90% of Children with Down Syndrome are Aborted

Off Topic Politics & World Issues
921

[quote]bigflamer wrote:

[quote]kamui wrote:
No.
We are rhetorically comparing human tissue to a banana.

Brian seriously think this “tissue” is not human, though.

That being said, i’m curious to know why i can’t eat this non-human “collection of cells”.
Brian already “proved” it was devoid of ethical value. But i suppose it still has some nutritionnal value.
That’s protein after all.[/quote]

My point was that human tissue, by and of itself, does not constitute “human life”.

[/quote]

Please do explain one more time, if you don’t mind. What, exactly, is the difference between “human tissue,” and “human life?”

You’ll have to reconcile your pet definitions with those of the dictionary. It’s going to take some explaining. Here is the number one definition of the word “life,” followed by the number one definition of the word “tissue” from dictionary.com. The rhetorical arc kamui and I have followed so far is perfectly in line with both of these:

[i][life] 1. the condition that distinguishes organisms from inorganic objects and dead organisms, being manifested by growth through metabolism, reproduction, and the power of adaptation to environment through changes originating internally.

[tissue] 1. Biology . an aggregate of similar cells and cell products forming a definite kind of structural material with a specific function, in a multicellular organism.[/i]

Notice the final clause of the “life” definition, not contained in the one for “tissue.”

My fingernails are not “life.” They will not continue to grow in the absence of me. A fetus is a self-contained organism, with its own metabolism, unique genetic code and the ability to adapt to its environment through changes originating internally. So no matter how many cells a human organism has, that organism is its own individual life form. YOU were once that organism. You were not a chunk of tissue that was suddenly, magically infused with “life” (but not a SOUL, by golly!) at some point after 3 months from the time of your conception.

And you can drop the religious jabs. I may be a Catholic, but kamui is anything but and we are here espousing the exact same argument. It’s not our problem that you are so inept and insecure in your convictions that you have to resort to logical fallacies in lieu of actual points.

922

And here’s a logic game for bigflamer, though anyone is welcome to play. First, note the following:

Now, if the above is true, then you should have no ethical problem with the sale of a jar of pickled human fingernails. It may sound gross, but hey, my grandfather was a first generation American of German descent, and he used to eat head cheese and pickled pigs’ feet, so who am I to judge, right?

It should also logically follow, though, from your statements above, that you should also have no ethical problem with the sale of a jar of pickled human fetuses (say, procured from abortions). So long as they are all under 3 months or a certain amount of cells, bon apetit, no? They go great with beer and peanuts as a bar snack!

If not, why not?

923

[quote]ZEB wrote:

[quote]kneedragger79 wrote:
Attached is my child, her name is Elizabeth = D Her shirt says “Who’s cuter than me?” jajaja[/quote]

That is one very cute little baby!
[/quote]

X2 and thanks for the CD suggestions, I’ll look into those!

924

[quote]kamui wrote:

[quote]bigflamer wrote:

[quote]kamui wrote:
No.
We are rhetorically comparing human tissue to a banana.

Brian seriously think this “tissue” is not human, though.

That being said, i’m curious to know why i can’t eat this non-human “collection of cells”.
Brian already “proved” it was devoid of ethical value. But i suppose it still has some nutritionnal value.
That’s protein after all.[/quote]

My point was that human tissue, by and of itself, does not constitute “human life”. I’ve made this point ad nauseam in other similar discussions. Do you believe otherwise? Do you believe that all human tissue should be raised to title of “human life”?

And if you’re into cannibalism, then by all means, eat up…
[/quote]

Biologically ? a fetus, not matter how old it is, is a living organism belonging to the homo sapiens specie. Ie : an human being.

Philosophically ?.
I suppose you can always give a narrower meaning to “human life”.
It’s pretty convenient if you want to deny the intrinsic ethical value of some human beings.
But it’s pretty arbitrary too. And dangerous.

That being said, why is cannibalism wrong again ?

Why should i respect dead bodies more than fetuses ?
“No more an human life” is somehow superior to “not yet an human life” ?

How comes that i can destroy a fetus but that i can’t eat it ?
Eating a “collection of cells” is somehow worst than wasting it ?
[/quote]

Not to mention that the embryo is an individual organism, not simply tissue. An organism = life. A human female carries a human embryo. A human life (organism).

925

Alright BrianHanson, I will try very hard to lead you through this post. Honestly. Please read the points I bring forth and if you have a question, please don’t hesitate to ask.

[quote]BrianHanson wrote:
kneedragger,

Your questions, obviously out of order

  1. I never said YOU have an issue with funding programs for the disabled, in fact I stated in my original post that my issue is with those people.[/quote] I refuse to argue a case for others. I will however argue for the position I have. Please do not believe you know and understand why I am against abortion. I am against abortion simply because innocent children are slaughtered in the name of “convenience.” Would you let some people kill other people, like tear our friends apart, limb by limb and then crush their skulls? How about finally sucking up their remnants through a tube and flushed down a drain? Should we rip our fellow humans apart because they are simply THOUGHT to be less than a complete person?

Look in any modern embryology and you will find the following definition: I am paraphrasing here From the earliest moments of conception, the unborn are complete, distinct, whole and living human beings.

[quote]2. I was stating my opinion on abortion and how I personally wish it were legislated, in my ideal world there would be no abortions, however we do not live in my ideal world.[/quote] Why should any abortion be legislated against? Because they can feel pain that a doctor can verify? Well, watch the most recent video I posted. Around eight weeks under an ultrasound, the child will move around as they grow and develop. The ObGyn from my wife’s pregnancy said that after watching a fetus move around, there is no way you could deny they are alive, even at such an early stage of development. Science continually proves life at earlier and earlier stages. The beginning is at conception. Before conception you have nothing but two different types of human reproductive cells. Never once does the human embryo change from something prior to something different at the end of pregnancy.

[quote]3. Not all abortions are convenience abortions, what if the pregnancy will result in the death of the mother? Is that convenience? Is the life of the fetus more valuable than the life of the mother?[/quote] Completely wrong! Every single abortion is based purely on convenience. You cite maternal morbidity. This is a horrible claim on your part as maternal morbidity occurs in countries where there is a lack of medical care, like the savannahs of Africa. I found zero cases of this in America for the last decade. Here is the site I did find - http://www.ispub.com/journal/the-internet-journal-of-health/volume-3-number-2/reproductive-health-the-issues-of-maternal-morbidity-and-mortality.html - The case can be convincingly made that the mother is less valuable than the infant’s. Ask a mother who has even one child and she will likely say their own lives are nothing compared to that of her children.

[quote]4. I think that abortion as birth control is reprehensible, I also think that the majority of people against abortion are also the people clamoring for lower taxes and slashing programs like food stamps and WIC, you can’t take care of unwanted children for free.[/quote] I have never made this argument and I have never even met someone like you describe.

[quote]5. 12-13 weeks is only arbitrary in the sense that a fetus is not viable for another two months, but I think 12 weeks is enough time to make an informed decision. You seem to think that I believe late term abortions are acceptable, I do not.[/quote] An abortion at any stage, at any arbitrary line is wrong! The activities that create life are all understood and well known; if a person does not want to become pregnant then the steps to guarantee not having a pregnancy need to be pursued. Sterilization processes are one of those ways. If a person wants to save pregnancy for a later time, then abstinence is your answer. Why should a person be given a chance to abort a life after partaking in an activity known to create life, be given an opt-out option after a life is created? Once a person partakes in an activity knowing full well what could happen because of nature, you can never make a case that they should be given a do-over, negating their choice to partake in said activity.

[quote]6. If science proved that “life” begins at conception they need better lawyers to argue their case.[/quote] Science has proved life begins at conception, but arguments still exist because of other reasons. If anything was that simple, this world would be a far better place. It’s more politics than law. There is far too much money to be made for the abortion industry to shut it down. Planned Parenthood made “$1,009.6 million” dollars that would be an excess of one trillion dollars from a non-profit in '09-'10. Source - http://www.lifeissues.org/pp/report_09-10.pdf - though PP touts the fact they are non-profit.

[quote]7. If I grow a thumb in a lab would you call that a human being? It is the same as a newly formed fetus really, no brain, no lungs, heart, expressions, emotions etc. Tissue is not what makes a human being, tissue makes part of a human being.[/quote] Your lab-created thumb is nothing like the newly formed fetus, a human in early stages with all of the components to be a self-sustaining human life. Please read the following paragraph. The cells that are created at the moment of conception are actually traveling to do the jobs they are intended to do. The cells that make up the neural canal, just as one example, all travel to specific regions of the embryo and they multiply and multiply until another job can be performed. How does this happen? The best scientists in the world can only make a guess as to how this happens, but it is a guess none the less. The cells that make up the different organs and tissues are predetermined to where and when they will be the cells we recognize, but only after they grow numerous and large enough. The cells of an embryo literally cannot be switched around if the cell body is in a simpler form, like as a blastocyst. - When Does Life Begin? Dr. Fritz Baumgartner explains - This site offers many claims to the points you bring up, BrianHanson. Please read the page if I failed to explain anything further or if I was confusing.

[quote]8. How many disabled people do I know? Lots, I was a Voc Rehab counselor at the VA, dealing with disabled veterans. Plus I spent 6 weeks in a wheelchair and underwent 14 surgeries after an accident involving a helicopter, me and gravity, I have more metal in me than a KIA Optima. I said nothing disparaging about the disabled, I said that if people want to defend them ( i.e. the unborn disabled) a good way to do that is to fund programs that help parents care for their disabled children.[/quote] You believe parents should have the OPTION, in other words you believe they should have a CHOICE in the matter of a mentally disabled person. The CONVENIENCE of not having a child who is difficult to care for. If you honestly thought I was talking about veterans being disabled in an abortion thread, I apologize profusely. I am talking about the excuse people often used to justify the abortion of their disabled child.

Wait a moment! One thing, how is the VA funded? By our government. Then at the very top of this post, you are quoted and referring to “funding programs for the disabled” and never once did you use the noun of children. I’m not making a case for or against governmental programs. Please try not to confuse anything I say. In this thread I talk about ending the infant genocide, currently acceptable in this country, one that makes the Nazi reign seem like playtime with an insignificant bully.

Do you consider yourself to be human? If so, when did that humanity begin? At a certain week of development, or were you ALWAYS a human, from conception? Your claims infer that you were once a inhuman parasite inside your mother, not any different than a thumb created in a laboratory and less alive than a glob of tissue. When you look at your own children, do you see previous parasites that just happened to magically become human one day within the womb, or do you see them as distinct people? A parasite is a different species; there is no animal that changes species during their development. To claim any human was once a parasite is to cheapen human life as parasitic rather than perceiving the potential we all have.

926

From another thread :

[quote]i do not dispute that a healthy 12 week fetus can grow into a viable baby in 8-10 more weeks, and i have not asked once for more abortions, i have in fact hoped for less (none would be optimal), my initial argument was not about abortion it was about funding for services for children with disabilities, it appears that my statement for an increase in that funding was harder to argue against than calling me a baby killing monster that likes to rip the limbs off of unborn children.

Here is what I want (and what a lot of less militant pro-choice folks want), if your side would say " we will vote to make sure that all of the children born with disabilities and all of the unwanted, neglected abandoned and abused children are funded and supported for as long as necessary (18 for healthy kids, death for severely disabled kids)"

I would happily hop over to your side of the aisle on this issue (except in the case of rape and the mothers life in danger) and support a ban on all other abortions. The problem is that in todays political climate that will never happen.[/quote]

As Cortes mentioned it the usual “religious jabs” won’t work with me (i’m an atheist). But the political/economical one won’t work either. (i’m french, and as such, i’m beyond the far left).
I’m perfectly ok with astronomically high fundings and spendings.

Now, if you really hoped for less abortion you should argue for its depenalization (in some or all circumstances), not for its legalization.

You could say something along this lin :
“Abortion is the killing of an human being, and as such it’s a extremely bad thing that need to be prohibited by the law. But actively prosecuting it didn’t solved anything and would only make things worst”.
I would not entirely agree, but it would make at least a little bit of sense.

On the other hand :
“Abortion is not the killing of an human being because a 3 month old fetus is not human” doesn’t make any sense.
This rhetoric is too contrived to be taken seriously.

927

kneedragger,

“if you honestly thought I was talking about veterans being disabled in an abortion thread, I apologize profusely. I am talking about the excuse people often used to justify the abortion of their disabled child.”

  • you asked how many disabled people I know, people with TBI’s from shrapnel, people missing arms and legs (or all of them), burned, blind, unable to speak etc. the VA takes care of them, we do not have a similar program in place for regular old people with disabilities. don’t confuse the issue by trying to diminish the disabilities of soldiers, their disabilities are just as real.

“n this thread I talk about ending the infant genocide, currently acceptable in this country, one that makes the Nazi reign seem like playtime with an insignificant bully.”

  • it is not infant genocide, and it pales in comparison to the Nazi regime. genocide is defined as “the deliberate and systematic extermination of a national, racial, political, or cultural group.” framing abortion as genocide is disingenuous and sensationalizing, it is not true. Nobody is trying to abort every child, that is where you tend to veer off course.

“The case can be convincingly made that the mother is less valuable than the infant’s. Ask a mother who has even one child and she will likely say their own lives are nothing compared to that of her children.”

  • That is a completely flawed argument, I would burn down the whole world and roast marshmallows to save my kids, but emotion doesn’t make an argument it makes a soundbyte.

“You cite maternal morbidity. This is a horrible claim on your part as maternal morbidity occurs in countries where there is a lack of medical care, like the savannahs of Africa. I found zero cases of this in America for the last decade”

  • Seriously? You found nothing? Okay how about this strokes, heart attacks, aortic dissection, ectopic (tubal) pregnancies, eclampsia (sp?) and a number of others . But there is also this which doesn’t break it down by cause but:
    “The number in 2005 in the United States was 11 in 100,000, a decline by two orders of magnitude,[11] although that figure has begun to rise in recent years, having nearly tripled over the decade up to 2010 in California.[15] A maternal mortality rate for the U.S. of 24 per 100,000 was reported for 2008.[16] This change might not actually reflect an increase, due to a change in reporting methods by the CDC in 1999.[1”

This is allowing of course for all of the women that had abortions for what were considered life threatening conditions (as listed above).

“I have never made this argument and I have never even met someone like you describe.”

-I assumed that you vote Republican, if I was wrong I apologize. The GOP party has been busy defunding programs aimed at helping people with disabilities lead normal lives. This lack of funding has led to closing agencies, and in some cases a return to the institutional model, a model that strips away dignity and independence from those least able to care for themselves.

I am not arguing for the merits of abortion. My original post was about funding for care of PWD after their primary care giver is gone.

928

kamui,

i find it hard to believe that anyone is still arguing this. i have made my stance clear. also i have not made any religious jabs (that i am aware of), but i have been the target of them.

929

Excellent post and B r i a n will be incapable of answering much of this as none of it was covered in his stand pat 1990’s answers book.

At this point after reading many of his posts I’ve come to the conclusion that he thinks the way he does because that is always the way he has thought. And since it has gone unchallenged for so long he feels that he is correct regardless of the current facts presented by you and others.

930

Why do people even start topics in this area? The vast majority of this site is VERY conservative and if anyone ever represents a different view they are instantly attacked. You can continue to try and force your moral beliefs on others but I’m very thankful our country doesn’t work like that.

I am curious though if everyone here that is against abortion is also against the death penalty as it too is the taking of a human life. (Real question not sarcasm)

How about those of us that were/are military? Up to a point it can be argued that during an abortion the cells/fetus/baby wouldn’t feel pain in death but I can promise you the people getting killed in wars feel a lot of pain.

Are the above to examples justified killings but a woman who was raped and didn’t want to have her rapist baby immoral?

Sorry that this was off topic from the original topic but the thread was already derailed before I got here :slight_smile:

931

[quote]bigflamer wrote:

[quote]BrianHanson wrote:
Kneedragger,

BrianHanson wrote:Fine if you think it’s okay for birth control I won’t argue the point.

Cortes never made that claim. Please read a post and understand the points before you reply.

  • kneedragger I suggest you do the same. I stated that abortion should not be used for birth control, his question “why not?” can be interpreted in two distinct ways, I am bored with answering the same questions so I chose option B, where he supports it as birth control and was challenging me, its’ not that hard to follow really, if you folks want to twist my words why won’t I twist yours?

Kneedragger-
12-13 weeks is not a viable fetus that’s why. In fact 23 weeks is generally considered the minimum, I stand by 3 months because you are not killing something that could live. Simple again.

Kneedragger in regards to your last several points, since I do not consider a 3 month old fetus a human (and neither do the majority of physicians, ethicists, scientists etc.) I do not see how I am ignoring the weakest members of society. I hope that partial birth abortionis banned evrywhere, I would like to see a more stringent set of guidelines for abortion (regarding convenience abortions etc) and I would hope that we would develop a better set of preventative measure (more birth control availability since we can’t stop all the sex). My reference to social programs for people with disabilities was targeted at the right wing folks that are against abortion, gay adoption, and spending money to help take care of societies cast-offs.

[/quote]

BrianHanson…Good luck in trying to convince Zeb and the others on your points; you’ll find that they are absolutely unwilling to move from the position of “at the moment of conception it’s human life”. They believe that even an eight cell zygote is “human life”, so there’s virtually NO chance of moving them on their positions. Their positions are religiously driven (although they will falsely deny that), and I know how hard it is to argue with someone driven by blind faith.

I’ve loosely been following these threads, and I must commend you on your efforts though; arguing with a social conservative is like trying to convince the sun to rise in west and set in the east. If you’re lucky, Zeb will get mad and put you on ignore. lol[/quote]

Oh it’s easy to convince us… All you have to do is prove that the unborn child is not a human life. That’s all there is to it. There is not a single solitary shred of evidence that the human in utero is anything other than a human life. If you have contrary evidence, then bring it. It’s so simple, it’s ridiculous.

932

[quote]BrianHanson wrote:
bigflamer,

it’s all giving me a headache.[/quote]

It sucks to be wrong and then act like you’re right. It certainly is a painful proposition.

933

[quote]ZEB wrote:
Excellent post and B r i a n will be incapable of answering much of this as none of it was covered in his stand pat 1990’s answers book.

At this point after reading many of his posts I’ve come to the conclusion that he thinks the way he does because that is always the way he has thought. And since it has gone unchallenged for so long he feels that he is correct regardless of the current facts presented by you and others.

[/quote]

If all you got is slogans and meaningless words, you’re not going to make good points. My latest favorite is the “War against women”. That may be the dumbest shit I ever heard. So by this logic, if you believe based on evidence and scientific fact, that the fetal human is a human being and you are against the killing of human beings, that makes you hate women too, because that makes total sense. You’re against killing people, therefore you hate women! And they wonder why the logic fails? Geez.

934

[quote]CrewPierce wrote:
Why do people even start topics in this area? The vast majority of this site is VERY conservative and if anyone ever represents a different view they are instantly attacked. You can continue to try and force your moral beliefs on others but I’m very thankful our country doesn’t work like that.
[/quote]
Don’t look now, but you just posted here.

I am. But 1.2 million > 24, so I am focusing on the numbers. When there are 24 abortions per year then I will focus on the death penalty more.

War is bad, but it still kills less than abortion. Casualties from all the wars that the U.S. has been involved in does not equal one year’s worth of abortions in this country.

Only if she kills it.

935

[quote]pat wrote:

[quote]CrewPierce wrote:
Why do people even start topics in this area? The vast majority of this site is VERY conservative and if anyone ever represents a different view they are instantly attacked. You can continue to try and force your moral beliefs on others but I’m very thankful our country doesn’t work like that.
[/quote]
Don’t look now, but you just posted here.

I am. But 1.2 million > 24, so I am focusing on the numbers. When there are 24 abortions per year then I will focus on the death penalty more.

War is bad, but it still kills less than abortion. Casualties from all the wars that the U.S. has been involved in does not equal one year’s worth of abortions in this country.

Only if she kills it.

[/quote]
Hey in all fairness I said start TOPICS, I did not start any topics here just replied to one!

So you are against any killing of any kind then I take it? I mean that’s great in theory but that isn’t the world we live in. We don’t live in Utopia and tough decisions need to be made.

I do respect your thoughts though and good point about the numbers and putting the problems as you see them in that order. I did not realize the number of abortions was so high until you said that and I looked it up.

936

[quote]CrewPierce wrote:
I did not realize the number of abortions was so high until you said that and I looked it up.[/quote]

And why didn’t you realize that abortions were that high? It’s because the main stream liberal media does not talk about it. The dirty little secret is that abortion is being used as just one more form of birth control. The left says, “we must keep abortion legal because of rape, incest and the life of the mother.” But the facts are about 99% of all abortions are abortions of convenience.

And if you take the time to read those who try to defend abortion on this thread you’ll soon see that their arguments are weak and in fact many times non-existent. Mere run of the mill talking points that have been around for over 30 years. And when you peel back the layers there is no substance to them.

937

To be honest, this video tugged quite hard on my heart strings.

Boy Inspires Kids - Kids Inspire Us All

Matt has Spastic Cerebral Palsy, but opted to run in Field Day at Colonial Hills Elementary School despite being given the option to sit it out and despite the incredible challenge of his disability. What transpires is a boy who is filled with determination and a school of children who spontaneously come together and inspire Matt and everyone of us to do and be better.

938

Pat addressed these points already yet I am a different person and I will provide my views.

[quote]CrewPierce wrote:
Why do people even start topics in this area?[/quote] My fellow man and women are slaughtered. [quote]The vast majority of this site is VERY conservative and if anyone ever represents a different view they are instantly attacked.[/quote] I have never attacked someone. Maybe years ago, but I have matured. [quote]You can continue to try and force your moral beliefs on others but I’m very thankful our country doesn’t work like that.[/quote] Murder is wrong in America. I oppose the killing of other people.

[quote]I am curious though if everyone here that is against abortion is also against the death penalty as it too is the taking of a human life. (Real question not sarcasm)[/quote] I am against killing of anyone, even OBL. No one person has a right to judge and kill another human!

[quote]How about those of us that were/are military?[/quote] They choose to serve in the military. [quote]Up to a point it can be argued that during an abortion the cells/fetus/baby wouldn’t feel pain in death but I can promise you the people getting killed in wars feel a lot of pain.[/quote] I can promise you that a fetus does in fact feel pain. Current technology has limits in what can be observed. The future will do nothing but show the case for life.

[quote]Are the above to examples justified killings but a woman who was raped and didn’t want to have her rapist baby immoral?[/quote] How is a violent act made better through perpetuation of a violent act?

[quote]Sorry that this was off topic from the original topic but the thread was already derailed before I got here :)[/quote] You don’t need to apologize as long a you are honest in your attempt to seek answers. That is just my opinion ; )

939

Pat,

I don’t need to convince you to say or do or believe anything, I merely stated my opinion (multiple times). I have my opinion, you have yours. I could sit here and tell you your opinions are shit, but whats the use . Of course you can always say “You’re wrong, baby killer asshole etc.” whatever, but it doesn’t change a thing does it? At the end of the day we will both have our own way of looking at things.

940

I have an idea and could be wrong, but I honestly think you are trying to be difficult! Please read and comprehend my post before you ramble on about a disabled person being a veteran.

[quote]BrianHanson wrote:
kneedragger,
. . . .

  • you asked how many disabled people I know, people with TBI’s from shrapnel, people missing arms and legs (or all of them), burned, blind, unable to speak etc.[/quote] I have never once brought up a disabled person being a veteran. When I refer to a disabled person in THIS ABORTION thread I am talking about children. Please stop talking about veterans, you are doing nothing but side-stepping the topic we are discussing. [quote]the VA takes care of them, we do not have a similar program in place for regular old people with disabilities.[/quote] Social Security, Medicare, Medicade etc [quote]don’t confuse the issue by trying to diminish the disabilities of soldiers; their disabilities are just as real.[/quote] I have never once diminished the disabilities of soldiers here or in the real world. Please, please understand that. From this point on, when I talk about a disabled person, I am talking about CHILDREN and nothing else and no one else. I am talking about the option of abortion being sold to the parents of these children at many clinics around America. The parents who choose to let their children live realize that these children have no less value than any other healthy child. Previously when I asked you about if you knew any disabled people I was talking about disabled CHILDREN and I shall ask again. Do you personally know any disabled children NOT veterans!? The kids that have different genetic traits or a difficult pregnancy or anything to cause a handicap, they are all permanently affected because of the disability. They are ALL just as human as you or I.

[quote]- it is not infant genocide, and it pales in comparison to the Nazi regime.[/quote] The generally accepted number of lives lost due to the Nazi reign was eleven million lives. In no way do I want to diminish the enormous magnitude of the victimization and murder of the people lost during WWII. I do not repudiate, nor want to diminish in any way the people slaughtered during that time. - http://holocaustforgotten.com/ - However the lives lost since Roe v Wade is just under [u]FIFTY FIVE MILLION[/u] children, embryos who were poisoned OR torn apart, literally limb by limb and then sucked out through a glass tube. Those numbers mean that one abortion occurs every 30 seconds in America. [quote]genocide is defined as “the deliberate and systematic extermination of a national, racial, political, or cultural group.”[/quote] So now are you saying the unborn lack traits that quantify them as a UNIQUE group? I am honestly asking, how can they NOT be considered in a unique group? [quote]framing abortion as genocide is disingenuous and sensationalizing, it is not true.[/quote] I am not following your thinking. Are the numbers wrong when comparing one life with the next? Please help me understand what makes me wrong. [quote]Nobody is trying to abort every child, that is where you tend to veer off course.[/quote] So Barry is not trying to make sex selective abortion in this country commonplace? Read the material on this page, this was posted yesterday and therefore totally relevant. - http://townhall.com/tipsheet/katiepavlich/2012/05/31/president_obama_opposes_bill_that_would_ban_sex_selective_abortion -

[quote]- That is a completely flawed argument, I would burn down the whole world and roast marshmallows to save my kids, but emotion doesn’t make an argument it makes a soundbyte.[/quote] Your argument is based on nothing but EMOTION! What makes a person have their child shredded up and thrown away? Emotion because they are scared, maybe ashamed and want to hide their choice, interferes with plans of life timing, college etc., intimidated by perceived medical reasons, etc. Here EMOTION is defined, so you understand the case you fail to make. - EMOTION Definition & Usage Examples | Dictionary.com -

and a number of others . But there is also this which doesn’t break it down by cause but:[/quote] This does not even touch the national numbers. I have no idea why these women died due to pregnancy. Your numbers are varying from seven years old down to two years. In addition you never even provide a link so I can read the figures myself. I do not take the word of many people at face-value alone, without back-up. [quote]“The number in 2005 in the United States was 11 in 100,000, a decline by two orders of magnitude,[11] although that figure has begun to rise in recent years, having nearly tripled over the decade up to 2010 in California.[15] A maternal mortality rate for the U.S. of 24 per 100,000 was reported for 2008.[16] This change might not actually reflect an increase, due to a change in reporting methods by the CDC in 1999.[1”

This is allowing of course for all of the women that had abortions for what were considered life threatening conditions (as listed above).[/quote] How do you know this? A source would be appreciated when you make a claim.

[quote]-I assumed that you vote Republican, if I was wrong I apologize.[/quote] Pigeon hole much? I never vote according to party lines, I vote according to qualifications. [quote]The GOP party has been busy defunding programs aimed at helping people with disabilities lead normal lives.[/quote] Leave veterans with disabilities alone for once, please. I am talking about children. Then this is your claim but you have never provided an example of a program that helped people, then it was being shut down. Please provide a source for the claims you make. [quote]This lack of funding has led to closing agencies,[/quote] Where? Which agency? [quote]and in some cases a return to the institutional model, a model that strips away dignity and independence from those least able to care for themselves.[/quote] You will have to forgive me, please define what you mean by industrial model?

[quote]I am not arguing for the merits of abortion. My original post was about funding for care of PWD after their primary care giver is gone.[/quote] Is the acronym People With Disabilities? Again you lost me. Please extrapolate more.

BrianHanson - you have never addressed this point. Please do so this time. Prove to me with current science the statement does not have merit. [i][u] From the moment of CONCEPTION the unborn are in fact whole, distinct, living human beings.[/i][/u]

edited - I was incorrect in calling the unborn a national group. When in fact they are a group that spans the world. My apologies for using the wrong adjective. Instead I changed the term to UNIQUE. Again, my apologies.