This Twitter Account Showcases “The Very Worst” Activity On The Site, Here Are 35 Of Their Most Facepalm-Worthy Posts

Wait, what? Is this for real?

Yup. I'm a little relieved I am past child bearing years and I, unfortunately, was never able to get pregnant.

Yes

Lol no, it's not smh

Wait, can I please have one or two articles stating this?

Jack ... Is that really a thing?? What could possibly be the reason for that?? I'm gonna have to look that up

I'm not too sure about capable of survival outside the womb bit. It use to work, but I would personally include prem babies which are kept alive by medicine. I'm not too sure where the line should be. I personally don't think it is a baby until a heart beat - and possibly I would stick with foetus a bit after that.

Monday...you have up to 12-15 weeks to abort a fetus, after that it's a baby 🤷‍♀️ Just do it as soon as possible or take the day-after pill

So you still believe the rhetoric that it's "simply a clump of cells" eh? To draw out your illustration. I would more readily say it is bread that has not yet reached its full development than I would say it's just a lump of ingredients. So in short I would say it is bread (however lacking in development via baking). To again draw upon your statement of 'surviving outside the womb' I ask. How would you define "survive"?

Try making a sandwich with dough.

I think it is a human when it starts to exist.

That's an awful analogy.

How does survive require a definition there? It means to stay alive. That's generally why after viability we stop calling it a termination and start calling it a premature delivery. A woman comes in with a severe complication at 12 weeks and they tell her they need to terminate the pregnancy to save her. A woman comes in with a severe complication at 27 weeks and they tell her they need to perform an emergency C-section to save her. I really don't care what you decide is or isn't bread, the facts don't change. During the period of time where bread is still dough it is not safe to eat, and during the time where a fetus is not viable it is not a person.

Bread aside are you trying to make the case that the ability to stay alive without the assistance of others fully independently is a requirement for personhood? In that case, you would be ruling out all children of any age, and a hell of a lot of 'adults' for that matter, the disabled and the handicapped, as well as many elderly. If I miss understood what you meant by "capable of surviving outside the womb" and "to stay alive" then please I ask you to clarify. Or perhaps where you believe personhood begins. As though my original comment was about the definition of fetus it seems to have diverged into a discussion on personhood.

What on earth do you mean "How would you define survive"? It's pretty self-explanatory. You're making yourself look ridiculous. In fact, your whole comment is so indescribably stupid that I think I became significantly dumber just by reading it.

Thank you for your valuable input to the conversation Becky. I feel so much more inlighted by your contribution.

You are so kind.

Some states aren't just protecting fetuses, they are trying to say am embryo (before any brain is formed) is alive, and they are not making exceptions for fatal fetal anomalies. So when you ask that pregnant woman what she's having you could now send her down a sprail cause what she's having is dead.

I lived that situation, overseas military baby died couldn't get a d&c bc the Hyde act, at least not until I went septic months later and nearly died in the ER.

It's probably more with not wanting misinformation passed on, misinformation on easily checked science is not a difference of opinions.

Christopher, I think that's the purpose of the downvote...the purpose of the upvote is for liking/agreeing, so it's logical to assume the downvote is for disliking/not agreeing 🤷‍♀️

That's exactly the point of it.

So……24 weeks?

Yeah pretty much. By 24 weeks it has developed enough to survive in the outside world with significant medical support.

This comment is hidden. Click here to view.

Answer the questions or stfu

They did. Atleast one half

Yes

(finishing my reply) ... To life?

Saying a 12 week pregnancy is a human being is kind of like saying the lump of dough on my kitchen counter is a loaf of bread. If the right steps are taken it will certainly become bread, but it isn't now.

I always come to the comments, and am pleasantly surprised that you (monday) and I agree on everything. ***yay internet frens***

This comment is hidden. Click here to view.

If it's a human life at 26 weeks, it's a human life at 12 weeks. Time doesn't magically transform it. You're playing semantics to justify your view.

Actually, that was not my case. I was a soldier who got pregnant through a night of my own bad decision making and I own that. I tried to get an abortion because my military career was so important to me and I was not ready to become a mother. I was overseas and quickly found out that was not an option. I arranged for an adoption but when the baby was born super premature and died three times in the first 48 hours, the doctors said if the child survived he would be severely disabled. The adoptive parents backed out. I gave up the career I loved and took on another- Mother. My body was"used" by the birth father. It was GIFTED to my son, though I did not realize it at the time. I'm not anti-abortion. I just know that in my case, that fetus grew into an amazing man because I chose to put his needs before my own. For us, I made the right choices :)

Indeed.

@Debs Bee If it’s a 7 year-old after 7 years then it’s a 7 year-old after 8 years aswell by your logic.

What a ridiculous way to phrase “pregnancy”

That is demonstrably not true. The state of our foster care system is appalling. Forced birthers won't foster them or adopt them because they don't value the baby.

No one said they didn’t. We are simply stating that they are not really a human life until they can survive outside the womb. There.

This comment is hidden. Click here to view.

That's absurd. Babies can't survive outside the womb without human intervention. Should they be aborted too?

@Debs Bee "if it's a human life at 26 weeks, it's a human life at 12 weeks": have you people ever looked at the fetal development in the first trimester?! I've had a non-viable pregnancy before (blighted ovum), and they couldn't even be sure the foetus wasn't actually growing anymore until week 9, so I had to wait till week 10 so they could scrape out that lump of cells that NEVER EVER would have been a baby. Yes, I personally felt the loss, but NO, that doesn't make me any less pro-choice. If you're anti-abortion because of the POSSIBILITY of a new life, then we should also be chemically sterilising the whole population because of the POSSIBILITY of rape.

This is true.

No individual has the right to terminate another individual. “Your right to swing your fist, ends at the tip of my nose”

Sorry Dan you’ve got this the wrong way round. No individual has the right to another’s bodily autonomy, no matter their respective states of development. If I need a blood transfusion, I need your consent for you to provide. If you decide against I can’t take your blood, even if your refusal will result in my death. The principal stands the same with unwanted pregnancy, especially considering the implications of pregnancy to the woman even when things go well - a transfusion makes no difference to the donor in terms off side effects, financial and time outlay, and life implications, and yet still can’t be forced under any circumstance. Quite rightly too. Why force someone to undergo nine months of significant health implications and medical risk for the sake of another, as yet undeveloped, individual?