"Cell division isn't life, men can bear children and breastfeed them." ~ Time4pseudoscience school of science.
Printable View
It's absolutely hilarious to me how overnight Democrats could suddenly define exactly what a woman is when just minutes before this leak they were telling everyone that men could get periods and get pregnant too.
Once everything settles down about this court decision they will be right back to telling us how men need to use the women's bathrooms, need to shower with women, and need to compete against women in women only sports.
It's because they have to always come up with some faux justification for why they think everything being upside down and inside out is how the world should be. Most of them are extremely dumb and gullible, so there usually isn't much of any resistance to whatever issue they're being brainwashed about at the time.
Exhibit A
And yet the Church well into the the layer 1700s for heresy against doctrine for teaching scientific theories they felt was w threat to power. Things like the earth not being flat and that the universe wasn't earth-centric. You're citing an opinion by a famous early physician about when life begins, ignoring there was absolutely no scientific way for that to be measurable. Your evidence is lacking.
Are we really now saying "life" was a concept that people back in the 1700's couldn't possibly begin to understand? It wouldn't be until another 300+ years that people could possibly know what "life" is?
People in 1700's walking around like "Wait, is a bird a lifeform? Is a monkey a living thing? Are humans living things? I have no idea. I'm just a mindless dumb ass who doesn't know anything. I sure do hope some enlightened intellectuals in the 2000's figures it out!"
A ruling saying States can't restrict abortions doesn't need a definition of whether a fetus is a growth or a tiny tiny voter, it doesn't need a distinction of when life begins. That doesn't make it any less effective to leave it up to the medical providers to determine if an abortion is feasible. Given they are the professionals and the Supreme Court justices aren't doctors. A universal right didn't need conditions
No, all of this nonsense about it having rights and blah blah blah are stupid arguments by their Right to assert their religious dogma as a justification for ending a woman's right to choose. All these stupid distinctions are manifestation of the rights religious zealotry.