Women Having To Flee States With Insane Restrictions on Abortions

Hello ThatOwlWoman,

ThatOwlWoman said:
He said the state of Kansas, not KC Missouri. :)

Missouri also wants to criminalize abortion, arresting and charging Missouri residents who go to another state to have the procedure.
Click to expand...

It's a good clarification. And I learned that there are two Kansas Cities. The one in KS is smaller and younger than the one in MO.

Missouri seems to want to drive people out of the state. Too bad.
 
Eagle_Eye said:
Sorry but unlike you my points were general and not specific. You took a worse case scenario and tried to apply it across the board, that sport is dishonesty but I wouldn't expect a liberal twerp like you to be honest.
Click to expand...

Worst case scenario?
You claimed "most" of those without access to abortion could get there with a bus ticket that costs less than $50. Because I pointed out that just in 2 states with a population of 32 million it would be impossible to get there for under $200 suddenly I am the one that is not being honest? You can't even get from Sioux Falls, SD to Minneapolis and back for less than $120.

Bismark to Fargo, ND (and then crossing the border into MN) will cost you $106 round trip.

Your points may have been general only in the respect that they generally wrong and bereft of actual research. But claiming they were somehow more honest than looking at the actual fares to dispute your claim is utter nonsense on your part and denial of reality. Rather than admit you were wrong when presented with facts you just accuse the facts of being dishonest. Most people who would need to travel can't find a bus fare for less than $100 to travel to get an abortion. And then there are all the additional costs on top of it. Your general point that it wouldn't cost much and be easy for the poor is bullshit and you just don't want to admit it.
 
When a state tries to punish someone for crossing borders to seek abortion, that is like telling that person if you go, don't come back.

That would logically result in many young women questioning if they want to even live in a state with such a policy. If they are undecided if they want to live there, this becomes one more reason to not live there, and instead consider moving away permanently.
 
Frank Apisa said:
If a woman wants to terminate a pregnancy occurring in her own body, she should be able to do it...and not have a fucking moron male like you interfere.

The procedure is called an abortion. Yes, it kills some human tissue...but so does an appendectomy or a tumor removal.



And embryo or fetus is not a child...either alive or dead.
Click to expand...

An appendix will never grow into a human, dumbass.


not-your-body-not-your-choice-abortion-is-murder-quote-1.jpg
 
Bottom line, Roe didn't force anyone to have an abortion if your beliefs are againt it but not everyone is a christer.

So now we have some old pastry face christian males pontificating about a womens choice :palm:
 
Walt said:
Outlawing abortions in many states will make an already horrible maternal mortality rate much worse. Women will die. There is no getting around that.

The only defense I can think of is that fetuses will be saved. I really do not see a blob as cells to be more important than a living human being, but if you do, there is some defense of killing these women.

That being said, stop lying and saying this is not going to kill women. Women will die from this.
Click to expand...
The "blob of cells" is a distinct unique individual. Your "blob of cells" theory is anti-science. There are women whose water breaks early and the successfully carry the baby for weeks more to give the baby a better chance. This woman should have gotten a second opinion.
 
AssHatZombie said:
It is. It may be medically necessary however.

Is word games all you have?
Click to expand...

You're the one playing word games, Asshat.

Delivering an infant indicates that the infant is born either naturally or surgically. Delivery is NOT necessarily an abortion. If the fetus is deceased in utero drugs may be given to the mom to induce contractions that expel ("deliver") the infant. That is still not an abortion.

What makes you believe that it's legal -- or that any licensed and ethical medical practitioner AND facility -- would allow the delivery of a viable near-term infant and then kill it?

Stop watching stupid forced-birther propaganda and start paying attention to why they want you to believe this utter bullshit.
 
Walt said:
https://www.economist.com/united-st...ful-maternal-mortality-rate-looks-set-to-rise

We will already have the worst maternal mortality rate in the industrial world. Where a typical country has three mortality out of 100,000 live births, while the USA has a mortality rate of 17 (more than five times higher). States like Alabama, Arkansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Mississippi and Tennessee, are becoming illegal, already had mortality rates above 30. They will get much worse.

There are about 3.6 million births per year in the USA. If the mortality rate goes up by 10, there will be 3,600 more women that die. If you think abortion is murder, that might not be a lot of deaths. There might be about 600,000 abortions per year, and anti-abortion laws in some states might reduce the number of abortions by 10%. That would be 60,000 fetuses (or "unborn babies" as the Republicans call them). Maybe 3,600 women dying is worth saving 60,000...

But we should not lie. This is going to kill women.
Click to expand...

"Flee"? Inigo-MontoyaJPEG.jpg

Do you mean like the Jews "fleeing" the nazis? With fake passports and stuff? It's not like they can't come back, is it? I mean, there's no border checkpoints, right?
 
PoliTalker said:
When a state tries to punish someone for crossing borders to seek abortion, that is like telling that person if you go, don't come back.

That would logically result in many young women questioning if they want to even live in a state with such a policy. If they are undecided if they want to live there, this becomes one more reason to not live there, and instead consider moving away permanently.
Click to expand...

The citizens of each state, by their elected legislators, determine whether a woman can murder her own child.

I would think that most people do not want unborn children murdered by their own mothers.

Most sane people.
 
guno said:
Bottom line, Roe didn't force anyone to have an abortion if your beliefs are againt it but not everyone is a christer.

So now we have some old pastry face christian males pontificating about a womens choice :palm:
Click to expand...

The women (?) on the Supreme Court had a vote.
 
Earl said:
The citizens of each state, by their elected legislators, determine whether a woman can murder her own child.

I would think that most people do not want unborn children murdered by their own mothers.

Most sane people.
Click to expand...

What the fuck would you know about "sane people?"
 
The citizens of each state, by their elected legislators, determine whether a woman can murder her own child.

I would think that most people do not want unborn children murdered by their own mothers.

Most sane people.
 
Walt said:
https://www.economist.com/united-st...ful-maternal-mortality-rate-looks-set-to-rise

We will already have the worst maternal mortality rate in the industrial world. Where a typical country has three mortality out of 100,000 live births, while the USA has a mortality rate of 17 (more than five times higher). States like Alabama, Arkansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Mississippi and Tennessee, are becoming illegal, already had mortality rates above 30. They will get much worse.

There are about 3.6 million births per year in the USA. If the mortality rate goes up by 10, there will be 3,600 more women that die. If you think abortion is murder, that might not be a lot of deaths. There might be about 600,000 abortions per year, and anti-abortion laws in some states might reduce the number of abortions by 10%. That would be 60,000 fetuses (or "unborn babies" as the Republicans call them). Maybe 3,600 women dying is worth saving 60,000...

But we should not lie. This is going to kill women.
Click to expand...

The U.S. Constitution was not intended to give SCOTUS the supreme dictatorial control over U.S. society, and for it to come under checks and balances, and in particular which comes to states and their rights to established what they think is right versus the opinion of SCOTUS, and to which SCOTUS currently has at least three illegal so-called justices sitting there in violation of U.S. Constitutional law. This as a result of the seditious nature that tRump in seditious conspiracies with repukes at lawlessly dumping them there to do their will to wage war on democracy, society and all core values of America, and of course to do the bidding of foreign enemies against the U.S., etc.
 
The Supreme Court is the final arbiter for cases brought before it.

The far left loved it when it tilted left...not so much now that it tilts right.
 
Last edited:
ThatOwlWoman said:
You're the one playing word games, Asshat.

Delivering an infant indicates that the infant is born either naturally or surgically. Delivery is NOT necessarily an abortion. If the fetus is deceased in utero drugs may be given to the mom to induce contractions that expel ("deliver") the infant. That is still not an abortion.

What makes you believe that it's legal -- or that any licensed and ethical medical practitioner AND facility -- would allow the delivery of a viable near-term infant and then kill it?

Stop watching stupid forced-birther propaganda and start paying attention to why they want you to believe this utter bullshit.
Click to expand...

nobody said delivery is an abortion.

still word games.

it is all you have.

:truestory:

voters see this and it's why they're fleeing your idiotic devil party of baby murder.
 
AssHatZombie said:
nobody said delivery is an abortion.

still word games.

it is all you have.

voters see this and it's why they're fleeing your idiotic devil party of baby murder.
Click to expand...

Like the voters in Kansas just did? Like the three-quarters of a million voters who signed the petition in Michigan to put a constitutional amendment protecting reproductive rights on the ballot for November? That kind of fleeing? :laugh:

You might want to go have your unhealthy skepticism gland checked out.
 
Earl said:
The Supreme Court is the final arbiter for cases brought before it.

The far left loved it when it tilted left...not so much now that it tilts right.
Click to expand...

It never really "tilted left"...although for many years it tilted toward the truth and reality. Easy for people like you to mistake "truth and reality" for "the left."
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top