Page 4 of 7 FirstFirst ... 23456 ... LastLast
Results 31 to 40 of 67
Thanks Tree46Thanks

Thread: Abortion On Demand In Ohio, Unless The Fetus Has Down's Syndrome

  1. #31
    Veteran Member TNVolunteer73's Avatar
    Joined
    Nov 2014
    Posts
    29,977
    Thanks
    7718

    From
    TN
    Quote Originally Posted by Czernobog View Post
    Except that is a misuse of the word posterity:

    "POSTERITY -- 1. Descendants; children, children's children, &c. indefinitely; the race that proceeds from the progenitor... -- 2. In a general sense, succeeding generations; opposed to ancestors." An American Dictionary of the English Language, Noah Webster (1828), reprinted by Foundation for American Christian Education (1967).

    posterity


    noun
    mass noun

    1
    All future generations of people.
    ‘the victims' names are recorded for posterity’
    https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/posterity
    the fetus is a member of the FUTURE generation.. in fact the next future generation

    you lose.

  2. #32
    Veteran Member Czernobog's Avatar
    Joined
    Dec 2011
    Posts
    34,651
    Thanks
    17279

    From
    Phoenix, AZ
    Quote Originally Posted by TNVolunteer73 View Post
    posterity


    noun
    mass noun

    1
    All future generations of people.
    ‘the victims' names are recorded for posterity’
    https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/posterity
    the fetus is a member of the FUTURE generation.. in fact the next future generation

    you lose.
    Why? Because you want to misuse the word posterity like you do child? Nope. You can misuse words all you want, your argument is still irrational.
    Thanks from Madeline

  3. #33
    Junior Member
    Joined
    Nov 2014
    Posts
    1,845
    Thanks
    407

    From
    Florida
    Quote Originally Posted by Czernobog View Post
    Just being genetically human is not enough to supersede an actual person's right to their own body. You know what else is genetically human? Cancer. That is medical fact. However, to suggest that is enough to prevent a person the right to remove is is absurd. A fetus is always genetically human, even when it is aborted. So what? That, alone, is meaningless.
    You're saying that baby humans are cancer up until delivery? Feel free to defend that all day. Good luck.

  4. #34
    Junior Member
    Joined
    Nov 2014
    Posts
    1,845
    Thanks
    407

    From
    Florida
    Quote Originally Posted by Madeline View Post
    What possible government interest does the state of Ohio have in forcibly preventing abortions, but ONLY if the baby has Down' s?

    What do you think will happen? Pregnant women will find it extremely hard to get tested -- an aspect of prenatal care already fraught. They'll find it harder to get honest advice from their doctors, who will not risk their medical licenses.

    Nothing whatsoever will benefit the Downs children and adults already living in Ohio.
    It is a remarkable position for a state to take. I certainly don't agree with it. I personally would wrestle with the choice I'm certain. But the pro abortion position that it isn't a baby is BS. It's a baby, or at least a potential baby. It's a very grave decision that only the parents should make, but it is a baby.
    Thanks from Madeline

  5. #35
    Veteran Member Czernobog's Avatar
    Joined
    Dec 2011
    Posts
    34,651
    Thanks
    17279

    From
    Phoenix, AZ
    Quote Originally Posted by Otto Throttle View Post
    You're saying that baby humans are cancer up until delivery? Feel free to defend that all day. Good luck.
    I'm saying no such thing. I am pointing out that merely the fact of being genetically human does not automatically confer some right to exist that supersedes a person's right to make decisions about their bodies. The cancer analogy was just that - an analogy, not a description of a fetus.

  6. #36
    Veteran Member TNVolunteer73's Avatar
    Joined
    Nov 2014
    Posts
    29,977
    Thanks
    7718

    From
    TN
    Quote Originally Posted by Czernobog View Post
    I'm saying no such thing. I am pointing out that merely the fact of being genetically human does not automatically confer some right to exist that supersedes a person's right to make decisions about their bodies. The cancer analogy was just that - an analogy, not a description of a fetus.
    Mission statment of the US Constitution says different.

  7. #37
    Junior Member
    Joined
    Nov 2014
    Posts
    1,845
    Thanks
    407

    From
    Florida
    Quote Originally Posted by Czernobog View Post
    First, that is absurd. This isn't about fucking. This is about control over your body. Second, the OP isn't even about that. The fact is, the specific circumstances involved in the law in question isn't about wanting kids, or not wanting kids. Guess what? Typically, by the time a couple discovers that their fetus has medical issues, they have already decided they wanted kids. This is about finances, and emotional stability, and whether or not a couple can provide for a special needs kid. And, guess what? No one else gets to make that determination for a couple. And how dare anyone presume that they do!!!!!
    You know what? It really is about fucking. People should teach their kids that sex can have the most profound consequences possible, because it can. If you don't want to be faced with it, use a toque.

  8. #38
    Veteran Member TNVolunteer73's Avatar
    Joined
    Nov 2014
    Posts
    29,977
    Thanks
    7718

    From
    TN
    Quote Originally Posted by Czernobog View Post
    Why? Because you want to misuse the word posterity like you do child? Nope. You can misuse words all you want, your argument is still irrational.
    So a fetus is part of the "Future Generation" "Succeeding Generation" "unborn Generation" class, you lose.

  9. #39
    Veteran Member Czernobog's Avatar
    Joined
    Dec 2011
    Posts
    34,651
    Thanks
    17279

    From
    Phoenix, AZ
    Quote Originally Posted by TNVolunteer73 View Post
    Mission statment of the US Constitution says different.
    Not according to Constitutional Law experts. Tell you what. Since you think you know more than the experts, why don't you bring suit using that argument of yours, and see how far you get.

  10. #40
    Veteran Member Czernobog's Avatar
    Joined
    Dec 2011
    Posts
    34,651
    Thanks
    17279

    From
    Phoenix, AZ
    Quote Originally Posted by TNVolunteer73 View Post
    So a fetus is part of the "Future Generation" "Succeeding Generation" "unborn Generation" class, you lose.
    No it's not., It is not a person. Therefore it is not possible for a fetus to be a part of "future generations. Again, if you think you have some brilliant understanding of the Constitution that Constitutional law experts have gotten wrong, you go ahead, bring suit against abortionists, using this argument of yours, and see how far you get.

    Lemme know how that works out for ya.

Page 4 of 7 FirstFirst ... 23456 ... LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 45
    Last Post: 1st October 2015, 07:59 PM
  2. Ohio to pass Down syndrome abortion ban?
    By bajisima in forum Abortion
    Replies: 75
    Last Post: 7th September 2015, 04:31 PM
  3. Replies: 23
    Last Post: 27th March 2015, 03:18 PM
  4. Moms Demand Action Members Call For Murders Of Ohio Open Carry Folks
    By Madeline in forum Political Controversies
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 4th October 2014, 04:48 PM
  5. Texas and Ohio attacking abortion
    By distraff in forum Political Discussion
    Replies: 115
    Last Post: 8th September 2013, 12:12 AM

Tags for this Thread


Facebook Twitter RSS Feed