okay to do it late, then why is it early?

Those two views seem in conflict.

[cjandrze]

We've had this conversation down here a number of times and I really didn't start this thread to argue, I just liked that Trump was speaking at the rally.

So I ask this not to argue, but cause I've never gotten an answer that makes sense. Why is it okay to abort early but not late? And if it's not okay to do it late, then why is it early?

Those two views seem in conflict.

Because not everyone agrees when life begins. That is where most of this debate exists.

[NCRAVEN]

Because not everyone agrees when life begins. That is where most of this debate exists.

If that's the reasoning, okay. But where life begins is a scientific fact whether we agree with it or not. "facts don't care about your feelings"

[BustOfPallas]

We've had this conversation down here a number of times and I really didn't start this thread to argue, I just liked that Trump was speaking at the rally.

So I ask this not to argue, but cause I've never gotten an answer that makes sense. Why is it okay to abort early but not late? And if it's not okay to do it late, then why is it early?

Those two views seem in conflict.

The older I get the less I want to be in that sort of melee with anyone for any reason. At some point it's just a huge waste of energy that can be focused more positively.

Nah, I'm good.

[cjandrze]

If that's the reasoning, okay. But where life begins is a scientific fact whether we agree with it or not. "facts don't care about your feelings"

Different scientists have different views. They don't care about each others feelings either, lol.

The genetic view (the position held by the Roman Catholic Church and many religious conservatives) holds that life begins with the acquisition of a novel genome; it is a kind of genetic determinism.

The Survival Doctor's Guides to Burns and Wounds, by @James HubbardThose who hold the embryologic view think life begins when the embryo undergoes gastrulation, and twinning is no longer possible; this occurs about 14 days into development. (Some mainline Protestant religions espouse a similar view.)

Proponents of the neurological view adhere to brainwave criteria; life begins when a distinct EEG pattern can be detected, about 24 to 27 weeks. (Some Protestant churches affirm this.) Interestingly, life is also thought to end when the EEG pattern is no longer present.

Finally, one can say that life begins at or near birth, measured by fetal viability outside the mother’s body. (Judaism affirms something close to this position.) After all, somewhere between 50 and 60 percent of all embryos conceived miscarry.

[NCRAVEN]

Nah, I'm good.

I just said I'm not trying to argue. I'm genuinely curios as to how you reconcile those two views.

[NCRAVEN]

Different scientists have different views. They don't care about each others feelings either, lol.

The genetic view (the position held by the Roman Catholic Church and many religious conservatives) holds that life begins with the acquisition of a novel genome; it is a kind of genetic determinism.

The Survival Doctor's Guides to Burns and Wounds, by @James HubbardThose who hold the embryologic view think life begins when the embryo undergoes gastrulation, and twinning is no longer possible; this occurs about 14 days into development. (Some mainline Protestant religions espouse a similar view.)

Proponents of the neurological view adhere to brainwave criteria; life begins when a distinct EEG pattern can be detected, about 24 to 27 weeks. (Some Protestant churches affirm this.) Interestingly, life is also thought to end when the EEG pattern is no longer present.

Finally, one can say that life begins at or near birth, measured by fetal viability outside the mother’s body. (Judaism affirms something close to this position.) After all, somewhere between 50 and 60 percent of all embryos conceived miscarry.

Those seem to be the views/opinions on the scientific evidence. Not what the science actually is.

Check this out starting at right about the 1 minute mark for some scientific facts on this:

[Laxdad24]

Same slippery slope the left takes with guns.

For abortion to be legal until post birth like The Va gov was pushing, would be like alllowing citizens to justify handing tanks and nukes because of the 2nd amendment

Both are just crazy.

So you need a happy medium. The original framers of the 2nd amendment couldn’t have envisioned people wanting tanks and claiming 2nd amendment rights. Just like the original framers of abortion’s didn’t imagine a governor suggesting aborting a post birth child would be ok

Somewhere in the middle is probably logical for both

While I basically agree with your stance here ....I will say this....


I Want my damn TANK!!!! Lmao.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk