(13-04-2023, 12:36 AM)dken31 Wrote: "Clump of cells", "foetus", "not actually a baby": these are all just obfuscations to desperately cling to the barbaric notion that it is OK to deliberately kill certain humans for the sake of convenience.
If abortion is OK because "its not yet a baby", why isn't it OK to kill an unwanted newborn baby because "it's not yet a child/adolescent/adult"?
And no "zealots are keen to murder woman". That is hyperbole bordering on the deliberately dishonest. Essentially no one would argue that a mother should have to go through with a pregnancy where doing so will result in the death of the mother and child (e.g. ectopic). And, if you're referring to potential deaths of mothers from dodgy illegal back-alley abortions, does that mean that if a home invader breaks his neck trying to climb through a second story window, they were "murdered" by the homeowner who wouldn't let them through the front door?
That is complete & utter BS. The facts are that in most abortions, a clump of cells is all that is removed.
Right to birthers prefer to ignore that.
Women will invariably die due to being forced to continue with a pregnancy even if its likely to mean that the mother won't survive, & then there's the other fact in that article about the other uses of that particular drug which could also mean more deaths if women not needing an abortion but needing to access that particular drug are now unable to do so thanks to the zealots, who cannot fail to be aware of that.
If that isn't condoning women dying then its an especially fine imitation of precisely that. They are despicable & dishonest people.
(13-04-2023, 06:58 AM)Kenj Wrote: I don't really have any views on this except that men should stay the hell out of this subject and women of the world should make decisions on their own bodies.
Excellent idea...
in order to be old & wise, you must first be young & stupid. (I'm still working on that.)