A Quick Thought

It seems that not only has the 2ND Amendment constantly been re-litigated, but certain states have been curtailing the 2ND Amendment Right of their own citizens. So, since the 2A is up for re-litigation, how come abortion is considered settled law? I tend to believe that the technology of today is much better than when Roe vs. Wade was decided. With all the hoopla of wanting to litigate the past based on the standards of today, why is abortion off limits?

I wonder, not including myself, but how many more out there would like to see the proof, using today’s technology that is, on why and how abortion is still considered legal and why and how it is actually carried out. No animators please, actual footage inside and outside the womb, real time please. I’m sure an ultrasound can be used, or even possibly, one of those tiny cameras doctors use for say, a colonoscopy. There had to be a way. What about educational footage? In School during Sex Education, they will show videos of women giving birth. Why won’t they show an abortion?

Just a simple question and an easy request.

72 thoughts on “A Quick Thought

  1. You’re right. Our knowledge of the developing foetus has improved greatly in the last 20 years. We’re now more certain than ever that before week 25 (although more accurately week 28, after full bilateral synchronisation) there is no ethical dilemma in terminating a pregnancy.

    That being said, I believe week 20 should be the legal cut-off date, excluding, of course, medical emergencies.

    1. bottomlesscoffee007

      I don’t buy that, neither does a lot of other people. Where is the photographic proof? You lack actual proof, you attempt science without fully investigating your claim. Have you actually done the study, or did you just regurgitate the same nonsense that someone else said?

        1. bottomlesscoffee007

          Regardless of brain activity that can or cannot be detected today, the baby is still living. Whether or not I read a book, has no standing on whether a baby is a baby, there are plenty of books that deal in sci-fi and other fantasy, who’s to say the book or books you speak of are accurate? It seems that your attempting to justify the killing of something you cannot create. Why else would there be a need for a study if the baby is living and developing in the womb. What remains of the dead baby once it has been murdered?

          The only reason for that book, is to provide justification for murder. What else will be discovered in the next 20 years, that will discount what that book says today?

          The discussion and legislation concerning abortion is by no means accurate or transparent. The science behind abortion is another scam. Where is the actual factual proof that would remove any shred of doubt to everyone? Where’s the undeniable footage of what the baby is doing while the abortion is in progress?

          If abortion is justified by brain activity level, then why not re-litigate and pass it in the House, the senate and have the president sign it into law? If what you say is true, then it should pass no problem. I tend to think that you along with abortion supporters cannot withstand that much scrutiny and that the “proof” is either mere theory or that it cannot be proven beyond a reasonable doubt.

            1. bottomlesscoffee007

              Oh man, here it comes. What can you tell about foetal brain development from your own experiences? Not books you read or what you may have overheard others say. What experience do you have in this arena?

            2. bottomlesscoffee007

              Surely a person with your pedigree and your education level can break it down for a non college educated person such as myself, right? Make it easy to digest and relatable please.

                1. bottomlesscoffee007

                  I did in fact, I may seem rather illiterate, thank God for spell check! Why do you keep stalling? Let’s hear what you’ve got to say, convince me that abortion is not only justified, but that “science” says so!

                    1. bottomlesscoffee007

                      This is how conversations go. You say something, I say something, we acknowledge what the other said to ensure effective two way communication is taking place.

                    2. bottomlesscoffee007

                      What??? I am replying to everything you say! Censorship, nothing is censored on bottomlesscoffee007

                    3. bottomlesscoffee007

                      There you go again, stalling and counter accusing. Let’s hear it man, who is the arbiter of fact may I ask?

                    4. John, I hold all of my comments in moderation, as well. It is a necessary feature and many, many bloggers use it. It helps with spammers & trolls. Blogs are constantly getting hit with bots, esp. from overseas. I posted one image (with credit) from a Russian photographer at Unsplash & my blog got flooded from Eastern Europe.

          1. I once watched a footage of a movie some doctors made called ‘The Silent Scream’ of inside the womb while an abortion was happening. It showed the baby in there, calm and peaceful. Then the abortion started, and it became scared and started screaming as it was being killed. It was very disturbing.

            1. bottomlesscoffee007

              I couldn’t imagine. I’ve never seen that before, thank you so much for sharing. Honestly, I don’t know if I have the balls to witness something so horrific.

              1. The doctor that conducted the footage had decided to do it to prove once and for all that babies did not feel pain when they were aborted. After watching that, he walked out of the room deeply disturbed. Never did another abortion after that.

  2. bottomlesscoffee007

    Oh, your article on foetal brain development was supposed to convince me? The same article on how it’s impossible to kill something that has no life? Is that the one? Yeah, a bunch of big words explaining how babies aren’t actually living until certain brain activity can be detected? Comparing babies to people on life support? Is that the one?

    1. The same article on how it’s impossible to kill something that has no life?

      I didn’t say that. Do try and be accurate.

      The question was: How can you “kill” something that cannot “die”?

          1. bottomlesscoffee007

            Oh, so the theory is now fact? When did that take place, who was and were the deciding forces that decreed this fact and the end all be all of the entire matter?

              1. bottomlesscoffee007

                What dictates fact? Who dictates fact. Where do you get your facts from? At what point was the theory decided to be fact?

                  1. bottomlesscoffee007

                    A baby is living, from the point of conception. The answer to your riddle is do not believe in it in the first place, thereby it never existed so there is nothing to kill.

                    1. At no stage does “life” magically appear in a zygote, a blastocyst, embryo, or foetus. Life began on earth 3.8 billion years ago and hasn’t been interrupted since. A foetus was never inorganic and suddenly becomes organic.

                      What we are talking about is a human organism. A human organism can die, and it is simply not until full bilateral synchronisation (week 28) until the human organism fully, and absolutely, exists.

                    2. bottomlesscoffee007

                      You contradict your own words. If you do not consider it life, then why terminate? It’s not bothering you.

                    3. bottomlesscoffee007

                      You set out to determine life via brain activity/development. While on life support the support is artificial, however in the womb it is natural. The cells that are so often spoken of, are full of life, whether you acknowledge it or not. Life begins at conception, to ignore what you cannot create or control, is mere destruction and murder. No one has the right to abort since they were not alone in the conception.

                    4. bottomlesscoffee007

                      Now your name calling and slandering me. I had no idea that was the “scientific” method. Oh “human organism” a new fangled word, how long did it take you to come up with that?

                    5. bottomlesscoffee007

                      I try with my tiny uneducated brain. Have you ever conceived? How can you make such outlandish claims concerning life that you cannot create or control without invasive measures?

                    6. Listen, it’s clear you never read the article. You’re not contributing anything but noise.

                      When you do read it, including the linked articles and studies, and you can address the subject in a coherent and rational manner, I’d be happy to chat about the details.

                      Until then.

                    7. bottomlesscoffee007

                      I guess your theory isn’t worth fighting for, from your perspective. Oh well too bad. Are you just not used to defending your ideas or is it simple lack of intestinal fortitude?

                    8. This is Professor Goldenring (Professor of Cell and Developmental Biology) writing in the New England Journal of Medicine, “Development of the Fetal Brain”:

                      “When the coordinating and individuating function of a living brain is demonstrably present, the full human organism exists. Before full brain differentiation, only cells, organs, and organ systems exist, which may potentially be integrated into a full human organism if the brain develops. After brain death what is left of the organism is once again only a collection of organs, all available to us for use in transplantation, since the full human being no longer exists.”

                    9. bottomlesscoffee007

                      Were you there for the study? Or do you always talk about other’s works to sound intelligent?

                    10. bottomlesscoffee007

                      Lie, who lied? More slander and accusations, maybe that’s all you have, I refer to it as shit talking. You sound rather full of yourself to be honest. I had no idea any medical journal was true throughout and absolute. The noise you refer to is your inability to acknowledge that you may be mistaken in your summation.

                    11. bottomlesscoffee007

                      Or is this the actual professor? How many things did you believe before you came to this theory that have proved false up to this point? Keep looking, you may find the answer is much easier than you may expect.

    1. bottomlesscoffee007

      I never set out for fireworks in the first place, just an open and honest conversation. Thank you for following along with the dialogue. I know abortion is murder of the most innocent. I just cannot fathom why it is still practiced or even thought of as legitimate. Truly savage.

Please Like This Post, Follow and Comment to Aid in the Discussion

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.