Why not show it?

[atlkvb]

Hey @CpEER or anyone else on the Left, if you guys are so confident abortion will never be banned and you strongly support a Woman's right to kill her own child, why don't you all ever argue for more support of it by showing a full abortion on TV?

Wouldn't that be the best way to assure it is always safe, legal, and avaialble? We show open heart transplants, separation of Siamese twins, complicated transplant surgeries and limb reattachments, but for some reason or another we never show a little Baby being torn apart limb by limb?
Why not? It's not murder right? It's just a clump of cells right? So why not show it and build more support for it?

A picture is worth a thousand words right?

 

[CpEER]

I have no idea what shows you are watching on TV, champ. But jfc....agree to disagree on this one. Don’t you have a wife to nag?

 

[atlkvb]

I have no idea what shows you are watching on TV, champ. But jfc....agree to disagree on this one. Don’t you have a wife to nag?

She birthed 7 kids for us, and we're Blessed with Grandkids from our kids which the Bible says is beyond wealth.

Proverbs 17:6
Children's children are a crown to the aged, and parents are the pride of their children.

Don't you have a tree to worship?

 

[CpEER]

7 kids + grandkids? And you seem to be on here 24/7 trying to argue against a 45 year old Supreme Court ruling with a tone who will give yih the time of day? You sure do seem wealthy.

Let me ask one question though. If you get your way and abortion is legal. And a woman has an abortion. Do you punish the woman? What do you charge her with?

 

[Brushy Bill]

What do you charge her with?

First degree murder.

 

[atlkvb]

7 kids + grandkids? And you seem to be on here 24/7 trying to argue against a 45 year old Supreme Court ruling with a tone who will give yih the time of day? You sure do seem wealthy.

Let me ask one question though. If you get your way and abortion is legal. And a woman has an abortion. Do you punish the woman? What do you charge her with?

First of all how do you know how much time I'm on here unless you're on here longer?

Second if abortion is illegal it would be punished similar to any other crime.
My suspicion though is that if it is illegal we would see much less of it and in those instances where it was done the crime would be murder similar to any other murder.

Let me ask you a question. If the mother has no control over when she actually does conceive why does she have control over ending the conception?

 

[CpEER]

First degree murder.

Wonderful. Just the answer I was hoping for to see how crazy you guys were. “F*cking crazy” it is.

Next question:

You’re walking down the street and you come across a fertility clinic that is on fire. Being the Good Samaritan that you are, you rush into the burning building to see if anyone needs help.

In one corner is a 3-year old toddler crying hysterically. In the other corner is a cooler that is labeled “1000 Viable Human Embryos“. You only have time to save either the crying child or the cooler full of embryos before the smoke and fire consume you all. Which do you choose and why?

 

[CpEER]

First of all how do you know how much time I'm on here unless you're on here longer?

Second if abortion is illegal it would be punished similar to any other crime.
My suspicion though is that if it is illegal we would see much less of it and in those instances where it was done the crime would be murder similar to any other murder.

Let me ask you a question. If the mother has no control over when she actually does conceive why does she have control over ending the conception?

I’m not quite sure what you’re asking here. Are you implying that a woman cannot get pregnant through rape? Because that’s what it sounds like.

Surely you’re not suggesting that....right?




Right?

 

[atlkvb]

Wonderful. Just the answer I was hoping for to see how crazy you guys were. “F*cking crazy” it is.

Next question:

You’re walking down the street and you come across a fertility clinic that is on fire. Being the Good Samaritan that you are, you rush into the burning building to see if anyone needs help.

In one corner is a 3-year old toddler crying hysterically. In the other corner is a cooler that is labeled “1000 Viable Human Embryos“. You only have time to save either the crying child or the cooler full of embryos before the smoke and fire consume you all. Which do you choose and why?

I'd save the life(lives) I could. If I could save them all I would.

 

[atlkvb]

I’m not quite sure what you’re asking here. Are you implying that a woman cannot get pregnant through rape? Because that’s what it sounds like.

Surely you’re not suggesting that....right?




Right?

I'm saying just as in the case of rape she has no control whether she conceives.

Similar to how she has no control over that baby's DNA or heartbeat or anything else related to that single separate entity growing inside of her.

So regardless of the circumstances of her conception what gives her control over ending it? The life is not ordained by her so under what prerogative does she assume permission to end it?

 

[CpEER]

I'd save the life(lives) I could. If I could save them all I would.

But you can only choose one. Which do you choose and why?

 

[atlkvb]

I’m not quite sure what you’re asking here. Are you implying that a woman cannot get pregnant through rape? Because that’s what it sounds like.

Surely you’re not suggesting that....right?




Right?

You Defenders of abortion love to use the rape scenario and it is an important aspect of unwanted pregnancies.

However the vast majority of unwanted pregnancies are simply unwanted for the sake of convenience. Why are you arguing such a rare occurrence of rape when the vast majority of the murders are done strictly because the mother refuses to allow the child to live?

 

[CpEER]

I'm saying just as in the case of rape she has no control whether she conceives.

Similar to how she has no control over that baby's DNA or heartbeat or anything else related to that single separate entity growing inside of her.

So regardless of the circumstances of her conception what gives her control over ending it? The life is not ordained by her so under what prerogative does she have permission to end it?

So you’re saying a couple can’t choose when to get pregnant?

 

[atlkvb]

So you’re saying a couple can’t choose when to get pregnant?

They most certainly can choose to try to have a child that's not what I'm saying. I'm saying they have no control over when the mother actually conceives. It's unknown to both the mother and the father when it happens but they have no control over when it does. The mother can't even control when she ovulates!

Just as they have no control over the sex, hair color, eyes or any other unique characteristics of the child, they simply supply the egg and the sperm and almighty God takes over from there.

 

[CpEER]

You Defenders of abortion love to use the rape scenario and it is an important aspect of unwanted pregnancies.

However the vast majority of unwanted pregnancies are simply unwanted for the sake of convenience. Why are you arguing such a rare occurrence of rape when the vast majority of the murders are done strictly because the mother refuses to allow the child to live?

First off, I would like for you to start sourcing some of your claims. You have provided none yet speak like you have.

Second of all, if just one woman has to keep an unwanted pregnancy due to rape then that is one too many.

 

[WVU82_rivals]

I lived in Denver 87-92...

every Saturday morning they showed operations on tv from local hospitals...

the 'infant skull surgery' is the one I could never forget...

 

[atlkvb]

First off, I would like for you to start sourcing some of your claims. You have provided none yet speak like you have.

Second of all, if just one woman has to keep an unwanted pregnancy due to rape then that is one too many.

If you go over to the thread that was started the other day on this I think you'll find source material for much of what I'm quoting. The thread is called "not one person on here really thinks abortion is murder". I linked to several articles that are backing up much of what I'm arguing in this thread.

 

[CpEER]

They most certainly can choose to try to have a child that's not what I'm saying. I'm saying they have no control over when the mother actually conceives. It's unknown to both the mother and the father when it happens but they have no control over when it does.

Just as they have no control over the sex, hair color, eyes or any other unique characteristics of the child, they simply supply the egg and the sperm and almighty God takes over from there.

Well I would disagree. It is not divine intervention when you get knocked up. That’s just crazy talk and we should probably end the discussion here because we are on completely different wavelengths.

But I really wish you would answer my question above honestly. You only have one choice. Which do you choose?

 

[atlkvb]

Well I would disagree. It is not divine intervention when you get knocked up. That’s just crazy talk and we should probably end the discussion here because we are on completely different wavelengths.

But I really wish you would answer my question above honestly. You only have one choice. Which do you choose?

I agree with you we are on two different wavelengths because you're insisting that the miracle of childbirth is simply an accident while I'm arguing It Is by specific design creation that it even happens.

Yes I agree with you having sex is a choice but getting pregnant is not unless you choose abstinence.

As for the answer of your scenario I answered it if I could save one life I would save one if I could save both lives or all lives I would do that. You didn't ask either or, you asked which one would you save?

I answered the one I could.

 

[CpEER]

I agree with you we are on two different wavelengths because you're insisting that the miracle of childbirth is simply an accident while I'm arguing It Is by specific design creation that it even happens.

Yes I agree with you having sex is a choice but getting pregnant is not unless you choose abstinence.

As for the answer of your scenario I answered it if I could save one life I would save one if I could save both lives or all lives I would do that. You didn't ask either or you asked which one you would you save?

I answered the one I could.

So you save the one child first? Interesting.

 

[atlkvb]

Let me ask you a question based on your scenario are you suggesting that the babies in the test tubes are actually human lives worth saving?

 

[atlkvb]

So you save the one child first? Interesting.

If that's all I was capable of saving and under your scenario apparently it is, then yes I would.

 

[CpEER]

If that's all I was capable of saving and under your scenario apparently it is yes I would.

One child vs 1000 lives (by your definition). That seems like an odd choice based on what you have been saying. But I agree. I would definitely save the child first, no question.

 

[atlkvb]

Wonderful. Just the answer I was hoping for to see how crazy you guys were. “F*cking crazy” it is.

Next question:

You’re walking down the street and you come across a fertility clinic that is on fire. Being the Good Samaritan that you are, you rush into the burning building to see if anyone needs help.

In one corner is a 3-year old toddler crying hysterically. In the other corner is a cooler that is labeled “1000 Viable Human Embryos“. You only have time to save either the crying child or the cooler full of embryos before the smoke and fire consume you all. Which do you choose and why?

Are the embryos fertilized viable living fetuses?

 

[atlkvb]

One child vs 1000 lives (by your definition). That seems like an odd choice based on what you have been saying. But I agree. I would definitely save the child first, no question.

I would imagine under your scenario the embryos are not fully developed children yet however if they were fetuses and I could save them in addition to the single child I'd try and save them all.

 

[atlkvb]

One child vs 1000 lives (by your definition). That seems like an odd choice based on what you have been saying. But I agree. I would definitely save the child first, no question.

I'm glad you agree at least if the embryos are fertilized that they are human and worth saving.

 

[CpEER]

Are the embryos fertilized viable living fetuses?

https://academic.oup.com/humrep/article/22/4/905/695880

 

[CpEER]

I'm glad you agree at least if the embryos are fertilized that they are human and worth saving.

Well by saying first in this scenario, I meant only. As I said, you can only save one. But I wouldn’t risk my life over the cooler though, no. The child, yes.

 

[CpEER]

I would imagine under your scenario the embryos are not fully developed children yet however if they were fetuses and I could save them in addition to the single child I'd try and save them all.

So are you saying that life does not begin at conception now? I’m really getting confused.

As an aside, what is a fully developed child? My son is 6 and is still developing.

 

[atlkvb]

https://academic.oup.com/humrep/article/22/4/905/695880

Alright then under that definition we have established that those embryos are already human lives and are worth saving and I would try to save them if I could. If I could save them first I would.

 

[atlkvb]

So are you saying that life does not begin at conception now? I’m really getting confused.

No I'm saying Conception is the union of a fertilized egg by a sperm. At that moment it is a human being although not a fully developed one.

Just like a little girl is a woman just not fully developed.

 

[CpEER]

Alright then under that definition we have established that those embryos are already human lives and are worth saving and I would try to save them if I could. If I could save them first I would.

Yes that is the definition of embryos that science has established....is this new information to you?

So you would save the cooler over the screaming child. Gotcha. And it’s first degree murder if a woman has an abortion. Swell.

No need to have this discussion anymore. We aren’t going to see eye to eye.

 

[atlkvb]

Well by saying first in this scenario, I meant only. As I said, you can only save one. But I wouldn’t risk my life over the cooler though, no. The child, yes.

That's fine that's how you choose to answer that question and I answered it the way I chose which is I would save who I could regardless of whether it was one or the many in the embryos.

 

[CpEER]

That's fine that's how you choose to answer that question and I answered it the way I chose which is I would save who I could regardless of whether it was one or the many in the embryos.

Now you’re backtracking. Saying you would save whoever you could is ignoring the very premise of the hypothetical. I’m telling you that you absolutely can save one...either the child or the cooler. You have a choice.

 

[atlkvb]

Yes that is the definition of embryos that science has established....is this new information to you?

So you would save the cooler over the screaming child. Gotcha. And it’s first degree murder if a woman has an abortion. Swell.

No need to have this discussion anymore. We aren’t going to see eye to eye.

If the cooler was my first option yes I would save the cooler as far as abortion being murder we haven't established that yet but the only way to have one is to kill the living child. Call that what you want but it will always be murder in my eyes.

 

[atlkvb]

Now you’re backtracking. Saying you would save whoever you could is ignoring the very premise of the hypothetical. I’m telling you that you absolutely can save one...either the child or the cooler. You have a choice.

And my choice is to save who I could. You're
setting up the scenario saying I can't save both. How can I not save both but have a choice to save either that makes no sense.

If I have a choice I'm going to try to save both.

If I have no choice I will save who I can.

 

[CpEER]

And my choice is to save who I could. You're
setting up the scenario saying I can't save both. How can I not save both but have a choice to save either that makes no sense.

If I have a choice I'm going to try to save both.

If I have no choice I will save who I can.

Yea I’m setting up the hypothetical how I want because that how hypothetical questions work. You have one choice. You said you’d save the cooler. You said a woman should be charged with a crime (murder) if she has an abortion (if it was illegal).

 

[atlkvb]

I have one for you.

Right now it is perfectly legal to take a fully-formed baby and hold it exactly 12 inches inside the womb puncture its skull and suck his brains out. It's called an intact dilation and extraction, or partial birth abortion.

However if you deliver that same fully formed baby and hold it exactly 12 inches away from the cervix and perform the exact same procedure that is infanticide.

Besides the 12 inches what is the difference between the murder of the baby being held outside the womb and the slaughter of it being held inside the womb?

 

[atlkvb]

Yea I’m setting up the hypothetical how I want because that how hypothetical questions work. You have one choice. You said you’d save the cooler. You said a woman should be charged with a crime (murder) if she has an abortion (if it was illegal).

Yes and yes. But I notice you haven't answered whether you believe the lives in the tubes were humans worth saving?

 

[CpEER]

Yes and yes. But I notice you haven't answered whether you believe the lives in the tubes were humans worth saving?

I did. I said I’m not risking my life over it. Nope. They are a clump of cells.