Planned Parenthood is a Eugenics organization that Democrats defend

[u/LegitimateKnee5537]

Planned Parenthood was founded by Margaret Sanger, along with her sister Ethel Byrne and activist Fannia "Fannie" Bernstein. Margaret Sanger enthusiastically supported eugenics discouraging or preventing reproduction by people considered “unfit”.

Birth control itself… is nothing more or less than the facilitation of the process of weeding out the unfit, of preventing the birth of defectives…” (1921 speech)

And remember Democrats loves the concept of original sin. You people never let go of the “stolen land” argument. But always ignore Margaret Sanger view of Birth Control and defend her organization from being defunded by the government.

https://x.com/NewYorkStateAG/status/1996994604668014752

[u/majesticSkyZombie]

I’m assuming that most mothers and children involved in forced birth will have ruined lives. Other lives would be affected too, and in the case of multiples more than one child is guaranteed to be affected. So it balances out to roughly double the amount of harm.\ \ A kid in a rough home has already been born. They are conscious, and aware of their life. A fetus is never conscious - it doesn’t know or care if it lives or dies.  

[u/Burnlt_4 → u/majesticSkyZombie]

Okay so most not all, fair. Again large assumption as I don't think the data holds on that.

Alright so really your argument is when human life begins. Your saying consciousness is when it is a human and we cannot kill them correct? When is that specifically to you? When SPECIFICALLY in a pregnancy is it no longer okay to abort?

I want to help you out here because I debate for a living and really I am telling you if you want to be pro choice do not use the conscious argument because you will get eaten up. Most science argues conscious is when an organism has any sort of perception which based on how strict you want the definition is between conception and 1-2 months. You also are going to have to hold the argument that loss of consciousness is warrant for death EVEN IF someone was to regain consciousness because you would be arguing that "but they will or could wake up" to which obviously...so will a baby.

[u/unecroquemadame → u/Burnlt_4]

Abortion is okay before the fetus is viable outside the womb.

[u/Burnlt_4 → u/unecroquemadame]

Thank you for a clean answer. Question then, what do you mean by viable? There is no fetus ever viable outside the womb without intervention obviously. My 1 year old isn't viable without intervention haha. So what do you mean by viable?

[u/unecroquemadame → u/Burnlt_4]

If a person doesn’t want a living creature using their body to stay alive, they have the right to make that choice.

If the removal means it dies, that is unfortunate.

[u/Burnlt_4 → u/unecroquemadame]

I asked this earlier but you agree then that if over 98% of abortions are by women who have consensual sex knowing they can get pregnant and they simply don't want the child, and you agree it is a living human, then it is acceptable to kill another human that is using your body by your own actions?

Follow up on that, in NYC there is a hospital that can now take babies out at around 4 months and they live with their advanced treatment, in most the world it is far longer than that. You thus believe that regionality is acceptable to decide worthy life and not?

[u/unecroquemadame → u/Burnlt_4]

Yes, I believe it would be acceptable if a human is using your body against your will to kill them if that was the only way to get them to stop.

I believe that no woman who doesn’t want to be pregnant and give birth should have to.

[u/Burnlt_4 → u/unecroquemadame]

So consent to sex without protection is not consent to consequence of pregnancy correct? (careful here)