Yes it does. An unborn baby with a beating heart is a living human being. You, and your ilk, continue to deny science.
Lol literally not science. There's nothing science-y about the arbitrary definition of human life based on heartbeat vs any other function, such as brain development.
viability has nothing to do with it, as even young born children are not so-called "viable" without the care of their parents.
Viability is just as valid an arbitrary line as "having a heartbeat".
I'll say this much for the "life begins at conception" whackos: unlike you, their beliefs are consistent and not contradictary.
That Roe v Wade had NOTHING to do with body autonomy.
So? Privacy and bodily autonomy are interrelated, as the SCOTUS has decided in Griswold v Connecticut, Cruzan v Missouri and Lawrence v Texas.
It depends on one's perspective. Some people feel that the state's participation in murdering unborn children makes things a lot better.
"Some people" in this case being people not directly involved with or impacted by a woman's pregnancy whatsoever.
Furthermore, abortion was never suppose to be meant as a form of birth control.
According to who? That's literally what abortion has always been.
Various forms of birth control are widely available, and in many cases free. People need to practice personal responsibility. Actions have consequences, and I understand that many people, especially Libtards, want a consequence free lifestyle.
Having an abortion is practicing personal responsibility.
Regardless, if some states have limited abortion options, organizations like Planned Parenthood can help facilitate this type of procedure.
The guy who cries about gas prices and grocery costs is suddenly pretty sanguine about working class people's ability to afford to travel to seek medical services.
Home
Contact
Login
Register