Who are you to tell me what is right? A book written by man 2000 years ago? How are we not past this yet?
GOP's anti-abortion crisis
- Thread starter binsfeldcyhawk2
- Start date
Who are you to tell me what is right? A book written by man 2000 years ago? How are we not past this yet?
It's not right but it's okay, I'm gonna make it anyway. Pack your bags up and leave, don't you dare come running back to me. It's not right, but it's okay, I'm gonna make it anyway. Close the door behind you, leave your key. I'd rather be alone than unhappy.
I agree it’s dumb to oppose that but is that actually happening anywhere, or is that a solution in search of a problem?
The thing is, too, the pro lifers will NEVER EVER STOP on this issue. Most Republican politicians I would guess really don't care that much - just following a strategy to cater to these people. This is always going to be a thing, because again, the people who believe it's murdering babies to the core, will never let this issue go.
Yep. Like protect women's rights to their own bodies. Something you're not for.
Why do you want millions more added to the populace? Do you want to pay for them? Because that's what we'll be doing.
We completely agree here.
Well…after getting defeated Tuesday night in 7 elections, in the abortion arena, we are now seeing calls for standards and requirements limiting abortion at the federal level. Tim Scott called for it in the debate.
Funny don’t see how that takes the issue off the table. Can see Dems/Pro Choice hang the 6 week ban on the GOP. As their standard.
9 if you count Deacon Hill's practice performance.
As I predicted shortly after Roe was overturned, Dems will be employing the Karl Rove playbook against Republicans for decades
Rove successfully organized numerous state and local ballot initiatives around certain “hot button” issues guaranteed to drive conservative voters to the polls. Prohibition against same sex marriage, gun rights, criminal sentencing reform, school vouchers etc. He would then coordinate the rollout campaign to form PACs and ad campaigns around the issue.
It worked remarkably well as a GOTV strategy. The ads went out, Fox shows would promote and inform, Limbaugh and other RW hosts demagogued the outrage and turnout soared. Of course, the whole purpose was for these voters to check the box of the R candidates on the same ballot.
That same dynamic will work in Dems favor for the foreseeable future. Abortion access/rights is driving new voter registration. Those voters are motivated. They will vote D candidates.
Rove successfully organized numerous state and local ballot initiatives around certain “hot button” issues guaranteed to drive conservative voters to the polls. Prohibition against same sex marriage, gun rights, criminal sentencing reform, school vouchers etc. He would then coordinate the rollout campaign to form PACs and ad campaigns around the issue.
It worked remarkably well as a GOTV strategy. The ads went out, Fox shows would promote and inform, Limbaugh and other RW hosts demagogued the outrage and turnout soared. Of course, the whole purpose was for these voters to check the box of the R candidates on the same ballot.
That same dynamic will work in Dems favor for the foreseeable future. Abortion access/rights is driving new voter registration. Those voters are motivated. They will vote D candidates.
Not at all. Many, if not most, of the children will be forced into the already overworked foster system. Others will be born to mothers of minimal means. Yet your party actively works to gut the programs these children will need.
Your ilk talks a big game of moral superiority, but you don't actually care about these children.
I sure hope thats the republican philosophy with the 2024 elections. I think things will go very well for them LOL.
It was actually encouraging that there was talk and general agreement last night that one, mental health support in this country must be expanded and two, mothers who bring a fetus to term need more support.
If you asked foster children if they'd rather have been aborted, I bet they would say "No."
hawkeyetraveler
HR All-American
Virtually everyone has their own definition of right and wrong. I have mine and you have yours. On this topic we differ, on others we probably agree. Society is a collection of all of these opinions, some of which we codify into law, a few of which we hold so dear we codify them in the constitution.
I respect your right to believe what you believe, where you lose me is when a minority attempts to dictate their own religious views (through any means necessary) to the majority. Especially when you speak with such conviction that your belief is the only right belief. Society is speaking on this topic and it is quite clear the majority want something different from your view. If you don’t like it vote for people who think like you, or move someplace where they share your views. But don’t demean the voice of the majority by implying they don’t know right from wrong simply because they disagree with you.
Increased mental health support must be accompanied by increased social support services (private or public funded), or it won't make much difference. If a patient can't afford the medication because of cost, because they lost insurance after losing their job, etc they won't fill it. If they can't get affordable day care, or have to work 2-3 jobs, they won't be able to go into the appointment with their psychiatrist.
Additionally we have to start paying for the things we all seemingly want. Want more psychiatrists, counselors, social workers for this expanded mental health services? You have to start paying them more to attract people to the field. Insurance needs to better cover medications, counseling better (they have made improvements in the last few years, but there's room for improvement).
How is that going to work? How does losing every election advance any cause? I think you havn't thought that one through.
And if you ask their dead mother who was forced to carry them to term and died as a result of a medical complication that didn't meet the specific criteria that would make termination legal, I bet they wished the government kept that decision to the patient and her doctor.
Ah. So up to 5% of women suffering a health crisis in their pregnancy with no remedy is an acceptable number to you?
vs. a clump of cells?
That’s awesome, Brian.
Good. Than you believe that an abortion should be available to a woman and the decision about whether to abort or carry to term is between a woman and her doctor.
And nobody else.
I love consensus.
I'm against killing people unless it's in self-defense or to protect innocents.
Abortion doesn't qualify.
The problem with your stance is the absolute nature of it, Brian. And your stance - unfortunately - is being legislated where there is no gray area for exceptions.
That’s why your stance is unworkable. You are taking the medical necessity - yes, the REPRODUCTIVE HEALTHCARE - out of the equation.
Abortion is healthcare. I know you don’t like that term, but that’s the reality.
You theocracy blinds you from the nuance and complexity of the issue.
Abortion is killing. That's just a fact.
I can see nuance, though.
Abortion at 5 weeks is less bad than abortion at 20 weeks, for example.
Jesus Christ. You’re hopeless.
Good luck living in your increasingly marginalized world.
and allowing a woman to go into septic shock and dying is like…killing.
Nope. Allowing someone to die isn't the same as killing.
You're not educated on this subject, Hawk..
Yikes.
Well. As I’ve expressed to you previously, my “education” is enough to know that I don’t have a uterus and can’t get pregnant.
Therefore, I can’t make the choice.
Neither should you. Or your theocratic leaders.
Latest posts
-
-
Source Confirms to Rivals, Iowa has been in Contact with General Booty- Latest: Eliot Clough
-
-
-
