At what point do you think abortion should be illegal?

[Horseman 1,499]

Every night, all weekend. 

[TimHauck 1,789]

35 minutes ago, Gladiators said:

I didn’t see an option for whether the mother was fully vaccinated for COVID 19.

Huh?

[jerryskids 5,149]

29 minutes ago, TimHauck said:

The father shouldn’t have to pay anything if they agreed with the decision?

What do you think, Tim?

[TimHauck 1,789]

6 minutes ago, jerryskids said:

What do you think, Tim?

Under HT’s hypothetical?  Of course

[KSB2424 3,082]

12 Weeks.  I am personally against it, but look at abortion as a necessary evil in modern society.  I have a similar thought process to the 1990's Democrats before they went all woke and identity politics crazy.

Abortion should be legal, but rare and early.   Pregnancy is very time sensitive.....the oven is on and the cake is baking.  First Trimester is enough time to figure it out, especially in times of rape and incest, etc.  

Mind you most of Europe is at like 14 or 15 weeks.  Only the U.K. and America are the one's who view it as a form of birth control and talk about things like 24 weeks or full term nonsense.  

[Hardcore troubadour 12,552]

1 hour ago, TimHauck said:

Under HT’s hypothetical?  Of course

What’s the hypothetical? If you get pregnant in 2022 that’s on you. Your body, your responsibility. When a body begins to grow inside you then it’s about more than you.  Just acknowledge what you are doing, not falling for some notion that it’s not a baby it’s a zygote blah blah. It’s life. The very beginning of life. Just know what you’re actually doing before you do it.  What’s so hard about that? You people act like there is no downside for the woman when she has an abortion. There is for many. Lifelong regret.  

[RaiderHaters Revenge 3,563]

First trimester for me 

[TimHauck 1,789]

6 hours ago, Hardcore troubadour said:

What’s the hypothetical? If you get pregnant in 2022 that’s on you. Your body, your responsibility. When a body begins to grow inside you then it’s about more than you.  Just acknowledge what you are doing, not falling for some notion that it’s not a baby it’s a zygote blah blah. It’s life. The very beginning of life. Just know what you’re actually doing before you do it.  What’s so hard about that? You people act like there is no downside for the woman when she has an abortion. There is for many. Lifelong regret.  

So the man has no responsibility in getting a woman pregnant?

[craftsman 1,045]

4 minutes ago, TimHauck said:

So the man has no responsibility in getting a woman pregnant?

Only if he rapes her is he guilty.  Otherwise it's 50/50. And if abortion is legal, they should both have a say.

[TimHauck 1,789]

1 minute ago, craftsman said:

Only if he rapes her. Otherwise it's 50/50. And if abortion is legal, they should both have a say.

Agree.  I was just responding to HT’s comment that “the woman” should pay for it under his hypothetical proposal.  If the man is involved in the decision, he should too

[craftsman 1,045]

1 minute ago, TimHauck said:

Agree.  I was just responding to HT’s comment that “the woman” should pay for it under his hypothetical proposal.  If the man is involved in the decision, he should too

My body my choice does not include the father. 

Killing children is murder in states that don't allow abortion. Currently, only the woman should go to prison as the fathers have no say. 

[Sean Mooney 1,184]

Up to 20 weeks. The halfway point of a traditional pregnancy term seems reasonable.

Been lucky enough I've never been in the position to have to consider one because I did my best- along with my various sexual partners- to protect against it.

I personally would not have advocated for an abortion anyway however, I'm intelligent enough to understand that laws and policies should not be made based on my personal opinion. They should be based on what does the most for the health and safety and goodwill of the people involved. 

[TimHauck 1,789]

12 hours ago, Brad GLuckman said:

That's not an answer. The OP specifically stated no copouts like "let the states decide". What is your view on the issue?

Not surprised that @craftsman continues to dodge the question.  But I guess we can now put him down for at least less than 20 weeks.

[Sean Mooney 1,184]

4 minutes ago, TimHauck said:

Not surprised that @craftsman continues to dodge the question.  But I guess we can now put him down for at least less than 20 weeks.

Craftsman can't read as evidenced by his response to my post. Perhaps he doesn't know the question you are asking. Maybe this forum needs audio posting so he can at least listen.

[Hardcore troubadour 12,552]

So we all agree it’s ending a life. Everyone always knew/knows this, that’s why the left and the abortion industrial complex  have to say it’s not a baby, can’t live outside the womb and other nonsense to obfuscate that fact. . And the Hacks of the world dutifully repeat those absurdities, as instructed. At least none here are dumb enough to argue that it’s not ending life. 

[TimHauck 1,789]

5 minutes ago, Hardcore troubadour said:

So we all agree it’s ending a life. Everyone always knew/knows this, that’s why the left and the abortion industrial complex  have to say it’s not a baby, can’t live outside the womb and other nonsense to obfuscate that fact. . And the Hacks of the world dutifully repeat those absurdities, as instructed. At least none here are dumb enough to argue that it’s not ending life. 

Is it murder?

[TimHauck 1,789]

19 minutes ago, Hardcore troubadour said:

So we all agree it’s ending a life. Everyone always knew/knows this, that’s why the left and the abortion industrial complex  have to say it’s not a baby, can’t live outside the womb and other nonsense to obfuscate that fact. . And the Hacks of the world dutifully repeat those absurdities, as instructed. At least none here are dumb enough to argue that it’s not ending life. 

They can’t live outside the womb before 20 weeks, so while it is alive, it is still part of the woman’s body..  Which is why IMO it should ultimately be the mother’s choice up to somewhere around that point. 

[TimHauck 1,789]

1 hour ago, Sean Mooney said:

Craftsman can't read as evidenced by his response to my post. Perhaps he doesn't know the question you are asking. Maybe this forum needs audio posting so he can at least listen.

Oh he knows the question.  Just purposely avoiding it.  Also doesn’t seem to care that Lindsey Graham holds the complete opposite opinion as him.  Especially since Graham isn’t helping the Republicans’ chances in November.

[Hardcore troubadour 12,552]

43 minutes ago, TimHauck said:

Is it murder?

What is the matter with you? Are you so desperate to make a point you have to go in the weeds to make a one? Is taking someone off of life support, ending the life, murder? 

[Hardcore troubadour 12,552]

29 minutes ago, TimHauck said:

They can’t live outside the womb before 20 weeks, so while it is alive, it is still part of the woman’s body..  Which is why IMO it should ultimately be the mother’s choice up to somewhere around that point. 

So you’re good with ending a life. Fine. Glad we cleared that up. 

[TimHauck 1,789]

20 minutes ago, Hardcore troubadour said:

What is the matter with you? Are you so desperate to make a point you have to go in the weeds to make a one? Is taking someone off of life support, ending the life, murder? 

Part of my motivation for starting this thread is because if someone thinks abortion is murder, or in @craftsman’s words which he has now used multiple times, “killing a child,” IMO to be consistent they should also think it should be illegal.  And unless they voted for at fertilization, then I would take it to mean they think it isn’t murder prior to the point of it being illegal. 

Thank you for your answer.  No, taking someone off life support is not murder, and is probably a good comparison to abortion.   

[TimHauck 1,789]

Also, just in case anyone needed more proof that craftsman is Utilit (I know I know, you don’t since it’s so obvious)

 

[TimHauck 1,789]

29 minutes ago, Hardcore troubadour said:

So you’re good with ending a life. Fine. Glad we cleared that up. 

It’s a life, but it’s not a child.

[Gepetto 976]

Why should a pregnant woman get to kill her unborn baby?

[5-Points 2,715]

12 hours ago, TimHauck said:

The father shouldn’t have to pay anything if they agreed with the decision?

Her body, her choice, her responsibility. 

[Hardcore troubadour 12,552]

If she can prove who the father is, then yeah, he should pay half. How can you prove it? 

[jerryskids 5,149]

1 hour ago, TimHauck said:

Is it murder?

What do you think, Tim?

[TimHauck 1,789]

2 minutes ago, jerryskids said:

What do you think, Tim?

Before ~20 weeks, no

[jerryskids 5,149]

1 hour ago, TimHauck said:

They can’t live outside the womb before 20 weeks, so while it is alive, it is still part of the woman’s body..  Which is why IMO it should ultimately be the mother’s choice up to somewhere around that point. 

When the point comes (and it's when, not if, IMO) that a baby can live outside of the womb uterus (womb isn't a real word or it may cause emotions or some such crap, as per @dogcows and ACOG), will you think it is murder at any point of the pregnancy?

I personally think it already is tantamount to murder if it is done for convenience at any point of the pregnancy.  Legally, I recognize that that is not feasible though.

[Gepetto 976]

https://oag.ca.gov/system/files/attachments/press-docs/Penal Code 187 Legal Alert.pdf

Penal Code section 187, subdivision (a) defines murder as “the unlawful killing of a human being, or a fetus, with malice aforethought.” The statute excludes lawful abortions or acts by a physician to save the life of “the mother of the fetus.” (Pen. Code, § 187, subd. (b)(1) and (b)(2).) It also expressly excludes any act that “was solicited, aided, abetted, or consented to by the mother of the fetus.” (Pen. Code, § 187, subd. (b)(3).) Because persons necessarily consent to their own voluntary actions, the exclusion in subdivision (b) means that persons cannot be criminally liable for their own actions or inactions that are alleged to have caused the death of their fetus. Purpose: The Legislature broadened the scope of section 187 to include the unlawful killing of a fetus in specific response to the California Supreme Court’s decision in Keeler v. Superior Court (1970) 2 Cal.3d 619. In that case, the defendant was charged with murder after he attacked his pregnant exwife, intentionally causing the death of her fetus. The Keeler Court held that the unlawful “killing of a ‘human being’” did not encompass the killing of a fetus. In amending section 187, the Legislature intended to criminalize only third-party violence against pregnant persons resulting in fetal death. There is no evidence of legislative intent to extend criminal liability to pregnant persons.

[GobbleDog 815]

Birth. It's not a "pizza" until it comes out of the oven.

[Gepetto 976]

17 In that same plea hearing, the prosecutor explained what facts would have been proven 18 "had this matter proceeded to trial." (Ex. A at p. 68.) According to the prosecutor, the facts 19 would have shown that Perez was "pregnant with an unborn child." (Ibid.) "When the child was 20 eventually delivered, the child was stirnborn." (Ibid.) The "primary contributing factors" to the 21 fetus's death was "asphyxiation from a placental detachment and a toxic level of 22 methamphetamine within the fetus." (Ibid.) The court found a "factual basis" for the murder 23 charge and concluded that the plea "falls within the meaning of People v. West."

[dogcows 1,029]

1 minute ago, jerryskids said:

When the point comes (and it's when, not if, IMO) that a baby can live outside of the womb uterus (womb isn't a real word or it may cause emotions or some such crap, as per @dogcows and ACOG), will you think it is murder at any point of the pregnancy?

You can use whatever terminology you want. As I recall, the discussion began with a critique of Stacey Abrams for using terminology you didn’t agree with - hence me linking to some medical terminology as reference.

Quote

I personally think it already is tantamount to murder if it is done for convenience at any point of the pregnancy.  Legally, I recognize that that is not feasible though.

It is already illegal at any point of the pregnancy in many states. So I guess it is legally feasible, but quite unpopular and dangerous to women with complications during pregnancy.

[Hardcore troubadour 12,552]

Life begins at conception. But it’s not a baby or a fetus yet. But it is life. If you let laws define your morals then you’ll be out of morals pretty fast. Women live with the moral ramifications of abortion, not legal ones. 

[TimHauck 1,789]

39 minutes ago, jerryskids said:

When the point comes (and it's when, not if, IMO) that a baby can live outside of the womb uterus (womb isn't a real word or it may cause emotions or some such crap, as per @dogcows and ACOG), will you think it is murder at any point of the pregnancy?

I personally think it already is tantamount to murder if it is done for convenience at any point of the pregnancy.  Legally, I recognize that that is not feasible though.

Are you saying it’s only a matter of time before a 1 week old fetus can live outside the womb/uterus?  If that’s the case, then yes I’d be willing to move up my answer. “Follow the science!”

I’d probably say it should always be legal before 6 weeks or so though.  Many women don’t even know they’re pregnant before about 4 weeks.

[TimHauck 1,789]

I noticed you didn’t vote in the poll, @jerryskids

[jerryskids 5,149]

1 hour ago, dogcows said:

You can use whatever terminology you want. As I recall, the discussion began with a critique of Stacey Abrams for using terminology you didn’t agree with - hence me linking to some medical terminology as reference.

It is already illegal at any point of the pregnancy in many states. So I guess it is legally feasible, but quite unpopular and dangerous to women with complications during pregnancy.

I already provided you the dictionary definition of "womb."  If you like I can do the legwork for the definition of "need" as well, referring back to the ACOG "how to defend abortion through words" link.

Words matter, dogcows.  They matter...  

[jerryskids 5,149]

29 minutes ago, TimHauck said:

Are you saying it’s only a matter of time before a 1 week old fetus can live outside the womb/uterus?  If that’s the case, then yes I’d be willing to move up my answer. “Follow the science!”

I’d probably say it should always be legal before 6 weeks or so though.  Many women don’t even know they’re pregnant before about 4 weeks.

Yes, I'm saying that.

25 minutes ago, TimHauck said:

I noticed you didn’t vote in the poll, @jerryskids

Funny these are posted together.  The reason I haven't voted is because I'd like to determine a fair amount of time to recognize and confirm your pregnancy, and then a fair time on top of that to make the decision.  In my mind that is around 12 weeks which is on the border of your choices.

IMO in the extreme example of rape which the Left likes to use as the basis for all abortions, I would expect the victim to be testing themselves somewhat regularly after the event.  It's the unintended oopsies which might slip a month.

[dogcows 1,029]

6 minutes ago, jerryskids said:

I already provided you the dictionary definition of "womb."  If you like I can do the legwork for the definition of "need" as well, referring back to the ACOG "how to defend abortion through words" link.

Words matter, dogcows.  They matter...  

You never did point out what Stacey said that was inaccurate. Instead you got more and more tangential until you found some technicality on which you could say “I win.” Congrats. 

[Hardcore troubadour 12,552]

I guess when a woman finds out she’s pregnant, she’s pregnant. Pregnant With a growing life.