Not sure I'd go with the definition of "can't survive on its own". Neonates cannot survive long on their own without their mother to feed and nurture them. Same goes for infants and even toddlers.

That said, I think it's most important to avoid being put in the situation where one would consider abortion.

A full-term, newborn baby cannot survive without outside help.
Is it NOT a human either?

Furthermore, a baby was/is NEVER "just a part of its mother's body". You've obviously never studied it well, and certainly never been pregnant and/or given birth. It is always its own organism.


Finally, and foremost - if YOU are able to say there's really no difference between kidney stones and butchered babies (which YOU said), then yes, YOU are DEPRAVED and SICK. Period.

A full term baby is capable of carrying out all of the necissary bodily functions to survive. It can breathe, it's heart beats, it can eat, it can shit, and it can cry out for help. A fetus cannot do any of those things. The fetus is connected to the mother's body via the umbilical cord, and while there is never blood to blood contact, the fetus does absorb nutrients via the mother. Therefore, it is part of the mother's body.

I said that there is no difference between an abortion and the removal of a tumor, or any other surgical medical procedure for that matter.

Woefully ignorant.

A woman is not born with a baby insider her, is she?

The baby has its own organs, its own nervous system, its own limbs, its own heart beat, its own thumb to suck, its own reaction to pain, its own DNA and so on.

It is its own life, its own body. It is NOT just "part of the woman's body".

So it doesn't need that umbilical cord then? Bollocks.

Making the PERSONAL CHOICE of abortion legal lowered the amount of crime in America in RECORD NUMBERS. We are far better off as a whole by keeping abortion legal.

It is a religious intoxication that is responsible for wanting control over someone else's body or mind.

Do your medical research, or just shut up.

The right-to-life movement has nothing to do with religious intoxication. You, however, are clearly PLAGUED by religious bigotry and hatred. It is YOU that is wanting to control and destroy other people's bodies.

OMG! Was that a joke?

The movement that fights against the day-after pill being legalized and available to the public has nothing to do with "religious intoxication"?
That's funny!


Sigh. And then you demonstrate the clear symptoms of "religious intoxication".
Delusional beliefs that others are guilty of absurd positions.

You think Hevusa wants "to control and destroy other people's bodies"?
It would be funny if it weren't so abjectly pathetic...

Explain my "symptoms of 'religious intoxication'" to me!

The fact that I believe the unborn child is a HUMAN BEING? Is that it? The fact that I point out that YOU cannot determine when an unborn baby becomes human? Is that it? Is it the fact that I point out Hevusa's GLARING BIGOTRY and HYPOCRISY? Is that it? Is it the fact that the general medical consensus is that the unborn baby IS ITS OWN BODY? Is that it?

Or are you just talking out of your ass again?

1) Using large font with big red lettering. A demonstration of over-emotionality.
2) An incapability to accurately figure out who said what.
3) An incapability to actually COMPREHEND what people are and are not saying.
4) An incapability to get at the heart of an issue without introducing non-sequitur strawman arguments.


And this would be a perfect example of #3 and #4.
A corpse is "human".
Terry Schiavo was and is "human".
And to say it, although I'm repeating myself and you probably won't remember in a few minutes anyways...
Fetuses are human.

Being "human" is not the issue.
human: 1 : of, relating to, or characteristic of humans
2 : consisting of humans
3 a : having human form or attributes b : susceptible to or representative of the sympathies and frailties of human nature <such an inconsistency is very human -- P. E. More>

Just being "human" is irrelevant.

Total BS, incoherent and irrelevant.

This is nothing more than your personal insults, and a refusal to answer how, in any way, I'm connecting "religiousity" - or "religious intoxication" with Abortion.

Once again, FoundIt, you've used MANY words to say VERY LITTLE. And what you have said is WRONG. Again.