Biden is looking to make an example of the free-staters. Going to make Waco look like a camp fire.

Right around the time that brain waves typically can supposedly be found in a fetus/unborn(typically 25 weeks)

Which makes it consistent with the law in most states that affects whether or not a person(adult or not) is alive or dead. Do they have the full/usual complement of brain waves? If not, they're not alive in any way consistent with the law(s) affecting all other humans.

I think, FWIW, that always attempting to aim for legal consistency is a good thing. It lends greater credibility and enforceability. Having the legal system be a hodgepodge of inconsistent patchwork will always lead to social discontent/upset.

[deleted]

I'm afraid your generous benefit of the doubt may not be correct -- check their post history.

But I still don't see how they are forcing anything on you. If two people want to get married, who is saying you have to do the same? It makes absolutely no sense. All they are asking for is to be able to do what makes THEM happy. It literally has absolutely nothing to do with you. Even if you got I vited to the wedding ( however incredibly unlikely that would be) you could always say no. They wouldn't be forcing you at gun point to watch them get married.

[removed]

Yeah that was largely non-KSC students. There were still KSC students participating, but they weren’t the majority. I knew a few people who were either expelled or “suspended” (for lack of a better term) for the rest of the semester or year without reimbursement for the tuition they’d already paid. The administration took the whole situation very seriously, and any KSC students who were proven to have participated in the mayhem and destruction were punished harshly.

Also to be fair to the current students, that was seven years ago. Nearly two classes of graduates have passed since then, so it’s not like the current student body had anything to do with the whole thing. Most seniors now were probably around the age of 15 when the riots happened.

So you don't think a woman should get one to save her life? That is pretty pro manslaughter.

I just found it on the SELT website, looks awesome. Thank you

I’m not religious, and it’s not murder. Cope.

It is hard to discuss this with men, bc they will never understand that being pregnant is not fun for most women. It is painful and wretched and does not feel natural whatsoever. We do it bc we want kids. To make someone go through that without wanting one for a million different, individual reasons is inhumane. You can dispute it all you want, but that is what it is. Just accept you will never understand being pregnant, so you can never understand vehemently not wanting to be pregnant.

We lose women at less than one per year due to abortions. It is infinitely safer than giving birth. Your logic fails to hold up anyway since you are arguing in essence women should not get abortions even if it kills her, giving birth.

The source you’re citing appears to be making the opposite point: that 24 weeks is the viability threshold. Other sources (like this one: https://healthcare.utah.edu/womenshealth/pregnancy-birth/preterm-birth/when-is-it-safe-to-deliver) say it’s more like 40-50%, and talk about how when babies DO survive birth at 24 weeks or earlier, it’s often with extreme and life-threatening defects.

If what concerns you is the question of viability, I suggest you look here: https://healthcare.utah.edu/womenshealth/pregnancy-birth/preterm-birth/when-is-it-safe-to-deliver abortions in the third trimester are incredibly rare,(1% of the total) and when they do occur it’s often due to medical necessity. This makes sense when you think about it: why would a woman go through the genuine effort of six months of pregnancy only to change her mind frivolously in the home stretch? Indeed, it’s those medically necessary abortions, which more moderate pro-lifers may deem acceptable, that are most endangered by focus on the supposed murder of nearly-at-term fetuses.

I respect that many pro-lifers come from a place of love, even though I disagree with their conclusions. But there is also a strong element of the pro-life movement that is less concerned about love and more concerned about control of women’s bodies, and reducing their role in society to that of child-bearing alone. The latter is adept at misusing fringe examples as a way to pull at the heart strings of the former, to the point of unreason. I hope you belong to that former group, and you come to see that true compassion includes the mothers and women whose lives are changed irrevocably by pregnancy, and who are best-positioned to choose for themselves what’s right.

>But why are you so deadset on making sure nobody else gets one?

I'm generally anti-murder. I'm weird like that.

>There’s no way to determine who’s right and who’s wrong and for that reason alone, we cannot codify laws preventing people from getting abortions.

Given an unknown, the ethical choice is to do the least harm. Ending a life is clearly more harmful than allowing the reproductive process to continue.

I love it when pro-abortion folks suddenly become religious in a debate. Now that's a sign of an argument that has no logical defense. Suddenly one must act on faith! Sorry, no sale there. Tell God I said hi if you see Him.

Did you actually just use a slur for the mentally ill while decrying all words as offensive if somebody acts offended?

The max bet is 10 anywhere in the state of NH, which is either a positive or negative depending on what you're looking for.

I'm getting really tired of New England being saddled with the historical baggage of other regions...

If the requirement to survive on their own is a requirement, then plenty of adults fail this test as well.

>I mean, its likely, but not 100%. Is the woman who is being made to donate to the potential person live? Certainly. So it should be her decision.

By your logic, the chances of the woman surviving the abortion are not 100%, therefore we shouldn't allow her to have one.

>You think people should be forced to share blood or undergo the reorganization or organs, tissue, risk permanent death or disability for something they don't want?

What force is occurring? Reproduction is a natural process. Giving blood, donating or receiving organs and such are not natural processes. Those are medical procedures. Two very different things. It's the opposite of force, it's doing nothing.

Nice strawmans you got there. And, hey man, if you’re so against abortions, don’t get one. But why are you so deadset on making sure nobody else gets one? I don’t believe that a fetus is a person, you do. There’s no way to determine who’s right and who’s wrong and for that reason alone, we cannot codify laws preventing people from getting abortions. I’ll leave you with this quote:

>The unborn” are a convenient group of people to advocate for. They never make demands of you; they are morally uncomplicated, unlike the incarcerated, addicted, or the chronically poor; they don’t resent your condescension or complain that you are not politically correct; unlike widows, they don’t ask you to question patriarchy; unlike orphans, they don’t need money, education, or childcare; unlike aliens, they don’t bring all that racial, cultural, and religious baggage that you dislike; they allow you to feel good about yourself without any work at creating or maintaining relationships; and when they are born, you can forget about them, because they cease to be unborn. You can love the unborn and advocate for them without substantially challenging your own wealth, power, or privilege, without re-imagining social structures, apologizing, or making reparations to anyone. They are, in short, the perfect people to love if you want to claim you love Jesus, but actually dislike people who breathe. Prisoners? Immigrants? The sick? The poor? Widows? Orphans? All the groups that are specifically mentioned in the Bible? They all get thrown under the bus for the unborn.

Pastor David Barnhart

Is that what it's supposed to be? I took it as referring to Portsmouth, where there seems to be less fat people walking around here than in any other part of the state I've seen.

Nope. Most people being idiots who literally invented a false history should never be a viable argument.

>But the main point you’re missing is that in the eye of the law, a fetus is not a person.

The law used to regard certain people as not being people. The law is not infallible. That's why we have the ability to change it.

>And people aren’t getting abortions out of “convenience.” Often it is a matter or life or death because pregnancy literally puts a mothers life at risk.

Not easy to dig up data on this one, but I did find this with their sources linked at the bottom:

https://www.johnstonsarchive.net/policy/abortion/abreasons.html

The vast majority are due to lifestyle decisions (convenience).

>As far as your last comment goes, a fetus has no capacity to feel pain until 24 weeks

There are grown adults with conditions that prevent them from feeling pain. Can we terminate them?

I mean, its likely, but not 100%. Is the woman who is being made to donate to the potential person live? Certainly. So it should be her decision.

You think people should be forced to share blood or undergo the reorganization or organs, tissue, risk permanent death or disability for something they don't want? Thats dystopian.

Almost any school will be what you make of it, but the small state school stereotype's a thing. Where I grew up had a couple of them. Fine schools, but most people are going to experience college and because it's what they were supposed to do, then move straight back to their hometowns to become teachers, cops, nurses, or work at some relative's business etc.

So, conservatively 21 weeks?