[This message has been edited by randye (edited 05-05-2022).]

quote Originally posted by Patrick: Imagine that... women not only wish to retain control of their own bodies, but they want the right to vote as well. Uppity b!tches!

This is a crazy World we live in. On one hand we are being told that people can change gender at will and that words are violence AND so is the lack of words, BUT when people say babies lives matter and that they have voices outside the mothers body,...they are all upset. This simple fact is that the baby inside a woman can't grow in a man who believes he is a woman AND that baby growing inside a woman's body isn't her body. It is a separate person with it's own brain and nervous system. This is exactly why the mother can't feel the pain of a hurting baby inside her. She can't tell what it thinks or if it is uncomfortable. She can't tell if the baby is happy or sad, even at it's very primal and immature stage of life, they still have measurable brain activity that suggests that something is going on continously within the baby. And the mother is totally unaware of how the person within her is doing. The mother cant tell if the baby is sick or suffering, or if the baby is healthy (normal) or deformed. The mother can't tell if the baby is awake or sleeping but can feel it moving sometimes. This is all evidence that proves that the baby is a separate person from the mother and that she is carrying the baby till it can live outside her and into this harsh World.
Should a woman have the right to do what she wants with her body? I believe that they already do and have had that right for a LONG time. They just don't have the right to murder a baby that is in her body.

[This message has been edited by Rickady88GT (edited 05-06-2022).]

An embryo is a human and deserves protection against abortion from the earliest moment of conception. The fertilization of the human egg by the human sperm. Or the implantation of the embryo into the wall of the uterus. Protected against abortion, if there is a detectable heartbeat signal (an electrical signal that's detectable from outside the womb) even before there is a heart or the beginnings of a heart inside the embryo. And no exceptions of any kind. It cannot be argued that there was forcible rape. It cannot be argued that there was incest. It does not matter how young the pregnant woman (14 years?) even in a case where it can be argued that there was forcible rape or incest. "Abortion Denied."

If the reporting that I have been seeing is accurate, many of the red state laws against abortion have been written in this way. Is that what they want, or is that a strategy of extremism, staking out a negotiating position—a "stalking horse" as it were—with the idea of stepping back a small ways in some future and perhaps nationwide (putative new federal legislation on abortion) compromise?

Would there be an exception allowing abortions for pregnancy because of human parthenogenesis?

[This message has been edited by rinselberg (edited 05-06-2022).]

[This message has been edited by olejoedad (edited 05-06-2022).]