3 ms·

> Most people believe that if the life of the mother is in danger at any point, abortion should be available This may be true, but "should". the law can and do

> Most people believe that if the life of the mother is in danger at any point, abortion should be available This may be true, but "should". the law can and does differ. But agreed, it should be a medical decision only, as to if it's necessary. > we know that is categorically false. Hundreds of already born children are murdered by their parents That's not the same thing at all, so you haven't given any evidence of falsehood of the statement at hand here, you've just tried to equate something else.

yucky 4y ago
You're right, they're not the same thing. I would imagine killing an infant yourself after it's born is a lot harder (and actually murder) than having a non-medically necessary later term abortion. And yet hundreds of women do it every year. If you think "literally nobody" has a non-medically necessary late term abortion, then you need to provide some evidence to back up such an absurd statement. It's legal in all those states for a reason.
- SideburnsOfDoom 4y ago
  If you say that it happens, you provide proof that it does: that's the way round that proof works. Do not shift the burden of proof. "prove the absence" is a well-known absurdity in general. Your imaginings about infanticide are uninteresting, and I think wrong, but it also seems that you would rather pick nits about this insane comparison, so no.
  - yucky 4y ago
    > Your imaginings about infanticide are uninteresting https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2174580/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2174580/ https://ajp.psychiatryonline.org/doi/pdf/10.1176/appi.ajp.162.9.1578 https://ajp.psychiatryonline.org/doi/pdf/10.1176/appi.ajp.16... There is actually a metric shit ton of research on infanticide, I'm not sure what would lead you to pretend it's not real.
    - SideburnsOfDoom 4y ago
      Uninteresting distraction, since as pointed out above, it is unrelated to the topic at hand. > I'm not sure what would lead you to pretend it's not real Word games. Again: pointless distraction, dishonest, uninteresting. Burden of proof remains on you.

yucky 4y ago

You're right, they're not the same thing. I would imagine killing an infant yourself after it's born is a lot harder (and actually murder) than having a non-medically necessary later term abortion. And yet hundreds of women do it every year. If you think "literally nobody" has a non-medically necessary late term abortion, then you need to provide some evidence to back up such an absurd statement. It's legal in all those states for a reason.

SideburnsOfDoom 4y ago
If you say that it happens, you provide proof that it does: that's the way round that proof works. Do not shift the burden of proof. "prove the absence" is a well-known absurdity in general. Your imaginings about infanticide are uninteresting, and I think wrong, but it also seems that you would rather pick nits about this insane comparison, so no.
- yucky 4y ago
  > Your imaginings about infanticide are uninteresting https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2174580/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2174580/ https://ajp.psychiatryonline.org/doi/pdf/10.1176/appi.ajp.162.9.1578 https://ajp.psychiatryonline.org/doi/pdf/10.1176/appi.ajp.16... There is actually a metric shit ton of research on infanticide, I'm not sure what would lead you to pretend it's not real.
  - SideburnsOfDoom 4y ago
    Uninteresting distraction, since as pointed out above, it is unrelated to the topic at hand. > I'm not sure what would lead you to pretend it's not real Word games. Again: pointless distraction, dishonest, uninteresting. Burden of proof remains on you.