Ok. ?.

The wife will now charge him with dowry harassment and domestic violence and he will end up in prison. She doesn't have to prove anything, her word is enough

A fetus is not a baby. It’s a fetus.

The right-wingers don’t care about legal professionals or the laws themselves. Just whatever they think should be how things go. Facts don’t matter. That’s why the US is far behind the rest of the modernized countries in all but military strength.

[deleted]

Yeah we got some stupid folks living here....

He should have done it in a hospital. Hospitals use exorbitant amounts of electricity.

And if a decade of working in a hospital has taught me anything, it's that people in hospitals are not curious about anything. They will not move anything that's not theirs, sometimes for years.

Seriously. I once noticed two extra PC towers under a nurses' station and nobody could tell me what they were for. They were there for years. I once did an experiment where I took a trashy romance novel from the hospital lending library and put it on the desk at the nurses' station. It was there for about three months before it wasn't there one day. I bet if you get a boring-looking PC case and some quiet fans, you could easily plug it in somewhere and nobody will ever notice or care.

[deleted]

I was making a hypothetical question that you avoided just like i said you would. The left will consistently refuse to engage on this...

You agree 100% that there is a limit to a woman's autonomy then? that was my point... Or do you support abortion 10 minutes before birth?

Yes or No?

[deleted]

Given that 90% of their comments are about Israel, I'd bet it's an account run by a government propaganda subcontractor.

Just block them.

>No one is advocating for getting abortions 10 minutes before birth, this is a scenario right wingers lie about in order to get their base to vote against women's rights, and clearly their propaganda works or you wouldn't be here arguing for their BS.

Ignoring the fact that there are people advocating "total bodily autonomy" for women. this is the natural consequence of the bodily autonomy argument at it's core, and the left consistently refuse to even engage in the discussion because it forces you to decide how far back you are willing to accept terminating a human life.

>What's the question?

Yes or no, does a woman's bodily autonomy trump the right of the child at 10 minutes before birth?

At what point would you limit her autonomy, or do you not believe in women's autonomy at this point?

>

Is the question: "Do women deserve to have a right over their own body?"
If so, I say the answer is yes. What is your answer?

So a woman should have the right to kill a baby mid birth if she changes her mind?

Sorry, but your account is too new to post. Your account needs to be either 2 weeks old or have at least 250 combined link and comment karma. Don't modmail us about this, just wait it out or get more karma.

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.

[removed]

Beyond not criticizing it, if you post links to the official UN human rights councils published opinions about human rights abuses in Israel you can be banned as well.

Literally acknowledging wrong doing is viewed as wrong doing.

>Probably because you're in the 'all or nothing' mindset here. If it's in the third trimester, it's going to be restricted to medical issues only. I.E. the baby will kill or likely kill the mother, or the baby is already dead, etc.

So all abortions ever should be subject to a review to see if the fetus is endangering the physical health of the mother?

It's not an all or nothing thing when i ask you where you draw the line. You are painting an all or all image here. Reductions like this is helpful in discovering your position on the matter.

>10 minutes before birth, if the doctors (and you can add multiple approvals here like they mandate some places) agree it's likely to kill the mother on birth, then yeah, it should be up to the mother if she wants to give her life for this baby or not. To be clear, in this situation yes the mother's autonomy trumps the baby's.

So abortion is not OK unless a doctor show it is directly endangering the mother's life?

>If it's like 'Nah I don't want it anymore', then too bad, that should be done earlier, 12 weeks or 16 weeks or whatever.

Then we completely agree. Elective abortion past that point strikes me as murder.

[deleted]

What does this have to do with the article? I'm not about to get into an argument about abortion.

If they really cared about the life and safety of the baby then they would also support social programs that ensure the parents have everything they need to keep them safe and healthy. As the saying goes, if you're pre-born, you're fine. If you're preschool, you're fucked.

The "unborn" is being imprisoned without a trial or reason if it is a baby with full rights. If it isn't a baby, the entire anti-abortion movement is nonsense. No way to have it both ways.

So you don’t have the study then. Do you then have the article where the CDC admits it’s true?

Probably because you're in the 'all or nothing' mindset here. If it's in the third trimester, it's going to be restricted to medical issues only. I.E. the baby will kill or likely kill the mother, or the baby is already dead, etc.

10 minutes before birth, if the doctors (and you can add multiple approvals here like they mandate some places) agree it's likely to kill the mother on birth, then yeah, it should be up to the mother if she wants to give her life for this baby or not. To be clear, in this situation yes the mother's autonomy trumps the baby's.

If it's like 'Nah I don't want it anymore', then too bad, that should be done earlier, 12 weeks or 16 weeks or whatever.

[deleted]

>The whole point of the pro-life movement is that fetuses have rights.

No, it's not. It's about not killing babies. That's it.

[deleted]