Bag said:

---

cisgenderedAggie said:

---

Bag said:

---

aggiebq03+ said:

---

Bag said:

---

Quote:

---

I'm following. Still haven't seen you answer when it's murder and when you think it's just ridding a clump of cells, in your humble opinion.

---

I do not believe that if a woman decides at any stage of a pregnancy to terminate her pregnancy that she is guilty of murder, clear enough?

---

Is she still considered pregnant if the baby is outside her body with the umbilical cord attached?

---

all the gotchas make me laugh.

I can play too, is the morning after pill murder?

---

These aren't gotchas. Your first post on this thread was closer to a gotcha. You said this:

Quote:

---

I do not believe that if a woman decides at any stage of a pregnancy to terminate her pregnancy that she is guilty of murder, clear enough?

---

This is the absolute core of the issue. All other items build from it. A line must be drawn somewhere that states definitively when a woman no longer has the right to decide that human life may no longer progress. You stated this is not murder. Most that you are arguing with have been clear on how they see that. You are avoiding the central point by not defining the exact point at which murder can be a legitimate claim.

---

ok, got it, so you believe that the use of the Morning After Pill is murder, I believe that ANY late stage abortion is not murder

---

Bag said:

---

cisgenderedAggie said:

---

Bag said:

---

aggiebq03+ said:

---

Bag said:

---

Quote:

---

I'm following. Still haven't seen you answer when it's murder and when you think it's just ridding a clump of cells, in your humble opinion.

---

I do not believe that if a woman decides at any stage of a pregnancy to terminate her pregnancy that she is guilty of murder, clear enough?

---

Is she still considered pregnant if the baby is outside her body with the umbilical cord attached?

---

all the gotchas make me laugh.

I can play too, is the morning after pill murder?

---

These aren't gotchas. Your first post on this thread was closer to a gotcha. You said this:

Quote:

---

I do not believe that if a woman decides at any stage of a pregnancy to terminate her pregnancy that she is guilty of murder, clear enough?

---

This is the absolute core of the issue. All other items build from it. A line must be drawn somewhere that states definitively when a woman no longer has the right to decide that human life may no longer progress. You stated this is not murder. Most that you are arguing with have been clear on how they see that. You are avoiding the central point by not defining the exact point at which murder can be a legitimate claim.

---

ok, got it, so you believe that the use of the Morning After Pill is murder, I believe that ANY late stage abortion is not murder

---

aTmAg said:

---

Aggrad08 said:

---

Why is that better. That much anesthesia is likely to induce death anyway?

Why put the mother through that. Why give birth to that baby and drug it to the max and watch it die?

---

Because it's more kind than pulling it apart with forceps?

And how deformed is deformed enough? Should they be able to kill babies with one arm? ******s? Red heads?

---

Quote:

---

So are you pro life but not okay with a murder charge?

---

Tanya 93 said:

---

Bag said:

---

cisgenderedAggie said:

---

Bag said:

---

aggiebq03+ said:

---

Bag said:

---

Quote:

---

I'm following. Still haven't seen you answer when it's murder and when you think it's just ridding a clump of cells, in your humble opinion.

---

I do not believe that if a woman decides at any stage of a pregnancy to terminate her pregnancy that she is guilty of murder, clear enough?

---

Is she still considered pregnant if the baby is outside her body with the umbilical cord attached?

---

all the gotchas make me laugh.

I can play too, is the morning after pill murder?

---

These aren't gotchas. Your first post on this thread was closer to a gotcha. You said this:

Quote:

---

I do not believe that if a woman decides at any stage of a pregnancy to terminate her pregnancy that she is guilty of murder, clear enough?

---

This is the absolute core of the issue. All other items build from it. A line must be drawn somewhere that states definitively when a woman no longer has the right to decide that human life may no longer progress. You stated this is not murder. Most that you are arguing with have been clear on how they see that. You are avoiding the central point by not defining the exact point at which murder can be a legitimate claim.

---

ok, got it, so you believe that the use of the Morning After Pill is murder, I believe that ANY late stage abortion is not murder

---

If the baby can survive with technology, it is murder to abort the child. Have it removed.

She no longer has to be pregnant.

---

Tanya 93 said:

---

If the baby can survive with technology, it is murder to abort the child. Have it removed.

She no longer has to be pregnant.

---

Aggrad08 said:

---

aTmAg said:

---

Aggrad08 said:

---

Why is that better. That much anesthesia is likely to induce death anyway?

Why put the mother through that. Why give birth to that baby and drug it to the max and watch it die?

---

Because it's more kind than pulling it apart with forceps?

And how deformed is deformed enough? Should they be able to kill babies with one arm? ******s? Red heads?

---

How is that more kind? A 13-16 week abortion causing more suffering than you are describing is absurd.

I'd say a deformity or set of deformities for which there is no medical hope of survival

---

Tanya 93 said:

---

Bag said:

---

cisgenderedAggie said:

---

Bag said:

---

aggiebq03+ said:

---

Bag said:

---

Quote:

---

I'm following. Still haven't seen you answer when it's murder and when you think it's just ridding a clump of cells, in your humble opinion.

---

I do not believe that if a woman decides at any stage of a pregnancy to terminate her pregnancy that she is guilty of murder, clear enough?

---

Is she still considered pregnant if the baby is outside her body with the umbilical cord attached?

---

all the gotchas make me laugh.

I can play too, is the morning after pill murder?

---

These aren't gotchas. Your first post on this thread was closer to a gotcha. You said this:

Quote:

---

I do not believe that if a woman decides at any stage of a pregnancy to terminate her pregnancy that she is guilty of murder, clear enough?

---

This is the absolute core of the issue. All other items build from it. A line must be drawn somewhere that states definitively when a woman no longer has the right to decide that human life may no longer progress. You stated this is not murder. Most that you are arguing with have been clear on how they see that. You are avoiding the central point by not defining the exact point at which murder can be a legitimate claim.

---

ok, got it, so you believe that the use of the Morning After Pill is murder, I believe that ANY late stage abortion is not murder

---

If the baby can survive with technology, it is murder to abort the child. Have it removed.

She no longer has to be pregnant.

---

Bag said:

---

Quote:

---

So are you pro life but not okay with a murder charge?

---

I am pro choice, opposed to late stage abortion, but not in favor of murder charges under any circumstance.

---

Bag said:

---

Quote:

---

So are you pro life but not okay with a murder charge?

---

I am pro choice, opposed to late stage abortion, but not in favor of murder charges under any circumstance.

---

Bag said:

---

Tanya 93 said:

---

Bag said:

---

cisgenderedAggie said:

---

Bag said:

---

aggiebq03+ said:

---

Bag said:

---

Quote:

---

I'm following. Still haven't seen you answer when it's murder and when you think it's just ridding a clump of cells, in your humble opinion.

---

I do not believe that if a woman decides at any stage of a pregnancy to terminate her pregnancy that she is guilty of murder, clear enough?

---

Is she still considered pregnant if the baby is outside her body with the umbilical cord attached?

---

all the gotchas make me laugh.

I can play too, is the morning after pill murder?

---

These aren't gotchas. Your first post on this thread was closer to a gotcha. You said this:

Quote:

---

I do not believe that if a woman decides at any stage of a pregnancy to terminate her pregnancy that she is guilty of murder, clear enough?

---

This is the absolute core of the issue. All other items build from it. A line must be drawn somewhere that states definitively when a woman no longer has the right to decide that human life may no longer progress. You stated this is not murder. Most that you are arguing with have been clear on how they see that. You are avoiding the central point by not defining the exact point at which murder can be a legitimate claim.

---

ok, got it, so you believe that the use of the Morning After Pill is murder, I believe that ANY late stage abortion is not murder

---

If the baby can survive with technology, it is murder to abort the child. Have it removed.

She no longer has to be pregnant.

---

so, by your line of thought, what is murder today was not 20 years ago? interesting

---

aggiebq03+ said:

---

Bag said:

---

Quote:

---

So are you pro life but not okay with a murder charge?

---

I am pro choice, opposed to late stage abortion, but not in favor of murder charges under any circumstance.

---

You don't sound opposed to late stage abortion if you are okay with a woman terminating pregnancy up to birth.

Now I see why you've resisted answering direct and simple questions. If you start doing that people can point to your answers not lining up together.

---

Bag said:

---

aggiebq03+ said:

---

Bag said:

---

Quote:

---

So are you pro life but not okay with a murder charge?

---

I am pro choice, opposed to late stage abortion, but not in favor of murder charges under any circumstance.

---

You don't sound opposed to late stage abortion if you are okay with a woman terminating pregnancy up to birth.

Now I see why you've resisted answering direct and simple questions. If you start doing that people can point to your answers not lining up together.

---

I DIDNT SAY I WAS OK WITH IT, I FIND IT REPULSIVE, BUT I DO NOT BELIEVE THAT SHE SHOULD BE CHARGED WITH MURDER ESP IF IT IS PERFORMED IN A STATE WHERE IT IS LEGAL

---

Bag said:

---

aggiebq03+ said:

---

Bag said:

---

Quote:

---

So are you pro life but not okay with a murder charge?

---

I am pro choice, opposed to late stage abortion, but not in favor of murder charges under any circumstance.

---

You don't sound opposed to late stage abortion if you are okay with a woman terminating pregnancy up to birth.

Now I see why you've resisted answering direct and simple questions. If you start doing that people can point to your answers not lining up together.

---

I DIDNT SAY I WAS OK WITH IT, I FIND IT REPULSIVE, BUT I DO NOT BELIEVE THAT SHE SHOULD BE CHARGED WITH MURDER ESP IF IT IS PERFORMED IN A STATE WHERE IT IS LEGAL

---

aTmAg said:

---

Aggrad08 said:

---

aTmAg said:

---

Aggrad08 said:

---

Why is that better. That much anesthesia is likely to induce death anyway?

Why put the mother through that. Why give birth to that baby and drug it to the max and watch it die?

---

Because it's more kind than pulling it apart with forceps?

And how deformed is deformed enough? Should they be able to kill babies with one arm? ******s? Red heads?

---

How is that more kind? A 13-16 week abortion causing more suffering than you are describing is absurd.

I'd say a deformity or set of deformities for which there is no medical hope of survival

---

Getting dismembered piece by piece is less suffering than sleeping under anesthesia? Are you serious?

---

Bag said:

---

post birth, all of this is semantics

---

Tanya 93 said:

---

Bag said:

---

Tanya 93 said:

---

Bag said:

---

cisgenderedAggie said:

---

Bag said:

---

aggiebq03+ said:

---

Bag said:

---

Quote:

---

I'm following. Still haven't seen you answer when it's murder and when you think it's just ridding a clump of cells, in your humble opinion.

---

I do not believe that if a woman decides at any stage of a pregnancy to terminate her pregnancy that she is guilty of murder, clear enough?

---

Is she still considered pregnant if the baby is outside her body with the umbilical cord attached?

---

all the gotchas make me laugh.

I can play too, is the morning after pill murder?

---

These aren't gotchas. Your first post on this thread was closer to a gotcha. You said this:

Quote:

---

I do not believe that if a woman decides at any stage of a pregnancy to terminate her pregnancy that she is guilty of murder, clear enough?

---

This is the absolute core of the issue. All other items build from it. A line must be drawn somewhere that states definitively when a woman no longer has the right to decide that human life may no longer progress. You stated this is not murder. Most that you are arguing with have been clear on how they see that. You are avoiding the central point by not defining the exact point at which murder can be a legitimate claim.

---

ok, got it, so you believe that the use of the Morning After Pill is murder, I believe that ANY late stage abortion is not murder

---

If the baby can survive with technology, it is murder to abort the child. Have it removed.

She no longer has to be pregnant.

---

so, by your line of thought, what is murder today was not 20 years ago? interesting

---

Things change as technology does.

No, she should not have an abortion at 24 weeks because she changed her mind.

Do a C section.

Give the baby a chance and find adoptive parents.

But you probably do not want to go down this wormhole with me on abortion.

---

Aggrad08 said:

---

aTmAg said:

---

Aggrad08 said:

---

aTmAg said:

---

Aggrad08 said:

---

Why is that better. That much anesthesia is likely to induce death anyway?

Why put the mother through that. Why give birth to that baby and drug it to the max and watch it die?

---

Because it's more kind than pulling it apart with forceps?

And how deformed is deformed enough? Should they be able to kill babies with one arm? ******s? Red heads?

---

How is that more kind? A 13-16 week abortion causing more suffering than you are describing is absurd.

I'd say a deformity or set of deformities for which there is no medical hope of survival

---

Getting dismembered piece by piece is less suffering than sleeping under anesthesia? Are you serious?

---

This is a false description of abortion at that stage

---

Bag said:

---

post birth, all of this is semantics

---

cisgenderedAggie said:

---

Bag said:

---

post birth, all of this is semantics

---

It is not semantics, it is the core of the issue.

So one minute after. Now, when is birth completed? Crowning? Once the feet exit the vagina? Crying? Once the fetus is no longer attached to the placenta?

---

aTmAg said:

---

So if the law in a state were changed to allow 5 year olds to be shot in the street, would you spend 9 pages calling people wackos for wanting the shooter to go to jail while occasionally tossing in that you found shooting 5 years olds "repulsive"?

---

aggiebq03+ said:

---

cisgenderedAggie said:

---

Bag said:

---

post birth, all of this is semantics

---

It is not semantics, it is the core of the issue.

So one minute after. Now, when is birth completed? Crowning? Once the feet exit the vagina? Crying? Once the fetus is no longer attached to the placenta?

---

Well Bag has refused to answer me about 5 times on this, doubting you'll get a direct response either. That would back him (or her) into a corner and all.

---

aggiebq03+ said:

---

cisgenderedAggie said:

---

Bag said:

---

post birth, all of this is semantics

---

It is not semantics, it is the core of the issue.

So one minute after. Now, when is birth completed? Crowning? Once the feet exit the vagina? Crying? Once the fetus is no longer attached to the placenta?

---

Well Bag has refused to answer me about 5 times on this, doubting you'll get a direct response either. That would back him (or her) into a corner and all.

---

Bag said:

---

aTmAg said:

---

So if the law in a state were changed to allow 5 year olds to be shot in the street, would you spend 9 pages calling people wackos for wanting the shooter to go to jail while occasionally tossing in that you found shooting 5 years olds "repulsive"?

---

This is why we cant have nice things

---

aTmAg said:

---

Aggrad08 said:

---

aTmAg said:

---

Aggrad08 said:

---

aTmAg said:

---

Aggrad08 said:

---

Why is that better. That much anesthesia is likely to induce death anyway?

Why put the mother through that. Why give birth to that baby and drug it to the max and watch it die?

---

Because it's more kind than pulling it apart with forceps?

And how deformed is deformed enough? Should they be able to kill babies with one arm? ******s? Red heads?

---

How is that more kind? A 13-16 week abortion causing more suffering than you are describing is absurd.

I'd say a deformity or set of deformities for which there is no medical hope of survival

---

Getting dismembered piece by piece is less suffering than sleeping under anesthesia? Are you serious?

---

This is a false description of abortion at that stage

---

Still not pleasant by any stretch.

---

Bag said:

---

aggiebq03+ said:

---

cisgenderedAggie said:

---

Bag said:

---

post birth, all of this is semantics

---

It is not semantics, it is the core of the issue.

So one minute after. Now, when is birth completed? Crowning? Once the feet exit the vagina? Crying? Once the fetus is no longer attached to the placenta?

---

Well Bag has refused to answer me about 5 times on this, doubting you'll get a direct response either. That would back him (or her) into a corner and all.

---

I dont have any answer, except to say after the process of birthing a child is complete, but for ****s and giggles I can use detached from the cord, does this change anything?

---

Bag said:

---

aggiebq03+ said:

---

cisgenderedAggie said:

---

Bag said:

---

post birth, all of this is semantics

---

It is not semantics, it is the core of the issue.

So one minute after. Now, when is birth completed? Crowning? Once the feet exit the vagina? Crying? Once the fetus is no longer attached to the placenta?

---

Well Bag has refused to answer me about 5 times on this, doubting you'll get a direct response either. That would back him (or her) into a corner and all.

---

I dont have any answer, except to say after the process of birthing a child is complete, but for ****s and giggles I can use detached from the cord, does this change anything?

---

Bag said:

---

aTmAg said:

---

So if the law in a state were changed to allow 5 year olds to be shot in the street, would you spend 9 pages calling people wackos for wanting the shooter to go to jail while occasionally tossing in that you found shooting 5 years olds "repulsive"?

---

This is why we cant have nice things

---

Aggrad08 said:

---

aTmAg said:

---

Aggrad08 said:

---

aTmAg said:

---

Aggrad08 said:

---

aTmAg said:

---

Aggrad08 said:

---

Why is that better. That much anesthesia is likely to induce death anyway?

Why put the mother through that. Why give birth to that baby and drug it to the max and watch it die?

---

Because it's more kind than pulling it apart with forceps?

And how deformed is deformed enough? Should they be able to kill babies with one arm? ******s? Red heads?

---

How is that more kind? A 13-16 week abortion causing more suffering than you are describing is absurd.

I'd say a deformity or set of deformities for which there is no medical hope of survival

---

Getting dismembered piece by piece is less suffering than sleeping under anesthesia? Are you serious?

---

This is a false description of abortion at that stage

---

Still not pleasant by any stretch.

---

A 2.5 inch fetus with barely developed brain and organs dying extremely quickly vs a full sized baby with much more development (even if in a horrible way) being kept on a guesstimate or fatal dose of anesthesia for hours or days? And that's to blindly assume such a baby isn't actively suffering from these defects in the womb.

It's not even close

---

aggiebq03+ said:

---

Bag said:

---

aggiebq03+ said:

---

cisgenderedAggie said:

---

Bag said:

---

post birth, all of this is semantics

---

It is not semantics, it is the core of the issue.

So one minute after. Now, when is birth completed? Crowning? Once the feet exit the vagina? Crying? Once the fetus is no longer attached to the placenta?

---

Well Bag has refused to answer me about 5 times on this, doubting you'll get a direct response either. That would back him (or her) into a corner and all.

---

I dont have any answer, except to say after the process of birthing a child is complete, but for ****s and giggles I can use detached from the cord, does this change anything?

---

So to be clear, attached at the cord the mother can still "abort" and you don't think it's murder.

Wow.

---

aTmAg said:

---

Bag said:

---

aTmAg said:

---

So if the law in a state were changed to allow 5 year olds to be shot in the street, would you spend 9 pages calling people wackos for wanting the shooter to go to jail while occasionally tossing in that you found shooting 5 years olds "repulsive"?

---

This is why we cant have nice things

---

You avoiding questions that put your ideology to the test is why we can't have nice things?

---