I am assuming here that nobody is in favor of abortions after 8 months, fair?

It's ironic that the most staunch pro-life people, those who believe "life" absolutely begins at conception, are usually also strong advocates of an originalist interpretation of the Constitution.

Yet in the America of the Founders, and for decades afterwards, abortion was deemed legal until the point in the pregnancy where movement of the fetus could be felt through the mother's abdomen (usually 15 to 20 weeks).

The colonies originally followed English Common Law (quickening), but there were numerous state laws outlawing abortion as far back as the early 1800s.

And the founders would have considered it a state's rights issue.
 
Not the father? Hmmm

If that thing has a heart beat, you fucked up if you deliberately kill it. According to high morals and all

Odd that no one considers the fathers opinion in the matter.
 
Some facts according to the CDC:

91.5% of abortions were performed at ≤13 weeks’ gestation; a smaller number of abortions (7.2%) were performed at 14–20 weeks’ gestation, and even fewer (1.3%) were performed at ≥21 weeks’ gestation.

My view is that it is a non-issue, as the fetus had the ability to become a human life at every stage, the probability increasing in development. Selecting a “cut off” point at any age before birth is a relatively arbitrary distinction.

It is also rather immaterial, as statistics show almost all abortions are performed early. Those performed late are generally for medical reasons.

I’m fine with a cut-off age to appease the anti-abortion crowd, provided there is a caveat to allow for abortions for medical reasons which includes fetal abnormalities. Logically, it doesn’t make sense to have a cut-off age, but I understand the visceral and emotional side of it is a different story.
Bumping this because it's easily the most relevant and best post itt.
 
Bumping this because it's easily the most relevant and best post itt.

So you're supporting the post under the terms that because murder (abortion after 8 months) is rare, its also therefore acceptable?
 
First trimester seems like the reasonable point.

I'm just glad to see, like in every abortion thread on here, the most anti-abortion posters on here are the same ones that are against military actions that murder innocent civilians, and that believe all people are equal and not "lesser" than others because of skin colour, religion, or country of origin.

I thank God for that :rolleyes:
 
Last edited:
If there were an in utero test for liberalism then I might consider it.
 
Abortions should be very rare. One quarter of the population is too much.
 
I am trying to find out at what point it is OK to kill your child by those who support the idea. This topic comes up often and most, if not all the supporters seem quite confused themselves.

If there is no clear line (ie. 8 1/2 months, 6 months, 4 weeks, next day), then what are we even discussing?
Like he said, it depends on the woman having the baby.
 
Michelle Wolf might make a few people move to the Pro Life side. Excellent video:

 
LIB%2B%252820%2529.jpg
 
so I'm all for allowing abortions up to the point where the baby is viable outside the womb.
But you realize that this means that your idea of what is and is not okay is dependent on medical technology of the day you live in
 
But you realize that this means that your idea of what is and is not okay is dependent on medical technology of the day you live in

Stop just reading the first page you lazy fuck. This is literally page 2.

"I'm all for abortions up until the baby is viable outside the womb without medical intervention. If it's right before natural delivery then it's clearly viable outside the womb and should be an adoption choice. "
 
"I'm all for abortions up until the baby is viable outside the womb without medical intervention.
So, I guess we can go around stabbing adults who cling to life on machines?
 
Back
Top