Ohio passes 'heartbeat' abortion bill

[Halyon]

The trace of a heart beat is a baby. Emotions is still a –fallacy– to you? What are you, but a robot with no remorse nor care for others? No care for the BEAT of a HEART. This, this is whom we fight against.

...no. A heartbeat is a heartbeat...it signifies that the heart is beating. A heart can be kept alive artificially, the brain can't. Brain death is what actually determines if a person is a person, and if that person is alive or not. Your heart can stop, you can be revived, if your brain dies, there's not even a snowball's chance in hell of you coming back. Ever.

[Jotaux]

You have literally zero knowledge of this subject. And yes, you keep whining about empathy, which is just your feelings talking. Thats it, you're basing those thought on your emotions. "Have empathy!" isn't a good argument for basically anything in this realm of conversation.

No, you have literally zero knowledge of this subject and are just using your feelings as fact. You came up with the subjective measure of when a fetus is considered a person which is of course subjective. You will note that I did not mention what I thought of the classification because unlike you I am not going to state my opinion as fact.

My point was that being concerned about the well being of others is empathy, much like it upsets us when someone is killed. That is why your argument of nothing matters if it doesn't affect me is laughable.

[Annoying]

I'm not sure why you keep talking about my feelings as like I said, I am pro choice. So, how did you come up with this arbitrary measure of being able to live outside the womb? Because thats what it is arbitrary. Its a completely subjective measure, it's not in the realm of facts. You are entirely wrong here and stating your feelings as facts. I don't even know how we got to this topic as your argument against empathy was the one I said was laughable.

It's actually the best measure. The real crux of the issue is bodily autonomy. You have the human right to control what happens within your person. Once a fetus can survive outside the womb, they deserve the right to try and live on their own. Before then, your human right to bodily autonomy means you don't have to give free rent inside your body to anything you don't want.
Beyond the point of fetal viability, if they can survive outside and you kick them out, you have to give them the chance to survive.

[Cerus]

Plenty of other animals feel empathy and pain, FYI. Do you believe that the government can control what you can and can't do with your body? I'd hope not, otherwise I could use a kidney right about now.

The government says what you can and can't do with your own body all the time. Drugs, suicide etc. They can even force medical treatment upon you.

It's also quite hypocritical of you to say the government has no right to say what you can or can't do with your own body when it's the very same government giving you the rights to murder another human being. Might want to choose your words more carefully next time.

[Jotaux]

It's actually the best measure. The real crux of the issue is bodily autonomy. You have the human right to control what happens within your person. Once a fetus can survive outside the womb, they deserve the right to try and live on their own. Before then, your human right to bodily autonomy means you don't have to give free rent inside your body to anything you don't want.
Beyond the point of fetal viability, of they can survive outside and you kick them out, you have to give them the chance to survive.

It may be the best measure or it may not, that doesn't change the fact that its an arbitrary measure. To present it as fact is simply dishonest.

[PassingBy]

No, you don't. Most people using BC will not expect to be pregnant, thus they won't test for it until some 'early' signs appear...they appear at like 4-6 weeks if you know what to look for, mainly missing menstruation, and even then, many women have spotty bleeding, which is normal for ovulating...

Unless you want mandatory, weekly pregnancy tests, and I mean the expensive shit, because most easily accessible pregnancy tests aren't accurate until 5-ish weeks...And there are waiting lists for abortions, they don't just sit you down and make you pop a pill immediately on finding out...

I don't want anything.
It is the responsibility of the two people having sex to protect themselves from unwanted pregnancy and STDs.

If you are sexually active - it is your headache to make sure you don't get pregnant.
And the tools available to you now are more than enough to do that, unless you are either sloppy, or just dismiss the risk.

Yes there still is a very small chance that you will still get pregnant while being careful, using proper birth control. But the chance is very very small, and the majority of abortions are made by people that didn't take all the needed precautions.

There are actual medical reasons for having an abortion - danger for the mother's life, pathological damage to the baby. Those, while still controversial, are a reason to make an abortion at later stage.
Laziness and sloppiness are not a reason for that.

It is an ethical question. We are constatntly drawing imaginary lines.
Killing is bad. But if you are killing during a war, protecting your country - it is good.
Killing is bad. But if it is a convicted murderer - it is a needed punishment by the state.
Killing is bad. But if we do it before the baby is X weeks old - it is ok, since it is not technically a human yet.

This line will always be artificial. On the 7th week you can already register brainwaves. While the fetus itself is like 7mm long or smth. Some will say that it is already alive, some will say that it is just a set of cells, but not a human being. By week 12 it is already moving around. By week 13 it, theoretically can feel pain, at least has all the nerves and needed parts of brain for that. At the same time it is still 10cm in size, and can't live outside of mother.

Some people will say that unless it can live by itself - it is not a human being and can be aborted at any time if the woman decides so.
Some people will say that life is created at conception, and even things like plan B is murder.

Abortion should be a last resort, something that is done only when there are no other options to go to. From my point of view abortion should be last resort, something that is used only when there are no other options. When mother's health is at stake, when the baby has no chance of being born viable and healthy, in cases of rape etc.
In other cases there should be other options. Options not involving the society making such a difficult ethical choice.

Birth control, sex ed, opportunities for women to give birth and leave the baby up for adoption etc.

Currently many people view abortion almost as a type of birth control. While sugar coating it with the talks about "woman's right to choose", but forgetting about the rights of the unborn.
Since in case of an abortion, especially one made later in pregnancy, the mother usually faces the inconvenience of carrying the baby and the unpleasant procedure of child birth, while the unborn faces the inconvenience of being killed.

I'd say those are not equal.

A rather peculiar thing in this discussion is that usually pro-abortion people are very anti death penalty, and vice versa people that are "pro life" usually are at the same time pro death penalty. I find it quite funny.

[Public Enemy Truth]

Plenty of other animals feel empathy and pain, FYI. Do you believe that the government can control what you can and can't do with your body? I'd hope not, otherwise I could use a kidney right about now.

Ugh, poor moderation attitude. We cannot give birth unto kidneys, we are given but two at birth & hopefully they last throughout. Poor, terrible analogy in absolutely appalling taste.

If I find consuming broccoli deeply upsetting, is that justification for banning the consumption of broccoli?

Comparing babies to broccoli? Murdering them is not enough, now you must eat them? Another terrible analogy.

Emotion is fallacy to robots.

Emotion partially drives the rule of law. Should we end the life of an elderly person just to save resources? What if this elderly life struggling was of your own family? I suppose to robots whom have no emotions, it would not matter.

This, this is whom we fight against.

[Cthulhu 2020]

The government says what you can and can't do with your own body all the time. Drugs, suicide etc. They can even force medical treatment upon you.

It's also quite hypocritical of you to say the government has no right to say what you can or can't do with your own body when it's the very same government giving you the rights to murder another human being. Might want to choose your words more carefully next time.

It's not classified as a human being til brain functions begin. Silly.

- - - Updated - - -

Ugh, poor moderation attitude. We cannot give birth unto kidneys, we are given but two at birth & hopefully they last throughout. Poor, terrible analogy in absolutely appalling taste.

Comparing babies to broccoli? Murdering them is not enough, now you must eat them? Another terrible analogy.

Emotion is fallacy to robots.

Emotion partially drives the rule of law. Should we end the life of an elderly person just to save resources? What if this elderly life struggling was of your own family? I suppose to robots whom have no emotions, it would not matter.

This, this is whom we fight against.

The people who you are arguing with provide a healthy mix of emotion and logic into their decisions. You however seem to be uninterested in logic.

Throwing emotion to the side for the sake of logic makes one a robot. Tossing logic aside for the sake of emotion makes one an animal.

[Vargur]

http://www.cnn.com/2016/12/07/politi...ill/index.html

Oh good, more illegal abortions or discarded kids to be adopted. Like there aren't enough.

[Public Enemy Truth]

The people who you are arguing with provide a healthy mix of emotion and logic into their decisions. You however seem to be uninterested in logic.

Throwing emotion to the side for the sake of logic makes one a robot. Tossing logic aside for the sake of emotion makes one an animal.

Look at you, scoring acceptance points to your peers. I care not of this, nor your definition of "logic." All you speak, without any response to my content of the elderly. To hell with you!

[Annoying]

The government says what you can and can't do with your own body all the time. Drugs, suicide etc. They can even force medical treatment upon you.

It's also quite hypocritical of you to say the government has no right to say what you can or can't do with your own body when it's the very same government giving you the rights to murder another human being. Might want to choose your words more carefully next time.

First: Governments don't give rights, they affirm them.

Second: Bodily autonomy doesn't deal with external forces until it's violated. Drugs are an example of this.

Third: You can say human being all you like, but denying another being the right to your body isn't the same as murder.

[Vargur]

A rather peculiar thing in this discussion is that usually pro-abortion people are very anti death penalty, and vice versa people that are "pro life" usually are at the same time pro death penalty. I find it quite funny.

Funny how? It's logical and reasonable.

[antelope591]

it's foolish to think everyone embraces all the policies of a candidate, I did not endorse all of Obama's policies. In this election with two horrible candidates it is very unlikely people will support everything Trump does.

Its also pretty silly to think that anti abortion legislation wouldn't be one of their major priorities when the VP is a Christian fundamentalist. They're just doing it state by state because outright repealing Roe vs. Wade is too much work.

[PassingBy]

It's actually the best measure. The real crux of the issue is bodily autonomy. You have the human right to control what happens within your person. Once a fetus can survive outside the womb, they deserve the right to try and live on their own. Before then, your human right to bodily autonomy means you don't have to give free rent inside your body to anything you don't want.
Beyond the point of fetal viability, if they can survive outside and you kick them out, you have to give them the chance to survive.

But in a current society there are plenty of issues on which the State takes away your right to control what happens within your person.
It is illegal to inject, inhale, induce certain chemicals. And if you do - you may serve jail time, be forced into a health institution etc.
If you attempt a suicide and don't succeed - you will be put into a mental hospital against your will, and will be treated against your will without asking for your opinion.
Most likely even if you just decide to mutilate yourself - questions about your mental health will be risen, and you might be locked up in a mental institution.
Also when you, yourself, are beyond viability the doctors will still use different tools, that they have at their disposal to make you viable again. They will put you on life support, without which you won't be viable at all. They will take the organs from one human being, and put those inside you, to replace the ones that failed, to make you viable again.
What is more if the said doctor says "nah, this guy is beyond the point of viability without external support, i'd rather spend my time treating people that have a longer life span ahead of them" and refuses you treatment - he will probably also be charged with a crime.

So the point of fetal viability is as artificial as the point of conception or the point of heartbeat, or the point of registering brainwaves, etc.

[Self Inflicted Wounds]

No, you have literally zero knowledge of this subject and are just using your feelings as fact. You came up with the subjective measure of when a fetus is considered a person which is of course subjective. You will note that I did not mention what I thought of the classification because unlike you I am not going to state my opinion as fact.

My point was that being concerned about the well being of others is empathy, much like it upsets us when someone is killed. That is why your argument of nothing matters if it doesn't affect me is laughable.

Thats not subjective. You are ignorant to the science.

I'm sorry, but your feelings are not the basis of an argument.

- - - Updated - - -

It may be the best measure or it may not, that doesn't change the fact that its an arbitrary measure. To present it as fact is simply dishonest.

You are using these words incorrectly.

[Public Enemy Truth]

It's not even an analogy, just an example that serves to establish that feeling upset by something doesn't automatically mean it's terrible and deserves to be banned, but as we've thoroughly established at this point, you are not only not a rational thinker, but openly hostile towards logic, and therefore I don't expect you to find rational arguments compelling. You'll continue to repeat your emotional tripe ad nauseum with that insipid us vs them tag line at the bottom and there's not a thing in the world that has the power to sway your thinking. People like you simply need to be marginalized and pushed out of the society with all due haste, as your dogmatic approach to policy and opinion is precisely the worst possible approach to governance.

What. After denying utilizing analogy to explain, you subsequently proceed to admit utilizing analogy.

Bah! I do not submit acquiescence, I am free. To all you, and your robot-kin, any differing view is seen as "logicless" & dismissed. It is referred to now as an echo-chamber. Pseudo-intellectualism, parading as worth. All without responding to my content of the elderly.

I am glad we are making progress, taking measures against the murder of babies.

[Self Inflicted Wounds]

What. After denying utilizing analogy to explain, you subsequently proceed to admit utilizing analogy.

Bah! I do not submit acquiescence, I am free. To all you, and your robot-kin, any differing view is seen as "logicless" & dismissed. It is referred to now as an echo-chamber. Pseudo-intellectualism, parading as worth. All without responding to my content of the elderly.

I am glad we are making progress, taking measures against the murder of babies.

You cannot murder a fetus in any sense of the word.

[Belize]

I'd say the alternatives are likely worse. (An unwanted child which you can't afford) That'd be worse for the "women" and society.

I agree. I must have misunderstood your post then, I thought you were against them on the basis that it doesn't hurt anyone.

[Cthulhu 2020]

Look at you, scoring acceptance points to your peers. I care not of this, nor your definition of "logic." All you speak, without any response to my content of the elderly. To hell with you!

As I said, they combine logic and emotion to create the proper human response to situations. Animals give in to raw emotion. Killing off the elderly because they're a waste of resources is non-empathetic, which is why these people would never do it. The elderly's existence also does not remove someone's right to bodily autonomy. If babies developed inside of eggs, our abortion laws might be different, but as it stands the baby requires a woman to carry it. Removing her right to bodily autonomy is the issue. It's weighed against the POTENTIAL for life. Which is why abortion is illegal past the point at which brain function begins.

[Wells]

Worth remembering that pregnancy is measured from last period, so the actual sex can occur several weeks after that point.

A regulation that precludes time necessary to determine that one is pregnant is a de facto ban across the board.