SCOTUS fails to stop TX abortion law.

#551
#551
Sub Par SUPERSTAR said:
I'm so iffy on this because, on one hand, I agree with everything about about it, but on the other hand, the idea of a child potentially going without necessities is very disheartening...
Click to expand...

Perhaps you should reexamine your presuppositions, if they lead inevitably to a conclusion that your conscience rightly rejects.
 
#552
#552
AshG said:
If the unborn child has implanted in a fallopian tube, then it will rupture the tube as it grows and kill both mother and child. Limiting procedures with a hard cap of present heartbeat puts doctors and hospitals in very tight legal spots where saving the mother's life may mean violating the letter of the law.
Click to expand...

It should be easy to craft and find support for language amending such "heartbeat laws" to specify that the removal of the fallopian tube in the case of an ectopic pregnancy is in no way prohibited, since vanishingly few in the prolife community regard this procedure as an abortion (see the concepts of "double effect" and "indirect abortion").
 
#553
#553
AshG said:
Can we clarify that when the word "abortion" is used in here it is referring specifically to prophylactic abortion? I want to make sure that I save my righteous indignation for the right people.
Click to expand...

I'd be grateful if you'd define what you mean by "prophylactic abortion" -- a brief search on Google leaves me with the impression that this is not a common term with a commonly understood meaning.
 
#554
#554
luthervol said:
I can almost hear his numbers going up.

Biden launches federal effort to respond to Texas law as he faces pressure to protect abortion - CNNPolitics

Biden said he was launching a "whole of government" effort to respond to the law, tasking the Department of Health and Human Services and the Justice Department "to see what steps the Federal Government can take to ensure that women in Texas have access to safe and legal abortions." He said the effort would be led from within the White House.
Click to expand...

Do you think he could use some of those resources to help with the border crisis?
 
#557
#557
DinkinFlicka said:
You sanctimonious sh*tbirds should be thankful for abortion. I would have spawned a score of mini Dink's without it.
Click to expand...

Did you consult the fathers before aborting their assh$le babies?

It was probably best for you, because I don’t believe you can handle the pain of giving birth.
 
#558
#558
rjd970 said:
View attachment 392033
Click to expand...

Who could disagree with Justice Ginsburg, if the words "the decision whether or not to bear a child" were to be understood in their conventional sense? In that case, though, the factors that would infringe upon a woman's autonomy would be such things as rape, infertility, and violence visited upon a mother and her unborn child, none of which have historically been caused or condoned (domestically, at least) by our government. The words "when Government controls that decision for her," then, make manifest that the words "the decision whether or not to bear a child" are a euphemism for "the decision whether or not to abort a fetus already conceived." Why did a Justice of the Supreme Court feel it necessary to speak in euphemisms?
 
Last edited:
#559
#559
MOOOOONEY said:
Did you consult the fathers before aborting their assh$le babies?

It was probably best for you, because I don’t believe you can handle the pain of giving birth.
Click to expand...

Surely, even you can come up with something better than ''ur a girl lol.''
 
#561
#561
#563
#563
It has not escaped my notice that a couple of our self-proclaimed champions of the liberty and dignity of woman have chosen as avatars images perpetuating the objectification of women, while a third seems by his own admission to have impregnated several different women. One is justified to question whether advocacy for abortion really tends toward the empowerment and elevation of our daughters.
 
#564
#564
DuckInAPen said:
It has not escaped my notice that a couple of our self-proclaimed champions of the liberty and dignity of woman have chosen as avatars images perpetuating the objectification of women, while a third seems by his own admission to have impregnated several different women. One is justified to question whether advocacy for abortion really tends toward the empowerment and elevation of our daughters.
Click to expand...

Easy. The first two view women as nothing more than breeders, whereas that absolute casanova stud of a third sees them as carnal goddesses to be savored like fine wine.

Moral of the story? Pork and abort.
 
#565
#565
DuckInAPen said:
It has not escaped my notice that a couple of our self-proclaimed champions of the liberty and dignity of woman have chosen as avatars images perpetuating the objectification of women, while a third seems by his own admission to have impregnated several different women. One is justified to question whether advocacy for abortion really tends toward the empowerment and elevation of our daughters.
Click to expand...

big-lebowski.gif
 
#566
#566
Rasputin_Vol said:
Why does the baby have to be killed if it could be kept alive through medical intervention?

Still waiting on that answer...
Click to expand...
Because it would be a bad look for abortion clinics to have ambulances show up every day to transport children to the local hospital.
 
#567
#567
VolStrom said:
Because it would be a bad look for abortion clinics to have ambulances show up every day to transport children to the local hospital.
Click to expand...
Oh, so its just about perception?

Interesting...

I don't understand why answering this question is so hard for our pro-choice posters. Seems like you could accomplish the goal of removing the baby and still not kill it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: NEO and Rickyvol77
#568
#568
Rasputin_Vol said:
Oh, so its just about perception?

Interesting...

I don't understand why answering this question is so hard for our pro-choice posters. Seems like you could accomplish the goal of removing the baby and still not kill it.
Click to expand...
Not at all, it's about admitting that they kill viable babies and if they are forced to save them instead of kill them they would garner some really bad publicity. Kill the babies and they hide the fact that about what they're doing.
 
#569
#569
AshG said:
I read them both, thank you. I didn't see a connection to abortion then, and I don't see one now after second and third readings.

Is the point you're trying to make that women exist primarily to crank out more humans, and any operation that prevents them from being baby factories is bad?

If that's the case, then let's make vasectomies require spousal consent and only be the reversible kind.
Click to expand...
Plenty of Dr’s do require spousal consent/sign-off for vasectomies.
 
#570
#570
MOOOOONEY said:
That probably equals 1% of all abortions the other 99% is birth control.
Click to expand...
This. Avoiding a pregnancy takes the intelligence of a frog. I’ve been married for 10 years and have managed to only have one child. If/when we decide we want another, practices can be changed. The sole value of abortion is a green light for uninhibited promiscuity
 
#571
#571
AthensVol2007 said:
This. Avoiding a pregnancy takes the intelligence of a frog. I’ve been married for 10 years and have managed to only have one child. If/when we decide we want another, practices can be changed. The sole value of abortion is a green light for uninhibited promiscuity
Click to expand...

One must be careful to not map their own personal belief system or lifestyle on others.

I know several women who were not allowed to take birth control pills and their husbands refused to wear condoms. The wife did not want more children, the husband did. The women would not refuse sex for fear of physical or emotional abuse and were not financially or spiritually able to leave the marriages.

It's not so simple. We have to stop pretending that everything is so damn simple.
 
#573
#573
AshG said:
Could you provide me with a link to a practice that does this? I find this very interesting.
Click to expand...
My Dr didn’t require written consent but he did ask about my wife’s opinion on the matter as well as having a fairly serious talk with me on our choices since we don’t have children.
 
  • Like
Reactions: AshG
#574
#574
AshG said:
Could you provide me with a link to a practice that does this? I find this very interesting.
Click to expand...
I have two co-workers who have had them done in the past few years and in both cases the wife had to be involved and sign off or verbally consent; two separate practices. I have no idea who they went to other than somewhere in north AL (Huntsville/Decatur). Another co-worker had one about a month ago and his Dr. did not require it. I somewhat get the thinking behind it but also believe the same standard should apply to the practice being discussed in this thread.
 
#575
#575
AshG said:
One must be careful to not map their own personal belief system or lifestyle on others.

I know several women who were not allowed to take birth control pills and their husbands refused to wear condoms. The wife did not want more children, the husband did. The women would not refuse sex for fear of physical or emotional abuse and were not financially or spiritually able to leave the marriages.

It's not so simple. We have to stop pretending that everything is so damn simple.
Click to expand...
Again, those are anecdotal examples and I would argue not the norm. You can make a nuanced argument for or against anything. However, I’d be willing to wager my entire life savings that the overwhelming majority of abortions are performed on unmarried women due to career aspirations, one night stand mistakes, age/financial standing etc. As the OP stated, 99% are post-sex birth control.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Rasputin_Vol
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top