Abortions Rights Win (Again)

[OHvol40]

So if a woman just up and decides she doesn’t want to be a mom at say 30 weeks, she should be able to abort no questions asked without any repercussions?

Americans who want to ban abortion are clearly a minority, there is an even smaller minority who want to criminalize abortion. It’s a losing position that most Americans, especially women, will never vote for. If you disagree, then fine, but it’s important to understand that most people don’t want abortion criminalized.

 

[creekdipper]

Consent from the unborn?

Consent from the mentally-impaired? Consent from the two-month-old infant?

 

[creekdipper]

I don't understand why anyone thinks the "vasectomy" proposition is a relevant analogy. Pro-life advocates are not attempting to mandate involuntary sterilization of birthing persons.

 

[creekdipper]

This is the exact same type of tactics we see from gun grabbers who post “the truth about what an ar15 does to a 5 year old’s body”.

They are identical pleas to emotion.

- It’s no secret as to what happens to a baby in a D&E procedure.
- It’s no secret as to what happens when a high velocity rifle round hits a child.

It may not be "a secret" (i.e., hidden from public access), but many people who say they are "pro-choice" have absolutely no idea of the actual, graphic nature of what takes place during abortions...any more than the average person can imagine what happens during other invasive procedures.

 

[McDad]

Attempting to criminalize movement between states for legal purposes, already involves the Federal government since it would violate freedom of movement under the privileges and immunities clause which has long been established by the Supreme Court as fundamental right.

Activities illegal in one state or county and legal or decriminalized in another state or county already exist without federal involvement. Gambling, alcohol sales, prostitution, drug usage, etc. The difference between those "vices" and abortion is the state or county doesn't attempt to punish citizens when those illegal activities are done outside the citizen's jurisdiction. Doesn't a punished individual have a civil rights case against their county or state when it comes to traveling for abortion? The fed would only need to be involved at the judicial level if the case between a citizen and their state made it's way to SCOTUS.

 

[creekdipper]

Full bodily autonomy for every legal adult in America. Full stop.

But not for children?

 

[creekdipper]

I think you’re welcome to place whatever limits you think apply, and practice those limits in your own lived experience. Leave everyone else to set their own limits. Do you think the government needs to be making these decisions for us? I don’t.

Also, don’t use ridiculous examples, no regular person wants to advocate for unfettered full-term abortions.

There are certainly people who do just that, and they would likely consider themselves to be "regular people."

And consistent re: "choice."

 

[creekdipper]

The ole shock jock routine. If you need to resort to nut-picking to explain your stance, maybe it’s not a stance worth explaining.

A rebuttal would say that if you have to resort to equivocating and back-tracking on the "choice" argument, then perhaps it's not a stance worth explaining.

 

[BeardedVol]

Activities illegal in one state or county and legal or decriminalized in another state or county already exist without federal involvement. Gambling, alcohol sales, prostitution, drug usage, etc. The difference between those "vices" and abortion is the state or county doesn't attempt to punish citizens when those illegal activities are done outside the citizen's jurisdiction. Doesn't a punished individual have a civil rights case against their county or state when it comes to traveling for abortion? The fed would only need to be involved at the judicial level if the case between a citizen and their state made it's way to SCOTUS.

Jurisdiction. States only have rights for prosecution inside the borders of said states. It's the same reason that extradition is required when a a person is charged with a crime in another state.

It's exactly why Tennessee can't charge you with solicitation when you return home from a visit the Bunny Ranch while in Nevada.

The supreme court has already ruled on several occasions that freedom of movement is a fundamental right, which the Federal government has an obligation to uphold under the Constitution (United States v. Guest).

 

[Vol8188]

The ole shock jock routine. If you need to resort to nut-picking to explain your stance, maybe it’s not a stance worth explaining.

Nuts are a big reason laws exist. You can’t simply ignore them when writing laws. It’s not about shock at all. It’s about establishing a limit.

 

[Vol8188]

Americans who want to ban abortion are clearly a minority, there is an even smaller minority who want to criminalize abortion. It’s a losing position that most Americans, especially women, will never vote for. If you disagree, then fine, but it’s important to understand that most people don’t want abortion criminalized.

Your stance here is the real minority here. I’m not sure how you could be convinced otherwise unless you’re simply trolling. Almost no one supports unlimited abortion. 2/3 want it restricted to the first trimester

 

[Vol8188]

They have realized abortion is murder is a losing position.

I would guess most people who say "abortion is murder" don't actually believe that when you ask the right questions. Who is willing to hand out a life sentence to an 18 YO girl who had an abortion at 6 weeks?

Yes, abortion is murder in almost all cases (if by that you mean the unjustified taking of another life). Answering no to the second question doesn’t change that. Even older adults get less than life for murder charges frequently.

Yes, it’s murder. But that’s not the question we should ask when evaluating if an 18 year old should go to prison for life for committing the act.

Rather I’d start with the question of “was she raised in a society that falsely taught her that her child was neither alive nor human and did she believe that?” That’s why republicans don’t support putting women in prison for life for abortion but many do support charging the doctor (because they know better).

 

[whodeycin85]

Yes, abortion is murder in almost all cases (if by that you mean the unjustified taking of another life). Answering no to the second question doesn’t change that. Even older adults get less than life for murder charges frequently.

Yes, it’s murder. But that’s not the question we should ask when evaluating if an 18 year old should go to prison for life for committing the act.

Rather I’d start with the question of “was she raised in a society that falsely taught her that her child was neither alive nor human and did she believe that?” That’s why republicans don’t support putting women in prison for life for abortion but many do support charging the doctor (because they know better).

If the GOP wants to push a federal abortion policy....only fair option IMO is a heartbeat law...meaning if a women goes for an abortion and there is a heartbeat then no abortion unless is saved the life immediately of the women...if no heartbeat then that is her choice...but this eliminates an arbitrary week timeframe. And seems like a compromise
..

 

[hog88]

I don't understand why anyone thinks the "vasectomy" proposition is a relevant analogy. Pro-life advocates are not attempting to mandate involuntary sterilization of birthing persons.

I think the “pro-life“ monikers is disingenuous for most people who use it to describe themselves since most “pro-lifers” overwhelmingly support capital punishment.

 

[hog88]

Jurisdiction. States only have rights for prosecution inside the borders of said states. It's the same reason that extradition is required when a a person is charged with a crime in another state.

It's exactly why Tennessee can't charge you with solicitation when you return home from a visit the Bunny Ranch while in Nevada.

The supreme court has already ruled on several occasions that freedom of movement is a fundamental right, which the Federal government has an obligation to uphold under the Constitution (United States v. Guest).

So what are you worried about. These dumbazz laws they are trying to pass won’t stand the first court challenge.

 

[whodeycin85]

I think the “pro-life“ monikers is disingenuous for most people who use it to describe themselves since most “pro-lifers” overwhelmingly support capital punishment.

Yea. I'm not pro life I'm anti abortion...but I'm willing to compromise timing of abortion...but I think pesos and murders should be killed after due process of guilt and appeals...

 

[BigOrangeTrain]

Americans who want to ban abortion are clearly a minority, there is an even smaller minority who want to criminalize abortion. It’s a losing position that most Americans, especially women, will never vote for. If you disagree, then fine, but it’s important to understand that most people don’t want abortion criminalized.

I am asking a question. You remind me of liberals who are asked simple yes or no questions but simply cannot answer them.

 

[BigOrangeTrain]

Yea. I'm not pro life I'm anti abortion...but I'm willing to compromise timing of abortion...but I think pesos and murders should be killed after due process of guilt and appeals...

Same

 

[BigOrangeTrain]

I think you’re welcome to place whatever limits you think apply, and practice those limits in your own lived experience. Leave everyone else to set their own limits. Do you think the government needs to be making these decisions for us? I don’t.

Also, don’t use ridiculous examples, no regular person wants to advocate for unfettered full-term abortions.

This post is typical word salad. On one hand you say live your life and let everyone else set their own limits. Ok. That implies that a woman should be able to make any choice when it comes to her body right? Then you say don’t use ridiculous examples of unfettered abortions. There have been many videos of women saying kill them kids and talking about how they love abortions.

Also you make the statement that no regular person wants to advocate for unfettered full term abortions. While I pretty much agree, you know as well as I do, there are normal people who believe in full term abortions or abortions at any point for any reason. So where do you fall?

There are also other factors. What if a married couple decide to have a baby. Woman gets pregnant and for some reason, she decides to abort. Does the potential father have any say? If no, why?

 

[hog88]

Yea. I'm not pro life I'm anti abortion...but I'm willing to compromise timing of abortion...but I think pesos and murders should be killed after due process of guilt and appeals...

I’m not pro-life either, I don’t support abortion and believe capital punishment should be outlawed but don’t mind the killing of those that need killing.

 

[McDad]

Jurisdiction. States only have rights for prosecution inside the borders of said states. It's the same reason that extradition is required when a a person is charged with a crime in another state.

It's exactly why Tennessee can't charge you with solicitation when you return home from a visit the Bunny Ranch while in Nevada.

The supreme court has already ruled on several occasions that freedom of movement is a fundamental right, which the Federal government has an obligation to uphold under the Constitution (United States v. Guest).

Excellent. There is established law, ruling, and precedent which makes a state criminalizing action outside of their jurisdiction unlawful. The bad laws created by bad politicians will not survive.

 

[BernardKingGOAT]

I am asking a question. You remind me of liberals who are asked simple yes or no questions but simply cannot answer them.

Very few issues are unnuanced

 

[BeardedVol]

Excellent. There is established law, ruling, and precedent which makes a state criminalizing action outside of their jurisdiction unlawful. The bad laws created by bad politicians will not survive.

Show me established law that allows states to criminally charge residents for legal activity occuring other states.

 

[creekdipper]

I think the “pro-life“ monikers is disingenuous for most people who use it to describe themselves since most “pro-lifers” overwhelmingly support capital punishment.

Both "pro-life" and "pro-choice" are simple shorthand labels without nuance that apply exclusively to one issue.

I agree that "pro-abortion" and "anti-abortion" are more accurate terms in describing the opposing views, although some pro-abortion folks seem to get offended by that term.

 

[creekdipper]

This post is typical word salad. On one hand you say live your life and let everyone else set their own limits. Ok. That implies that a woman should be able to make any choice when it comes to her body right? Then you say don’t use ridiculous examples of unfettered abortions. There have been many videos of women saying kill them kids and talking about how they love abortions.

Also you make the statement that no regular person wants to advocate for unfettered full term abortions. While I pretty much agree, you know as well as I do, there are normal people who believe in full term abortions or abortions at any point for any reason. So where do you fall?

There are also other factors. What if a married couple decide to have a baby. Woman gets pregnant and for some reason, she decides to abort. Does the potential father have any say? If no, why?

"Bodily autonomy," "right to choose," and "my body, my choice" platforms don't allow any room for compromise.

To liberals, "compromise" seems to mean "We won't force people to get abortions (yet)."