Live Birth Abortion is On the Table — America Enters New Stage of Radicalization


Cirrus

Member
Joined
Jul 11, 2018
Messages
357
Yes, I do and both of them are disabled. One has CP that affects all 4 limbs and he has the mentality of a 3 year old and is barely able to speak. The other is on the Autism Spectrum.
I am sorry that your family has endured this struggle. I cannot even imagine what you have had to go through.

Well I wouldn't say it's okay to murder a 10 year old. The point of live birth abortion is to say that after the 'whatever' trimester it's still okay to abort up until "THIS" point now.... because a lot of children are born with problems we can't see until they are born and some of them are bad enough to warrant a live abortion - but it's not to start killing children because they break their legs, like c'mon we're not horses here. There are circumstances that would warrant a live abortion and that's all we're discussing and advocating for; all of those other situations you come up with like killing some 10 year old kid because he got some insane nerve disease that crippled him is just crazy talk.
The problem is that it opens the door and pushes the needle further until, as @twisted476 noted, we're back in a time of eugenics. Even the most "airtight" laws can be open to interpretation by the courts.
 

Kairos

Active Member
Joined
Mar 31, 2018
Messages
618
Liberals inconvenience me. Maybe we should start culling them. If babies are fair game for killing for convenience, then surely the liberals that murder babies are fair game too.
 

Einstein

Temporal Engineer
Joined
Dec 24, 2004
Messages
3,191
Liberals inconvenience me. Maybe we should start culling them. If babies are fair game for killing for convenience, then surely the liberals that murder babies are fair game too.
I totally agree with you. But I don't think we should be humane at all in this decision. Just pure blind prejudicial hatred for liberals should be the driving force.
 

Element115

Junior Member
Joined
Jun 25, 2018
Messages
75
I'm pretty sure the argument isn't a matter of CONVENIENCE like OH, my baby is disabled? Great, now I gotta pay for special treatments blah blah - let's just kill it. NO. That's fucking psychotic. The circumstance is, oh... my child is born with a debilitating disease and it's going to only live for about 5-7 years and it's going to be in pain its entire life and we have no cure or treatment - THEN you can choose to humanely put it down - not for financial reasons, but for HUMANITY reasons - you do not want to bring a child into a world of insufferable pain. Most people have not been in a situation of that type of pain and are unable to comprehend the amount of suffering one goes through. There are poisons made by plants that will cause so much pain to a human (neurotoxin) that they want to kill themselves for relief. The bottom line is there are absolutely situations which warrant abortion past the fetal stage which is "illegal".

The way the law is now, is basically saying I don't care if your child suffers, legally you have to keep it alive and keep treating it until it dies.

Not to mention in the old days (pre-technology) this was part of natural selection. How is it "natural" to keep something alive which isn't meant to be alive and reproduce? Our gene pool is becoming tainted to say the least thanks to modern medicine and the general consensus to keep everything alive no matter what - even if it's against someone's WILL.

There is a famous case of the man who's DNA melted. He was exposed to as much radiation as Hiroshima in a split second. He begged for them to kill him but they kept him alive and kept experimenting on him so they could gauge the effects of extreme radiation damage. Ultimately he died but it was unjust to keep a man alive who wanted to die since he was in so much pain and not even medicine could ease his ailment. There is no difference between that and torture but somehow this form of torture is legal. Why? Who knows, maybe the pursuit of knowledge makes it into a pure venture? Maybe that's what the abortion law needs, some pursuit of knowledge to make it all okay for the pro lifers.

Late termination of pregnancy (TOP),[2] also known as postviability abortion,[3] or simply abortion[4] is a termination of pregnancy that is performed during a later stage of pregnancy. Late termination of pregnancy is more controversial than abortion in general because it results in the death of a fetus that is more developed and sometimes able to survive independently. Given the complex, gradual nature of human fetal development, the definition of "late" in this context is not precise, and different medical publications have discussed the varying gestational age points that can be involved.
 

Kairos

Active Member
Joined
Mar 31, 2018
Messages
618
Stop the canards. The vast majority (and I mean virtually all) of abortions are performed for convenience.
 

Cirrus

Member
Joined
Jul 11, 2018
Messages
357
Late termination of pregnancy (TOP),[2] also known as postviability abortion,[3] or simply abortion[4] is a termination of pregnancy that is performed during a later stage of pregnancy. Late termination of pregnancy is more controversial than abortion in general because it results in the death of a fetus that is more developed and sometimes able to survive independently. Given the complex, gradual nature of human fetal development, the definition of "late" in this context is not precise, and different medical publications have discussed the varying gestational age points that can be involved.
Thanks, Wikipedia. Maybe I'll just go in and change that paragraph for fun. Find a different source.

I understand your argument, but, I don't think you understand the fallout. In the US, Roe v. Wade and its progeny has been debated for years despite the SCOTUS trying to set a "line" as to when abortion can occur but then allowed the states to make their own determinations (to a certain extent) for any abortions past the "line". When you move the "line" further down the road, you end up opening the door to other "arguments" when a late-term pregnancy can be aborted. That's not a door we should open as a society.
 

Element115

Junior Member
Joined
Jun 25, 2018
Messages
75
Thanks, Wikipedia. Maybe I'll just go in and change that paragraph for fun. Find a different source.

I understand your argument, but, I don't think you understand the fallout. In the US, Roe v. Wade and its progeny has been debated for years despite the SCOTUS trying to set a "line" as to when abortion can occur but then allowed the states to make their own determinations (to a certain extent) for any abortions past the "line". When you move the "line" further down the road, you end up opening the door to other "arguments" when a late-term pregnancy can be aborted. That's not a door we should open as a society.
We treat people better than most animals but we are just animals. Maybe the line should start with all life or not be applied at all.
 

dizzie

New Member
Joined
Feb 7, 2019
Messages
13
I totally agree with you. But I don't think we should be humane at all in this decision. Just pure blind prejudicial hatred for liberals should be the driving force.
HI, Einstein! Just to clarify - is your remark facetious or do you truly condone blind prejudicial hatred? I would be surprised at the latter, having read your posts back on the TTI forums when they were active. But, who knows? Perhaps such topics never arose there in those days. I hope all is well.
 

Top