After viability which is generally accepted as 23-24 weeks unless the mother's life is in danger.How far along do you think is too long to allow an abortion?
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
After viability which is generally accepted as 23-24 weeks unless the mother's life is in danger.How far along do you think is too long to allow an abortion?
No, my point is that if we get to a point where there are tax breaks and credits for a fetus, then the law has decided it’s a person and there would be no argument for paying it back. It’s stupid.No one has ever argued whether your 10yo is or isn't a person. That is not the same for a fetus. How far are many willing to go when they're changing the accepted rules.
To term
They become "miscarriages".
A.K.A. "natural abortions"
A.K.A. "God's abortions"
No more than the sperm cells that end up in the tip of the condom.
What about frozen embryos left over from couples using in vitro fertilization? Should all of them be required to be implanted?
They do if abortion/killing fetuses is criminalized. If a woman can’t get a medical procedure to end it, but ends it in other ways, is that really going to fly? It opens the door for investigation of every miscarriage.These have no relevance for the abortion debate.
Collectively, 2/3 of Americans believe that Roe v Wade should remain as it is. But keep ignoring that inconvenient truth
But this is what’s dangerous about the “at fertilization” bills. We have no way of knowing when fertilization happens - we learn about that later when there’s a positive pregnancy test, which is typically at 4-8 weeks. “At fertilization” is not enforceable, but does give avenue for people to fill in that time gap on their own. Miscarry at 8 weeks? What were you doing during weeks 1-4 that might have caused this?I disagree. A sperm cell cannot become a person.
2) if the fetus is a human, shouldn’t it be allowed to have a SSN? You can have one assigned at birth?
4) it doesnt matter if anybody depends on the fetus for financial earnings. A life insurance policy can be taken out on babies and children. Why wouldnt you extend that to a fetus?
3) If a parent claims a fetus as a dependent and receives a tax benefit from that, should they be required to pay back that benefit if the fetus doesn't survive to birth? Same with the $3600 Child Tax Credit for qualifying filers?
Every time I bring up embryos created for in vitro fertilization in an abortion thread none of the pro life posters ever respond. Seriously this has to be an issue if some states make laws holding that life begins at conception. Will some states not allow the practice of in vitro fertilization? Why are none of the pro lifers outraged that 1000s of babies are stored in freezers?
They do if abortion/killing fetuses is criminalized. If a woman can’t get a medical procedure to end it, but ends it in other ways, is that really going to fly? It opens the door for investigation of every miscarriage.
But this is what’s dangerous about the “at fertilization” bills. We have no way of knowing when fertilization happens - we learn about that later when there’s a positive pregnancy test, which is typically at 4-8 weeks. “At fertilization” is not enforceable, but does give avenue for people to fill in that time gap on their own. Miscarry at 8 weeks? What were you doing during weeks 1-4 that might have caused this?
Why the nuance? Why do you not consider their disposal murder, but you consider the abortion of an embryo from a woman murder?No, and I realize this is very nuanced. But I do not consider them to be humans.
Sure…..and could there be a murder/manslaughter difference? Girl parties a lot and doesn’t stop until she finds out she’s pregnant and miscarries at 7-8 weeks, is there a manslaughter/negligent homicide angle on her drinking/drugs between fertilization and the miscarriage?Well, yes, if a miscarriage is somehow purposely induced, that would be illegal if abortion was illegal.
Why the nuance? Why do you not consider their disposal murder, but you consider the abortion of an embryo from a woman murder?
No. No mens rea.Sure…..and could there be a murder/manslaughter difference? Girl parties a lot and doesn’t stop until she finds out she’s pregnant and miscarries at 7-8 weeks, is there a manslaughter/negligent homicide angle on her drinking/drugs between fertilization and the miscarriage?
One, the frozen embryo, was created on purpose to produce a life. The other was created by accident. It seems to me that if the accident is a life surely the purposely fertilized embryo is a life as well. Earlier in the thread you spoke against abortion in the case of rape or incest because "it's still a human protected by the constitution", why are the frozen embryos not "human?"Because one (embryo in a woman) will likely be a birthed child someday, but the other (frozen embryo) will not be unless further action (implantation) occurs.
Again, nuanced and messy, but something adults must be able to process.
Has the story in the OP been reported by anyone other than slate?
couldn’t find anything.
You’d think national media would pick it up.
So without the mother the fetus has no chance to eventually become a human. What right does the fetus have to force a woman to risk their life for their well being? Where else in our laws on one person forced to risk their physical life to support another human?Because one (embryo in a woman) will likely be a birthed child someday, but the other (frozen embryo) will not be unless further action (implantation) occurs.
Again, nuanced and messy, but something adults must be able to process.
One, the frozen embryo, was created on purpose to produce a life. The other was created by accident. It seems to me that if the accident is a life surely the purposely fertilized embryo is a life as well. Earlier in the thread you spoke against abortion in the case of rape or incest because "it's still a human protected by the constitution", why are the frozen embryos not "human?"
So without the mother the fetus has no chance to eventually become a human. What right does the fetus have to force a woman to risk their life for their well being? Where else in our laws on one person forced to risk their physical life to support another human?
Do you support social services that help a mother who may not have family or financial resources to take care of a kid by providing paid maternity leave, healthcare and things like daycare so the mother can finish school or go to a job or you one of these “protect the most vulnerable only if they are inside the womb” peopleThe woman, in most cases, chose the risk of bearing the child.
Now, with rape and incest, no. In that case, we the people have an issue bligstion to protect the life of the most vulnerable.
Messy stuff.
When I said by accident I meant the women seeking an abortion were most likely not trying to create a person.Not at all clear the embryo in the woman was “created by accident”. In many cases, two people are trying to create a person.
Again, this is messy and there is not an absolutely irrefutable case to be made either way on the frozen embryo. I have stated my reasoning for it earlier.
Do you support social services that help a mother who may not have family or financial resources to take care of a kid by providing paid maternity leave, healthcare and things like daycare so the mother can finish school or go to a job or you one of these “protect the most vulnerable only if they are inside the womb” people
So you are one of those “protect the vulnerable if they are only in the womb” people.In general, yes. To an infinite degree by a country already $30 Trillion in debt, no.
I'm not trying to be a jerk, but it seems to me your position on this issue is more about punishing those that were "sexually irresponsible" than believing an embryo is human therefore entitled to constitutional protection.
So you are one of those “protect the vulnerable if they are only in the womb” people.
Im a “bailout people, not corporations” personAre you a “there are infinite resources” person?
No. In many cases "the woman" did not choose the risk of bearing a child. She chose the risk of having sex. Which, at the crux, is what this is all about.The woman, in most cases, chose the risk of bearing the child.
Now, with rape and incest, no. In that case, we the people have an obligation to protect the life of the most vulnerable.
Messy stuff.
Are you against birth control too? If not, would you join a protest laws that limit birth control?
Im a “bailout people, not corporations” person
i am a person who wonders why the people who cry “how are we going to pay for it” for anything that would benefit the american people never question how we are going to pay for spending when it comes to sending money to defense contractors and sending money to subsidize israels military while they give their citizens universal healthcare person.
and most importantly, i am a “not force a woman to carry a pregnancy to term if they are not mature enough, responsible enough and dont have a stabile home or financial life” person
If it's entirely the latter you should be as concerned about the human rights of frozen embryos as those in the womb.You are incorrect here.
My motivation is entirely the latter.
If it's entirely the latter you should be as concerned about the human rights of frozen embryos as those in the womb.
You mentioned protecting the vulnerable inside the womb and said that you dont support protecting the vulnerable outside the womb because of 30 trillion im debt.Too much generalization here.
The “vulnerable” outside the womb who are indeed vulnerable are paid for by taxpayers. Section 8, food stamps, disability, Medicaid, and other local programs like food banks and churches fund them. It’s a myth that we just say fo to the poor in this country.You mentioned protecting the vulnerable inside the womb and said that you dont support protecting the vulnerable outside the womb because of 30 trillion im debt.
i just mentioned a few of the things that we have no problem soending a ton of money on and it never gets questions on how it will be paid for like it does when it comes to helping people in our country.
so i will just chalk you down as one of those people who says “f**k you, youre on your own” when you want someone forced to carry a pregnancy to term.
The lines are not logical, that's why they're not clear.I addressed that earlier.
No clear lines available here.
You mentioned protecting the vulnerable inside the womb and said that you dont support protecting the vulnerable outside the womb because of 30 trillion im debt.
THAT'S BARBARIC!!!