US Politics : Biden 100 days edition

[Kieppie]

Asking for evidence to support a fairly contentious claim is not sea-lioning.

(Although I will admit to have been unfailingly polite.)

Yes since you made statements prior to that without any evidence and then demand it when someone else makes a statement.
And it fits your troll demeanor.

Funny that you call it contentious to say that 70% of pregnancies are viable. Guess you have stats to back that up? No?
So interestingly enough the risk of a miscarriage starts off at 30% the first 3 weeks and then gradually drops. at 6 weeks it's about 13.5%

 

[Kieppie]

I don't mind getting it, but would it really change your point of view?

Doubtful. Remember how he argued about this?

 

[Gnarls]

^Bwahahahahahaha!

 

[scudsucker]

Yes since you made statements prior to that without any evidence

Such as?

and then demand it when someone else makes a statement.

It is not me, demanding accuracy, it is the convention of civilised conversation that calls for some level of due diligence when proposing a verifiable fact.

And it fits your troll demeanor.

Ok Kieps.

Funny that you call it contentious to say that 70% of pregnancies are viable. Guess you have stats to back that up? No?

I'm not actually making the claim.

So interestingly enough the risk of a miscarriage starts off at 30% the first 3 weeks and then gradually drops. at 6 weeks it's about 13.5%

Would you care to back that up with some verifiable facts?

 

[scudsucker]

I don't mind getting it, but would it really change your point of view?

I would be interested as to your sources.

So, yes, please.

 

[greg0205]

And the odds of that happening are?
Strange that proportions of such individuals aren't much higher then.

Anyway the medical emergencies exception could cater for those situation, but lets not pretend that you really care what the bill entails except that it exists.

Odds?

There you go, disrespecting Jesus again.

Jesus: Truly I tell you, whatever you did for one of the least of these brothers and sisters of mine, you did for me.

Kieppie: No, Jesus. Statistically you have to exclude those raped women.

Jesus:

Jesus:

Kieppie: I sure showed you a thing or two, hippie.

 

[konfab]

I would be interested as to your sources.

So, yes, please.

The stats we are effectively talking about are the inverse of the miscarriage rate. If a pregnancy doesn't end in a miscarriage, then it is a viable pregnancy.

A general estimate of miscarriage risk by week is as follows:

Weeks 3–4

Implantation usually occurs around 3 weeks after a woman’s last period, and about a week after ovulation. By week 4, a woman may be able to get a positive result on a home pregnancy test.

As many as 50 to 75 percent of pregnancies end before getting a positive result on a pregnancy test. Most women will never know they were pregnant, though some may suspect they were because of pregnancy loss symptoms.

Week 5

The rate of miscarriage at this point varies significantly. A 2013 study found that the overall risk of losing a pregnancy after week 5 was 21.3 percent.

Weeks 6–7

The same study suggested that after week 6, the rate of loss was just 5 percent. In most cases, it is possible to detect a heartbeat on an ultrasound around week 6.

Weeks 8–13

In the second half of the first trimester, the rate of miscarriage was between 2 and 4 percent.

Weeks 14–20

Between weeks 13 and 20, the risk of experiencing a miscarriage is less than 1 percent.

By week 20, a miscarriage is known as a stillbirth and may still cause a woman to go into labor.

https://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/322634#pregnancy-loss-rates-by-week

Most of the risk of miscarriage drops off by week 6, which is when the heartbeat law starts to apply.

Week 3-4: 50-75%
Week 5: 21.3%
Week 6-7 : 5 % <= No more abortions from here.
Week 8-13: 2-4%
Week 14-20 <1%

 

[Kieppie]

Such as?

The list is endless with you actually, but lets start with the most recent one where you claimed people view miscarriage as murder. I've only ever heard that line of argument from unhinged pro-abortionists.

It is not me, demanding accuracy, it is the convention of civilised conversation that calls for some level of due diligence when proposing a verifiable fact.

Ok Kieps.

I'm not actually making the claim.

Would you care to back that up with some verifiable facts?

You claimed without evidence that it's "contentious" to claim that over 70% of pregnancies are viable.
You had no evidence to prove this, but you claimed it anyway.
Yet a rational person would assume that Konfab read about it somewhere.
Here a normal person would quickly look it up themselves to confirm.

You however are not a rational normal person now are you?

 

[Ponderer]

So by that definition taking a brain-dead patient off life support is also murder? Brain activity is usually what defines a person, not just life... A sperm is alive isn't , as are a women's eggs., is destroying them also murder in your book?

Careful now.
If "brain activity" is used as the absolutely/only standard, it can for example strongly be argued that libtards are not alive.

 

[Kieppie]

Odds?

There you go, disrespecting Jesus again.

The irony of invoking Jesus while arguing pro-abortion...

 

[Ponderer]

I don't recall, and what was decided?

Neither will a foetus if removed from the mother...

Wow - just wow.
Your reasoning is truly psychotic.

 

[cerebus]

I have bookmarked that post of his, so when it gets overturned his reverse justification that he always held the view that it would get overturned will be on display.

Honestly I’d be shocked if the Supreme Court overturned it. It would set up a showdown with the executive branch and expose the partisanship of the court more than I think they want. But let’s see hey.

 

[konfab]

So by that definition taking a brain-dead patient off life support is also murder? Brain activity is usually what defines a person, not just life... A sperm is alive isn't , as are a women's eggs., is destroying them also murder in your book?

That is my definition of life. Which does coincidentally sit at about the same place in development as heartbeat.

Although there is a very good argument from the pro-life side against this, is that a foetus at 6 weeks has a 95% chance of "getting better" in 9 months. Would it be murder to pull the life support of someone who has a 95% chance of waking up in 9 months?

 

[scudsucker]

The list is endless with you actually, but lets start with the most recent one where you claimed people view miscarriage as murder.

I understand you don't do complex thinking nor understanding. I will try to help you with that in future.

I've only ever heard that line of argument from unhinged pro-abortionists.


You claimed without evidence that it's "contentious" to claim that over 70% of pregnancies are viable.
You had no evidence to prove this, but you claimed it anyway.
Yet a rational person would assume that Konfab read about it somewhere.
Here a normal person would quickly look it up themselves to confirm.

I expect Konfab to substantiate himself. I feel no need to provide a rationale to defend my own position until the person making the claim provides some form of evidence.

At that point we can debate the evidence.

You however are not a rational normal person now are you?

If I was a certain other right-wing member, that would be your first warning.

 

[greg0205]

The irony of invoking Jesus while arguing pro-abortion...

Oh?

Well, I quoted chapter and verse of god’s abortion recipe, but I know Jesus spoke about marriage, and sex, and divorce too.

I know he wasn’t on-board for stoning adulteresses, and I know a woman who had bled for twelve years touched him and was healed.

What I don’t know is where and when Jesus mentioned abortion, or expressed a view on it.

Help a pal out, Kieppie.

Where do I go to listen and be saved?

 

[Kieppie]

I understand you don't do complex thinking nor understanding. I will try to help you with that in future.

I expect Konfab to substantiate himself. I feel no need to provide a rationale to defend my own position until the person making the claim provides some form of evidence.

You made an unsubstantiated claim. He did not. So your rationale doesn't actually exists, but anyway lets see if you change your opinions after he's provided it.

At that point we can debate the evidence.

If I was a certain other right-wing member, that would be your first warning.

Haha cute. Refer your last sentence to your first.

I love it when you try to punch up. It provides endless entertainment. Never change.

 

[C4Cat]

Not with your beloved abortion laws. It would be about 12

How does that make any sense whatsoever?

 

[Kieppie]

Oh?

Well, I quoted chapter and verse of god’s abortion recipe, but I know Jesus spoke about marriage, and sex, and divorce too.

I know he wasn’t on-board for stoning adulteresses, and I know a woman who had bled for twelve years touched him and was healed.

What I don’t know is where and when Jesus mentioned abortion, or expressed a view on it.

He probably mentioned it the same way the constitution mentioned it...

Help a pal out, Kieppie.

Where do I go to listen and be saved?

Not up to date with religious practises and I suppose it depends on which one you follow, but anything is possible. I mean murderers have been forgiven before..

 

[greg0205]

How does that make any sense whatsoever?

Imagine a libertarian pretzeling himself into "beloved abortion laws" to attack the libertarian-beloved individual choice part of "pro-choice".

A libertarian, damn it!

We're in the upside down.

 

[greg0205]

He probably mentioned it the same way the constitution mentioned it...


Not up to date with religious practises and I suppose it depends on which one you follow, but anything is possible. I mean murderers have been forgiven before..

And right there you've given the whole game away.

Thanks, Kieppie

Of course Jesus never mentioned abortion, and the first amendment protects folks from government limiting their freedom.

Yet here we are, in y'all's white, nationalist, evangelical Christian world, legislating what grown woman can and can't do with their own bodies, and paying bounties to Arkansas felons for suing a doctor who self-reported performing an abortion in TX.

Jesus.