The states should decide....

[Joes Place]

Lol so you think the failings of politicians are to be how I should shape my opinions?

When they legislate the OPPOSITE of their actions, absolutely.

 

[win4jj]

Lol so you think the failings of politicians are to be how I should shape my opinions?

I’m sorry to interject in this thread, but I asked you in a previous thread when you oppose murder. What are your thoughts on the death penalty?

 

[HawkNester]

I think I saw a poll that showed women support a ban on 2nd and 3rd trimester abortion with them exception of mothers health

That still doesn’t change the fact that it should not be restricted.

 

[Obviously Oblivious]

That doesn't make any sense. You can't be upset about this decision under the guise of limited access while simultaneously saying the rate will increase. Nevermind the fact birth rates have steadily been declining. The only way your situation comes to fruition is if access doesn't change and birth rates reverse course.

You’re assuming all abortions after restrictions are put in place will occur in legitimate medical clinics/hospitals. They won’t. I don’t think it’s unreasonable to think that births will increase because of potential restrictions put in place, especially when you know this will primarily affect the poor. Prolifers want to turn back the clock and pretend that things will be different this time around. They won’t be. In fact it could be much worse.

 

[notlongago]

You’re assuming all abortions after restrictions are put in place will occur in legitimate medical clinics/hospitals. They won’t. I don’t think it’s unreasonable to think that births will increase because of potential restrictions put in place, especially when you know this will primarily affect the poor. Prolifers want to turn back the clock and pretend that things will be different this time around. They won’t be. In fact it could be much worse.

No, I'm assuming those will drop by about 13%. It's foolish to think the overall rate will increase and lacks all logic.

 

[Hawknado]

Neither are things we are granted you take for granted. Foolish argument.

Should be put on a plaque or something. Commemorate it

 

[Hawknado]

Your brain knows.

Your brain knows what can happen, yes

 

[Hawknado]

Sad to hear you never get laid.

Lol I spend too much time at your establishment

 

[Hawknado]

When they legislate the OPPOSITE of their actions, absolutely.

So did you wear a mask after you saw Gavin Newsome and every other democrat without a mask?

 

[ft254]

I be put on a plaque or something. Commemorate it

Predictable.

 

[Hawknado]

I’m sorry to interject in this thread, but I asked you in a previous thread when you oppose murder. What are your thoughts on the death penalty?

Pretty sure I replied. Go look. I said it’s not necessary but there is a difference between innocent life and someone who receives a death penalty.

 

[Hawknado]

Predictable.

Politicians will always try to take our rights away. SCOTUS puts them in check. Just because you don’t agree doesn’t mean they aren’t doing what they are designed to do. 10th amendment issue

 

[Obviously Oblivious]

No, I'm assuming those will drop by about 13%. It's foolish to think the overall rate will increase and lacks all logic.

What do you assume will drop by precisely 13%?

 

[ClarindaA's]

That still doesn’t change the fact that it should not be restricted.

It does actually. Majority rule, and if the elected officials decide to make the restriction 15 weeks as federal law, then I think that’sa great compromise.

 

[ClarindaA's]

"mother's health" is legally undefined, and means different things to different people.

• For one, it may mean "I'll go to the ER before I'll abort"
• For another, it may mean "I already have 2 kids, and a difficult pregnancy preventing me from working will bankrupt my family - and I do not want to risk leaving my existing kids orphans if things 'go south' quickly on me"

Why would you want "legislators" imposing those decisions/restricting those options for some people?

Then in the second case, abortion is great in the first 15 weeks

 

[win4jj]

Politicians will always try to take our rights away. SCOTUS puts them in check. Just because you don’t agree doesn’t mean they aren’t doing what they are designed to do. 10th amendment issue

Pretty sure I replied. Go look. I said it’s not necessary but there is a difference between innocent life and someone who receives a death penalty.

So pro choice?

 

[notlongago]

What do you assume will drop by precisely 13%?

Because thats what the "experts" are figuring.

 

[Hawknado]

So pro choice?

Uhh… no?

 

[HawkNester]

It does actually. Majority rule, and if the elected officials decide to make the restriction 15 weeks as federal law, then I think that’sa great compromise.

That’s not what’s happening.

 

[ClarindaA's]

That’s not what’s happening.

I know, I’m saying the majority would go for that, didn’t imply that’s what’s happening at all

 

[Joes Place]

Then in the second case, abortion is great in the first 15 weeks

Not everyone starts having serious complications "within the first 15 weeks".

 

[Obviously Oblivious]

Because thats what the "experts" are figuring.

“Experts” are figuring what will drop by 13%?

 

[Joes Place]

It does actually. Majority rule

So, then let's tie 100% of Federal Funding to states (for everything) to each state holding a referendum, every 2 years, on abortion rights.

if >50% of their constituents want "choice", then it's "choice". If they want to ban abortions, then they're banned in that state for the next 2 years. So long as you hold that open vote, you get federal funding, regardless.

That is "putting the power into the people of the state", NOT gerrymandered legislatures.

 

[ClarindaA's]

So, then let's tie 100% of Federal Funding to states (for everything) to each state holding a referendum, every 2 years, on abortion rights.

if >50% of their constituents want "choice", then it's "choice". If they want to ban abortions, then they're banned in that state for the next 2 years. So long as you hold that open vote, you get federal funding, regardless.

That is "putting the power into the people of the state", NOT gerrymandered legislatures.

I wouldn’t be against that, for some issues

 

[ClarindaA's]

Not everyone starts having serious complications "within the first 15 weeks".

I would leave it open for medical emergencies.

 

[Joes Place]

I would leave it open for medical emergencies.

Some people would rather terminate their pregnancy BEFORE it becomes a "medical emergency".

 

[ClarindaA's]

Some people would rather terminate their pregnancy BEFORE it becomes a "medical emergency".

They do it before 15 weeks

 

[ClarindaA's]

They do it before 15 weeks

Replying to myself here, but what I mean is, if there is a medical reason to terminate, go for it. If it’s a matter of losing a job, a break up, etc…..I feel their pain, but beyond a certain point, there is a life there. My stepndaughter was born at 24 weeks old….she’s awesome. There are cases at 20 weeks now. At what point are you not ok with abortion

 

[notlongago]

“Experts” are figuring what will drop by 13%?

Abortion. Keep up.

 

[TheCainer]

Roe vs Wade (1973) a decision written by Justice
Blackman was based on a "right to privacy". Many legal
scholars agree that Blackman's decision was clearly not
based on the U.S. Constitution which never mentions
a "right to privacy".

It was always felt by legal scholars that Roe vs Wade
would someday be overturned because it was considered
unconstitutional. That day was June 24, 2022. Let the
individual states make their own abortion laws.

Why, because those justices that said Roe was precedent should determine its outcome?

Well, uh, yeah, oops!

 

[Joes Place]

Replying to myself here, but what I mean is, if there is a medical reason to terminate, go for it. If it’s a matter of losing a job, a break up, etc…..I feel their pain, but beyond a certain point, there is a life there. My stepndaughter was born at 24 weeks old….she’s awesome. There are cases at 20 weeks now. At what point are you not ok with abortion

24 weeks

 

[ClarindaA's]

24 weeks

What’s wrong with, say, 18

 

[Joes Place]

What’s wrong with, say, 18

Not viable w/o seriously expensive intervention.

Remember, the initial embryo survival rate is about 25% for progression to an actual pregnancy. Viability should be at least 50% and with nominal medical intervention (not NICUs) for bans.

24 weeks is just fine.

 

[ft254]

Politicians will always try to take our rights away. SCOTUS puts them in check. Just because you don’t agree doesn’t mean they aren’t doing what they are designed to do. 10th amendment issue

The Supreme Court has become the tip of the right-wing spear. No pretensions of subtlety.

They are totally political and it will backfire. The core of the radical right-wing is relatively small with differing levels of information-starved followers, ranging from ignorant to dumb to totally stupid.

 

[Hawknado]

The Supreme Court has become the tip of the right-wing spear. No pretensions of subtlety.

They are totally political and it will backfire. The core of the radical right-wing is relatively small with differing levels of information-starved followers, ranging from ignorant to dumb to totally stupid.

Every action taken was constitutional, followed the text of the constitution. Just because the court didn’t follow their job description 50 years ago doesn’t make it some right wing spear.

It was well known that Roe v Wade was in the crosshairs. Obama himself said it wasn’t a priority when he could have done something about it.

 

[Hawknado]

Not viable w/o seriously expensive intervention.

Remember, the initial embryo survival rate is about 25% for progression to an actual pregnancy. Viability should be at least 50% and with nominal medical intervention (not NICUs) for bans.

24 weeks is just fine.

My question about viability. Do we believe a 1 year old is viable without intervention from an adult? I know some 18 year olds that would barely be considered viable

 

[ft254]

Every action taken was constitutional, followed the text of the constitution. Just because the court didn’t follow their job description 50 years ago doesn’t make it some right wing spear.

It was well known that Roe v Wade was in the crosshairs. Obama himself said it wasn’t a priority when he could have done something about it.

I don't see where you addressed my point. They are using the Court for political purposes. BTW, where is my response to 'where in the Constitution is the right to bear arms'.

 

[Hawknado]

I don't see where you addressed my point. BTW, where is my response to 'where in the Constitution is the right to bear arms'.

My point is religion doesn’t have to be/isn’t a part of the decision. There was no need for it to be, the constitution was the blueprint.

Are you being serious when you ask where is the right to bear arms? I’m sure you can count higher than 1. SCOTUS just affirmed 2A rights. Like days ago….

 

[ft254]

My point is religion doesn’t have to be/isn’t a part of the decision. There was no need for it to be, the constitution was the blueprint.

Are you being serious when you ask where is the right to bear arms? I’m sure you can count higher than 1. SCOTUS just affirmed 2A rights. Like days ago….

Amendment. Amendment to the Constitution idiot.

 

[Hawknado]

Amendment. Amendment to the Constitution idiot.

I guess I don’t follow. Amendments aren’t apart of the constitution? Please elaborate