Graham Questions Kagan On Medical Basis For Abortion

[davethehostage]

I'll summarize the entire "pro-life" argument in a sentence, for those of you unfamiliar with it:

"But...but...babies are so cute!"

[rlhstl]

Here's the issue, people: a fetus, whether it is "viable" at the time of abortion or not, will eventually be a living, breathing human if let be. In that regard, abortion is murder...period. I do agree with oolong2 in the respect that these idiots are trying to save unborn lives, but letting our prisons kill people.

[fyonista]

@rlhstl Wrong. 'Murder' carries the added implication of being unlawful. So you are in error to call it murder on this ground alone. Its also objectionable on the grounds that it is an emotive term that suggests a personal animosity towards the fetus. Obviously untrue and manipulative.

[Sukov]

@fyonista Yes, abortion technically isn't "murder". It could be called homicide though.

[fyonista]

@Sukov It's not homicide. Homicide refers to the killing of a human when there is viability or birth. In the 1800s, infanticide, which is homicide, was a common way to deal with an unwanted child. For the sake of women, I am very glad for the development of surgical abortion and now RU846 type pills and contraception.

[Sukov]

@fyonista The law varies by state and I think it is homicide regardless of viability in some states.

[fyonista]

@Sukov No actually its not homicide in any state. In some states there is a crime called feticide but it excludes abortion and refers to death of the fetus by a criminal act. You know, you are on the internet, doesn't it occur to you to look something up before you post? its just a click away.

[Sukov]

@fyonista Perhaps you should look up "fetal homicide laws".

[fyonista]

@Sukov Haha, you got me there. Fetal homicide it is but, you know, it still refers to something abortion isn't.

[rlhstl]

@fyonista We're speaking only of law? You have no moral ethics? Given, "murder" is a word of law terminology(so I may have made a bad choice with my wording), but killing a human being(whether in the womb or breathing oxygenated air) is immoral. If you knowingly stop something from growing into a life, when you know it will if let be, you are killing it. Am I incorrect? Therefore, aborting a human life is synonymous with murder in the technical sense, even if not in a law text book. Ya dig?

[fyonista]

@rlhstl Yes, you are incorrect. I believe so. Killing is not murder. There are different laws for war, self-defence, suicide, euthanasia, killing livestock, culling, murder, manslaughter, execution, abortion, fetal homicide, swatting flys because there are different moral ethics attached to all those things. The legalisation of abortion was based on a morally informed social movement. Do you think it was back street abortionist and corrupt politicians who supported this legislation?

[MrGnarus]

without working lungs a fetus is not viable the surfactants required are just not there until 35 weeks to 38 weeks. prior to this the fetus is will need advanced life support measures and even then before 20 weeks the fetus is not viable.

[jongalbreath]

Since when do Republicans believe in science?

[88donja]

@jongalbreath LOL True!

[Sukov]

@jongalbreath Whether or not Republicans have a track record of believing in science is ultimately irrelevant to whether not scientific evidence supports the claim that a fetus is a human.

[VoiceOfModeration]

@jongalbreath They've always been the party who funds the sciences more; i know that's random. But it's true, especially in terms of space exploration. That's why the president appealed to that in his speech last night, he wants to be more centrist to get more support and so people won't be worried about him.

[k166a]

These vetting sessions are farces with the sole purpose of (wrongly) influencing how new Supreme Court Justices think about popular political issues of the time.

Get off the camera, congressmen, get back to work, and let the Supreme Court do its work!

[hackit12]

Since Row vs Wade ... science has said the viability is higher; therefore legal abortions should be allowed for apprx. 5 months.

[kakahass]

@hackit12 lol i doubt youa re right about the 5 months- 5 months is almost full developed its more like 2 months- don't get carried away there

[hackit12]

kakahass -'lol i doubt youa'-

-

All you got ?

[kakahass]

@hackit12 no not all i got- but you made a statement with no scientific backing- i should as you is that all you got? I was thinking of when a fetus starts developing and its around the 2 month mark- i don't know where you got your '5 month' figure from...

[hackit12]

kakahass -' I was thinking of when a fetus starts - - with no scientific backing'-

-

Has to do with the context of the interview; I think Sen. Graham was trying to trap her based on scientific evidence that [is available now] that was not available, when Row v Wade was decided.

[scbluesman13]

@hackit12

That's exactly what he was trying to do... in his own bumbling & transparent way.

[kakahass]

@hackit12 i don't care what scumbag graham was doing- i was merely responding to your claims that you have some scientific evidence claiming that viability is at 5 months- but science doesn't really decide the issue in any clear cut manner...

[scbluesman13]

@kakahass

Between the 6th and 7th week, the fetus will begin to form a spinal cord and a central nervous system.

[bjphysics]

@hackit12

Why stay with the viability criterion?

[InternalCompass]

Thank you for standing up for the legiouns of leprechauns at the end of the rainbow!

We all need to respect and defend the integrity of the pot of gold.

Alll you losers can visit those of us that win the obvious lottery of God in the payoff of gold and riches.

Praise God and praise delusion, Amen!

[FDASARO]

Lol, a Republican acting like they know anything about science

ask graham his views on evolution, will he so readily say that we should consider the progressing knowledge of science then?

[micahgee]

"by considering science"

When does the GOP ever care about science?!?!?!

Oh yea only when they cherry-pick studies to further their zealous religious agenda thats right!

[treid100182]

Graham is gay...what does he care?

[junkforkaryn]

is miss graham saying she's going to keep the baby, then? congrats lindsey!

[Philinspaces]

What does this old queen give a shit about abortion? He's never going to get pregnant no matter how many guys do him.

[rumpole33]

so is graham saying that scientists will now say that an embryo is viable in the 1st 3 months? or that even in late term pregnancies, if giving birth means the death of the mother, who may even already have some children to take care of & might also be a single mother? or that if a woman finds out that her baby is severly disfigured/malformed, she should give birth to him/her? who's going to fund the care of the baby? the republicans? the ones who hate benefits to those in need? 

[joshpnw]

Fair question... fair answer.

[PersonalJesus348]

I don't think government should be in the business of taking away. That's a philosophy anyone who is left or right "handed" can agree with.

[kaysandesses]

Graham is so out of touch on this issue that he's trying to equate scientific discoveries with the evolution of society. Certainly the two are interconnected but his comparison is little more than word salad.

[juliewashere88]

Last I checked, the court already has considered viability and has only deemed unconstitutional laws banning abortion before this point, and after in special cases.

[whoo689]

Before the 20th or 22nd week (or now is it 24th?), the fetus has no SENTIENCE. It cannot feel pain or has ANY brain waves. Nothing, nada. HOW'S THAT FOR SCIENCE, you stupid fuck Graham?

[oolong2]

So since in vitro fertalization is possible. Does that mean that everytime I masterbate I'm aborting a potential life?

Funny hearing a republican talk about "science" instead of "emotion".

All they are doing is attempting to use science to extend the emotional bond we naturally have to children all the way to conception.

Whenever they talk about abortion it's always in terms of children, its never in terms of aghani civilians getting accidentally bombed from drones.

[kaysandesses]

@oolong2 You're already doomed due to the Bible's ban on "spilling your seed".

[tomfaranda]

@oolong2 "aghani" civilians being bombed has nothing to do with abortion - has a lot to do with other human rights issues, but nothing to do with abortion.

[kaysandesses]

@tomfaranda oolong's point was that the right-wing freakaloids rave on in one sentence about how abortion is "killing babies", and in the next sentence rave on about how we need to nuke the Middle East. They're only worried about "our" babies, not those on the other side of the world. It's the hypocrisy, you see.

[oolong2]

@tomfaranda

You don't get it.... The hypocrasy is the GOP stepping into our private lives to protect the POTENTIAL of life. Yet when it comes to adult lives. They have no problems KILLING prisoners that *may* be guilty of a crime, or HUNDREDS of THOUSANDS of Iraqi/Afghani civilians in perpetual war.

The issue is LIFE. Not cute babies.

The Bible never says "thou shalt not have an abortion". Yet abortion is the only LIFE the GOP cares about because it wins the emotional vote.

[themightylex]

@oolong2 Well said! A strong case against the GOP's BS!

[bushputz]

@oolong2

Deep down, the GOP doesn't want abortions banned.

They don't actually give a damn if babies live or die, just as they don't care if children or adults live or die.

Abortion is one of their primary keys to getting elected. They use it to get the religious right fired up. Life has no meaning for Republicans - only re-election and profits matter...

[bigc028282]

and on to another Harvard wannabe elite f*cktard in Washington. Isn't there a Skull and Bones group for women? How many Hartards are we up to know??

[jrshipley]

"There is no new evidence to show foetuses feel pain in the womb before 24 weeks, and so no reason to challenge the abortion limit, UK doctors say."--BBC. This is the most recent scientific research finding I've seen. What is Graham referring to?

[thehoaxbuster]

It's silly that people believe these politicians actually give a rat's ass about the unborn. They just want to snag the vote of the bible thumping crowd.

[kaysandesses]

@thehoaxbuster EXACTLY! the GOPers demand that every pregnancy be completed but then refuse to offer support to them once they're born.

[SgtMcCuddles]

slippery slope. soon congress is going to all be singing "every sperm is sacred" from monty python

[robinvan1983]

was that just a plea from the gay boy?