Is this accurate? How would you respond to her three questions? Can one say no to her questions and still be considered "pro life"?

[DrPepper12]

How would you respond?

A fetus IS a person so yes child support, citizenship and life insurance should be permitted while in utero.

A fetus IS NOT a person so child support, citizenship and life insurance should only permitted after birth.

[Lliam]

It's impossible to be logical with pro-lifers.

I am opposed to cruelty. But when can a fetus feel pain?
The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG 2020) and the Society for Maternal Fetal Medicine (SMFM 2021) state that fetal pain is not structurally possible until at least 24–25 weeks (6 months) gestation, that the fetus cannot be conscious of pain “until the third trimester at the earliest.”

So it's certainly not cruel to get a chemical abortion at up to 8 weeks. It not cruel to get a medical abortion up to 20 weeks.

There is no religious argument against abortion because the subject is never mentioned in the Bible. However, the Old Testament does endorse a lot of killing. Even now, many Christians celebrate the slaughter of innocent men, women and children.

And what about consideration for the pregnant woman? Isn't is cruel to force someone who got accidentally pregnant to carry the fetus to term and then either give it up for adoption or care it for the rest of their life? What about the tole on her body, her finances, her future and the child's future? All you hear from pro-lifers at that point is "It was her fault." So they really don't care about life or suffering.

[DrPepper12]

Every word true and accurate! TY

[MisterWack]

I mean to me, she proposes great questions that Conservative politicians don’t really want to answer to because they don’t have to in their mind. Answering those questions / entertaining those thoughts isn’t in the political sphere of influence, neither on left or right or center no one cares.

What I firmly see is this, incest & SA & rape & life threatening emergencies should allow a woman to have control over her own body when it comes to the choice of abortion or not to have it. All up to her and her alone.
Think about the financial impact, mental health impact, and forcing a life style they never asked for. It is really detrimental that we don’t do a national ban & individual states allow women to get the reproductive care they need to better their lives.

[DrPepper12]

The irony is that women need to have their body violated only to lose agency cuz of the violation. Its sick.

[Apple1996]

Pro lifers will fight everything so I wouldn't be surprised if some will say yes. Personally being pregnant 5 times I know that the baby is just part of the mom till they take their first breath then they become a separate living person. Babies acutally don't even realize they are a separate being from their mom till about 9-12 months old. The fact that some pro lifers think the baby in utero is a separate being from the mom and should be prioritized over the mom is just crazy shit

[DrPepper12]

Totally agreed.

[Caroline91]

I couldn’t pick either. All three criteria are separate issues. Life insurance for a fetus is ridiculous, child support is irrelevant bc there are no maintenance costs yet, citizenship only applies to individuals born here. On the surface it looks like a good argument but it isn’t valid bc the premises are invalid. Let’s not get ridiculous.

[Kaneki05]

People will try to argue against this logic but it's so right. If one law applies because it's a baby then all laws of it been a baby should apply.
But everyone even them know it's not a baby so will deflect by saying this is a separate thing when it's not. It's not murder if it has no rights.

[DrPepper12]

Good analysis

[TheorionMage]

A 'Fetus' is a PROTO-person; NOT yet ready for a 'Soul's occupancy.
The viability of the 'mother' and the 'environmental factors' of the EVENTUAL human ARE foremost concerns. "DON'T breed 'em if you (personally or societally) won't FEED them"
Those NOT doing the work, have NO right to impose THEIR values on YOUR choices!

A lascivious person imposing future involuntary conception on another is termed: A Rapist!

[AviatorTom]

No... a 6-week fetus is not a person... yet, not viable outside the womb

No... she is not a citizen, and neither is the fetus... not until born

Maybe... For the right price, you can get someone to insure anything

[nawtee_me]

You give two possibilities but not the right one as an answer. To collect child support you need more information on the child to fill out the paperwork to collect. Such as male or female, child’s name etc. yes it is a person but no you can’t collect child support before birth as date of birth is also a question on the paperwork.

[DrPepper12]

Oh, so lack of data is the hang up but its still a person. Are you serious?

[blueonblack22]

It makes sense why leftists want to flood so many illegals into the USA. They need a loyal voting block because their existing one is hell bent on slowly going extinct.

[DrPepper12]

Guys!!! He discovered the plot!! Implement Order 66!!

[blueonblack22]

😆😆😆 political differences or not I can take a joke above.

But on a more serious note welfare offices are signing up “migrants” to vote while not requesting proof of citizenship.

nypost.com/.../

Just FYI I do not believe the 2020 election was “legally” stolen by Trump (figurative is a different story considering what the mass media and social media did e. g. burying the hunter laptop story).

But there is some funny business bullshit going on right now that makes the DNC look highly suspect. Why are immigrants being signed up for voter registration without proof of citizenship?

[DrPepper12]

Yeah, community support agencies (NOT "welfare") ARE registering RESIDENTS to vote in LOCAL elections. Is that a problem?

[blueonblack22]

nypost.com/.../

Is this fair to American citizens? To disabled homeless veterans?

[Anonymous]

these issues have nothing to do with each other

and who exactly is she suppose to demand child support from without a confirmed paternity test? some random guy like you whom she decides is the father?

[DrPepper12]

An opinion bereft of evidence. Yawn

[Opinion Owner]

just like you have evidence a randomly selected man is the father of the child. oh wait, you don't

[DrPepper12]

You dont make the presumption that a womans intimate partner or rapist is not the parent? Wow. Your misogyny is showing.

[Opinion Owner]

presumption isn't evidence. proof is needed to convict someone of being a rapist, not your feelings and it's oddly suspicious she's demanding child support from an intimate partner she loves

[DrPepper12]

Its the principle. Ya know, the thing trump lacks? she's probing veracity and authenticity of beliefs.

[Opinion Owner]

nobody is questioning whether it's a life or not (exception for pro-abortionists)

people are questioning paternity, timing and location of birth

she trying to use loopholes to justify dehumanizing the unborn life to justify abortion

and what does Trump have to do with this? he must really be living rent free in your mind

[DrPepper12]

Because he stated "there has to be some kind of punishment for that" regarding women and doctors who perform abortions?

No she's asking the logical conclusions of fetal personhood

[Opinion Owner]

it doesn't change the fact it is still life

all she did was reveal some loopholes to be exploited

and considering men get punished for opting out of fatherhood, it's true equality for women to face punishment too unless you don't actually believe in gender equality

the child support system is already being abused by selfish single moms. if she can claim child support during pregnancy, there's nothing stopping her from aborting later or deliberately getting a miscarriage and still keep all those child support payments from a man who may or may not even be the father

[DrPepper12]

Who hurt you?

[Opinion Owner]

certainly not your low IQ brain

[exitseven]

A fetus is a person. The thing that needs to be changed is the concept of anchor babies. You have a baby and then you get deported.

[DrPepper12]

So you want to change +250 years of settled common law... To what exactly?

Oh, and a fetus still ain't a person...

[exitseven]

Yes, the rules need to be changed. That is what amendments to the Constitution are for. America has changed and the policies that we had a hundred years, ago no longer serve the needs of the country.

[DrPepper12]

Lmk how that goes for you...

[meepmeeperton]

Not surprising that a black woman is concerned about child support...

[DrPepper12]

Great contribution. Mom must be very proud if her little boy.

[meepmeeperton]

Well she does say I’m handsome…

[meepmeeperton]

Also the point of my contribution is that this kind of thing doesn’t deserve to be taken seriously, it’s a BS semantics game. I’m pro choice for the most part, but even I get disgusted by these lame arguments. “Oh well if a fetus is a life, that actually means it’s a legal PERSON which means it should have the legal personhood right to vote or something!” just nonsense.

[DrPepper12]

Several red states already HAVE fetal personhood laws. If they claim its a person then that person gets all the rights and privileges any other minor child would get. Be consistent or be gone.

[meepmeeperton]

I feel like a case could pretty easily be made for rights that are specifically for fetuses, or potential lives, clumps of cells, whatever the hell you want to call it...

[joesheks]

The woman is clearly deranged - as most liberals are. Anything to justify killing.

[DrPepper12]

An opinion bereft of evidence and extra helpings of ad hominem. Try again.

[joesheks]

@DrPepper12 — you’re right, I did not cite any evidence or expound at all because she isn’t worth the effort. Fortunately, most people can see through this idiocy. I should ask her if the fetus isn’t life, then if I stab a pregnant woman and kill it that would be aggravated battery and not murder right? As other commenters already mentioned, conception is not the determinant of who a citizen is — birth is… and the courts haven’t even clearly decided that being born in the U. S. gives automatic citizenship. The executive branch has applied the law that way. And if it’s a woman’s body, if a man doesn’t want to be involved, why should he have to pay child support since he had no say on whether the child was born? Lastly, I am not sure who puts life insurance on their children — but certainly as other commenters pointed out, there’s an insurance market for everything. Sadly, this affirmative action hire’s tired arguments suffice for scholarship today in academia.

[DrPepper12]

First off birthright citizenship is settled law.

If fetal personhood is the law in some states then that fetus is absolutely a citizen. why do they have to wait for birth to claim what the law has already granted it?

Why should a man have to pay child suport for causing a pregnancy? As john McEnroe would say "You CAN'T be serious?"

There isn't an underwritter in the World who would write a policy for a "fetal person". Find me one Waldo.

Affirmative action hire? Careful, you're hateful, myopic bigotry is showing...