(05-18-2019, 11:23 AM)oncemoreuntothejimbreech Wrote: If the chance of rain today is 50% at best, would you say it can rain or it might rain?

Because the qualifier "if left unmolested" implies it is a fait accompli which as the data indicates isn't the reality.

(05-18-2019, 02:08 PM)bfine32 Wrote: When you try too hard, you usually wind up looking petty and foolish. Both the newborn and unborn can (are able to) grow. 

(05-18-2019, 04:30 PM)oncemoreuntothejimbreech Wrote: With the exception of approximately 50% of the unborn that can't and don't grow, right?

What does passive aggressive name calling make one look like?

(05-20-2019, 04:22 PM)BFritz21 Wrote: I always saw this picture:

And it made perfect sense to me.

But I saw a picture today that took it a step further and just made it make even more sense:

So, my question is, what body part is the baby if it's part of the woman's body?

(05-20-2019, 04:26 PM)fredtoast Wrote: If it can not survive outside of the woman's body then it is still part of her body.

I say all of you Pro Life people are welcome to have all the 6 week old fetus that are removed from women's bodies.  


What exactly will you do with them?

(05-20-2019, 05:39 PM)fredtoast Wrote: Brad, if it makes you feel any better, I have always said that when technology advances to the point that we can take a fertilized egg out of the woman's body and gestate it in a lab the abortion laws should change.  But until then the fetus is either attached to the mother or it is dead.  Since it can not live on its own it is subjugated to the will and individual rights of the mother.  Since it is impossible for the fetus to live as an "individual" it can not have any "individual rights".

(05-18-2019, 09:21 PM)bfine32 Wrote: Sure, those and the infants that die. But they all can when they start out. Unfortunately, all do not.

Probably makes they look less than forthright; however, I was neither passive or aggressive. I spoke to you directly and non-aggressively.  

Quote:Genetic abnormalities within the embryo (ie, chromosomal abnormalities) are the most common cause of spontaneous abortion and account for 50-65% of all miscarriages.

(05-20-2019, 04:22 PM)BFritz21 Wrote: I always saw this picture:



And it made perfect sense to me.

But I saw a picture today that took it a step further and just made it make even more sense:



So, my question is, what body part is the baby if it's part of the woman's body?

(05-20-2019, 04:38 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: Call me a religious nut,  

(05-21-2019, 12:28 AM)oncemoreuntothejimbreech Wrote: If "a baby is an entirely separate person" what's the big deal about taking it out of the woman's body? That's what happens at birth, right?

As an entirely separate person, if we shoved your head up there you couldn't survive and would be dead in less than 10 minutes.

(05-21-2019, 03:36 AM)BFritz21 Wrote: A person needs food to survive and grow, just like a baby in the mother.  A baby newborn can't survive on its own, either.

A machine breathed for me, so did I have no rights to life?

(05-13-2019, 12:29 PM)oncemoreuntothejimbreech Wrote: How do you feel about men and women drinking when they aren't pregnant knowing alcohol consumption adversely affects fertility and the gametes?

Or what about pregnant women taking any prescription medication which isn't a category A?

(05-21-2019, 08:41 AM)oncemoreuntothejimbreech Wrote: You were teenager at that time. You had individual rights since you were born.

Let's go back to your premise because you ignored this:

(05-21-2019, 02:37 PM)BFritz21 Wrote: Those aren't circumstances affecting the child while the mother is pregnant.

If she does those things while the baby is growing inside her, then she definitely should be held accountable.

(05-21-2019, 03:36 AM)BFritz21 Wrote: A machine breathed for me, so did I have no rights to life?

(05-21-2019, 03:36 AM)BFritz21 Wrote: A person needs food to survive and grow, just like a baby in the mother.  A baby newborn can't survive on its own, either.