DRY RUN ...DO IT AND SEE

Pretty easy to understand actually. You are a supporter of access without restriction, pregnancy is a 40 week term, 4.35 weeks per month, after 9 months a woman is 39.15 weeks into her pregnancy.

If she chose an elective homicide prior to the child's birth, you would be supportive of that decision, which could occur when a woman was 9 months into pregnancy. You do not recognize, nor support, that the human life in utero possesses any rights of their own, they are not yet a human being under your belief system. You believe the right of the woman to destroy the human life in her uterus is absolute regardless of viability. That's all accurate, is it not?

homeagain wrote: U NEED TO CLARIFY THE STATEMENT U THINK I MADE ABOUT 9 MO ABORTION....OTHERWISE IT IS IMPOSSIBLE TO GIVE U A SUFFICIENT ANSWER......THE TALE OF "I DON'T WANT THIS AND CAN'T DO IT IS BULLSHIT....THUS THE NON EXISTENT ANSWER.......QUIT GASLIGHTING ME AND WE COULD HAVE A COHESIVE CONVERSATION

As PS stated, what’s the difference between 8 and 9 months? Both babies are viable. If you don’t want to look like a monster who is in favor of murdering unborn viable human babies, don’t support laws that allow women to kill their viable unborn babies. Simple.

STOP THE GASLIGHTING.....AND SHOW ME THOSE STATS THAT PERFORM WHAT U DESCRIBE

So if the elective homicide rate at 37+ weeks is 0.49/10,000 pregnancies it's OK and you'd support it, but if it's 50/10,000 pregnancies its too high for you HA?

Principle, not frequency, is the topic being discussed here. Nice try to take it off on that tangent, but no luck.

PrintSmith wrote: Pretty easy to understand actually. You are a supporter of access without restriction, pregnancy is a 40 week term, 4.35 weeks per month, after 9 months a woman is 39.15 weeks into her pregnancy.

If she chose an elective homicide prior to the child's birth, you would be supportive of that decision, which could occur when a woman was 9 months into pregnancy. You do not recognize, nor support, that the human life in utero possesses any rights of their own, they are not yet a human being under your belief system. You believe the right of the woman to destroy the human life in her uterus is absolute regardless of viability. That's all accurate, is it not?

THAT IS AN INACCURATE STATEMENT, AND U R GASLIGHTING......I'M DONE.

Here's the problem with your response HA, either all are true or all are false. That's what the no-limits on elective homicide laws of Colorado declare to be true. The human life in utero has no rights at all, the woman, and the woman alone, decides if, and when, to avail herself of her State declared right to an elective homicide. 1st week or 39th makes no difference, if she want an elective homicide she has a State protected right to receive one.

The Left Defense? They think it is better the fetus dies rather than not have a perfect life.

Just had lunch with an old hunting buddy. His parents were very poor and had to give up their children to an orphanage. Democrats would say it was better they had never been born.

He served in the military, his sons served on nuclear submarines. He is in his late 80's, married for over 50 years.

But the Left thinks it would be better if he had been vacuumed out of his mom.