gavin has come up with a pretty big deal. (Texas Abortion Politics)

[dorankj]

I’m standing for the rights of the innocent babies being murdered, their voices seem muted somehow!

[Fun CH]

No, when I go into my doctors office, whatever goes on, is between me and my doctor.

Well gee, I guess making that statement sides me with the anti vaxxers and Republican legislators. So Chris, what kind of argument can be used, if I want what is between me and my doctor to remain private?

oh no, I agree with you that personal medical decisions are just that, personal.

My point is that its hypocritical for Replubican legislators to use that argument to benefit their anti public health/ anti science agenda and then enact laws that interfere with how a women decides what's right for her own personal health.

So they are ok with peoples choice's that prolong a deadly pandamic based on personal freedom but not a women's right to decide what's right for her own body and health based on that same principle.

The Gov also needs to steer clear of interfering with people's religious beliefs by imposing their own Christian values on the law.

They also need to stop drone killing children and other innocent civilians in the name of fighting terrorism.

"Trump revokes Obama rule on reporting drone strike deaths"

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-47480207

[dorankj]

Obfuscating the actual debate is not a ‘technique’ that I’m aware of. Who cares how many rounds you’ve fired? You type dumb.

[dorankj]

A tumor = a child? mor*n! And when I went to school here in the 80’s almost every pickup had several guns in the back window.

I have no problem with birth control (abortifacients are a little tougher).

[mister_coffee]

I will say just two things:

(1) Note that nearly all of the people posting opinions here are men. Men have a hard time discussing abortion without sounding like jerks.

(2) When you ask Pro-life people why not advocate for wide availability of contraceptives at low or zero cost, it is enjoyable to me to watch the smoke come out of their ears. But I am not a very nice person.

[dorankj]

I told you, it’s less than 1%.

[PAL]

No, when I go into my doctors office, whatever goes on, is between me and my doctor.

Well gee, I guess making that statement sides me with the anti vaxxers and Republican legislators. So Chris, what kind of argument can be used, if I want what is between me and my doctor to remain private? Perhaps mandates are in a different category.
Have other vaccines been mandated? Was polio, TB, etc. mandated? And of course the saying is, well, if people got vaccinated there would not have to be mandates.
Ken, you've got to know that a woman that is raped or has incest committed against her, is already traumatized. You say it is rare. Do you have statistics? I think it happens more than we know. Many may go unreported also.

[dorankj]

So if I take my teenager on my 600 acre ranch and kill them because they acted against my wishes I can sight a ‘right of privacy’? Killing another who is innocent is the whole point, the mother and father have the freedom to make choices that lead to the innocent life but not the right to kill the result of those choices. The Supreme Court once said it was ‘constitutional’ to own slaves (on rather similar grounds) so they definitely get it wrong sometimes!

[Fun CH]

You guys always do the same thing, make assertions that the other side never said (or endorsed) and then hold them responsible for your invention! !

https://jwa.org/blog/risingvoices/abort ... pe-culture

"These laws violate due process clauses in the 5th amendment and the 14th amendment. A 1992 Supreme Court Case, Planned Parenthood vs. Casey, clarified the right to privacy, explaining that, “It is a promise of the Constitution that there is a realm of personal liberty which the government may not enter.” The decision of whether to have an abortion is a personal choice that the government should not have jurisdiction to regulate.

These laws also violate the idea of separation of church and state that the U.S. was founded on. As Alabama Governor Kay Ivey writes, “This legislation stands as a powerful testament to Alabamians' deeply held belief that every life is precious and that every life is a sacred gift from God." Forcing one’s personal religious beliefs onto the entire state of Alabama is reminiscent of so many other examples of religiously justified oppression: slavery, genocide, the Salem Witch trials, the Crusades... the list goes on."

"Even more concerning, the Alabama law offers no exception for victims of rape or incest to get abortions. It is horribly unsettling to read about this and realize that the people writing these laws have absolutely zero regard for the women whose lives will be irreparably harmed. When asked if the new law would outlaw in vitro fertilization, Alabama Senator Chambliss responded “The egg in the lab doesn’t apply. It’s not in a woman. She’s not pregnant.” In writing a comprehensive abortion ban, I would think that the “egg in the lab” would be extremely relevant to the conversation—I.V.F. is at the crux of the debate about when “life” begins, and when fetuses have rights. This Senator’s response reveals the chilling truth that the sole purpose of these laws is to regulate a woman’s body, not to “save lives.”

Restrictive abortion laws demonstrate the entitlement that men and the government feel they have over women’s bodies. Simply put, this is rape culture."

[dorankj]

You guys always do the same thing, make assertions that the other side never said (or endorsed) and then hold them responsible for your invention! I’m pretty cool with death of the rapist, related or otherwise if found guilty per our laws in a court of law. I would also support forced financial support of woman and child for rapists or really any man who impregnates a woman (I’m pro-choice for both ensuring no pregnancy occurs). I could even understand society saying that those extreme (and extremely rare) cases (rape, incest and health of the mother) are allowed an abortion (I still struggle morally with killing an innocent). 99% are personal choices and we all have great freedoms to make personal choices but we are not always free from the consequences of those choices!

[Fun CH]

No, when I go into my doctors office, whatever goes on, is between me and my doctor.

that's the same argument anti vaxxers and Republican legislators use against the Covid public health mitigation mandates.

Yet when it comes to women's right to the same consideration, they want control over that women's body.

Nothing new here. Rape culture dies hard.

https://www.nbcnews.com › us-news

"A New York man who pleaded guilty to rape and sexual abuse for assaulting four teenage girls when he was also a teen avoided prison when a judge sentenced him Tuesday to eight years probation, according to an attorney for one of the victims."

[Fun CH]

I didn’t catch the Jewish question and article, so you DO want government enforcement of one religious doctrine because it agrees with your POV? You lefties, without DOUBLE standards you have NO standards at all!

ha, no I do not "want government enforcement of one religious doctrine because it agrees with your (my) POV?"

But the when you impose Christian values concerning Abortion upon people with other religious beliefs, that's exactly what Republican legislators are doing in Texas and Mississippi with others soon to follow.

And you accuse Lefty's of a double standards huh?

Bodily autonomy for refusing a vaccine but not for women's right to control her body without the Gov wanting a piece of it.

And after a child is born, Republican legislators say too bad you're poor, get a job, and don't expect help you with childcare or a higher minimum wage.

[PAL]

Incest and rape and abortion should be allowed.
Some men, and it is mostly men, think it is just dandy if a woman has to bear the child of the rapist or of her own father. If it were their own daughter, well, would that be fine too?
It is sick for any man to demand that of a woman. Sadistic and crazy.
Poor women in Texas and other states may not be able to afford to go to another state that allows abortions for rape and incest. They will be the ones that suffer. And the child, a result of rape or incest will grow up and may not know how it was conceived. And the woman, may love it, after all. But if it is detested, what kind of life is that? Oh and should the rapist or incestuous father have visitation rights?
Send our sons and daughters off to war. Who cares about them being killed then?
No, when I go into my doctors office, whatever goes on, is between me and my doctor.
Rant over.

[dorankj]

Mirror Alf!

[dorankj]

I didn’t catch the Jewish question and article, so you DO want government enforcement of one religious doctrine because it agrees with your POV? You lefties, without DOUBLE standards you have NO standards at all!

[dorankj]

1. Yes, however they may not kill another body with separate DNA.

2.I’ve never understood how the answer to one heinous crime is to kill someone who is innocent and defenseless?

3.I don’t understand how you can so vociferously demand body autonomy and personal choice for one person (wanting to commit a murder) but then deny that same right to someone only exactly wishing to exercise personal choice for only their body? (Or do you now believe society CAN demand compliance for it’s wishes?) Show me how I am any threat to your life beyond normal human interaction (by each mutual consent).

4.I do not want government interfering with MY medical decisions, can I kill someone else and pretend it’s private? I thought society and government were instituted to protect those that can’t protect themselves?

5. I am perfectly fine with and in fact demand levels of government enact and enforce laws upholding individual rights and personal freedoms (to the greatest extent possible), where those values come from is fine to debate.

Hope this makes it clear for you.

[Fun CH]

Problem with this angle, there is an actual constitutional amendment directly providing for self protection (the right for one to live). There is no protection provided to kill another who is innocent (Roe’s theory of right to privacy protecting the killing of another life is as flimsy as it gets). As to scammy tricks, the leftists/marxists have owned that for centuries!

so women don't have a right to bodily autonomy?

So daughters raped by their fathers are now required to be Gov controlled incubators?

How about this one?

Anti vaxxers "theory of right to privacy protecting the killing of another life is as flimsy as it gets"

I thought that you didn't want government interfering with your medical decisions.

You ok with Federal and State governments imposing Christian values on other peoples religious freedoms?

"Jews, outraged by restrictive abortion laws, are invoking the Hebrew Bible in the debate"

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nat ... 808776001/

[dorankj]

https://youtu.be/09maaUaRT4M This could be put to many of these posts but I’ll try it here.

[dorankj]

Problem with this angle, there is an actual constitutional amendment directly providing for self protection (the right for one to live). There is no protection provided to kill another who is innocent (Roe’s theory of right to privacy protecting the killing of another life is as flimsy as it gets). As to scammy tricks, the leftists/marxists have owned that for centuries!