We're a pro-choice nation

Abortion (the murder of an unborn, live child) is against the law in 26 states.

Six Months Post-Roe, 24 US States Have Banned Abortion or Are Likely to Do So.

More to come...the will of the people.
 
Into the Night said:
The purpose of sex is procreation. It also has responsibilities. The decision to fuck has consequences. You are free to choose. You are NOT free of the consequences of that choice. YOU don't get to decide what is a 'good parent'. Omniscience fallacy.
Click to expand...

Yes women can be free of the consequences. 1 in 4 women will have an abortion by the time they are 45. They will do it legally and I would bet they don't vote for shitheads with warped opinions of what an abortion is like you. Keep pushing your asinine philosophy so we can get rid of the shitheads in congress that think like you do.
 
Earl said:
Abortion (the murder of an unborn, live child) is against the law in 26 states.

Six Months Post-Roe, 24 US States Have Banned Abortion or Are Likely to Do So.

More to come...the will of the people.
Click to expand...

BS, restricted but none have completely banned them.
 
Frank Apisa said:
I doubt anyone thinks that "killing the unborn" (your fanciful form of "abortion") is a "good thing." That is just your mind in over-load. But a majority of people consider it an option for a pregnant woman that should not be taken away.

Try to get that through your mind.
Click to expand...

I'm sorry, but considering the other options available, particularly adoption, there is no other way of looking at it but to say you people think killing unborn children is a good thing....time to fucking cope with the reality of your choices.......
 
TOP said:
If you shoot a pregnant women you will be charged with her murder and the death of her child...
Click to expand...

below is federal law and laws are protected under the constitution. it is therefore unconstitutional to charge someone for the murder of 2 persons for killing a pregnant woman.

Under current Federal law, an individual who commits a
Federal crime of violence against a pregnant woman receives no
additional punishment for killing or injuring the woman's
unborn child during the commission of the crime. Therefore,
except in those States that recognize unborn children as
victims of such crimes, injuring or killing an unborn child
during the commission of a violent crime has no legal
consequence whatsoever.\1\
Click to expand...

Eleven States currently have laws that recognize the unborn as
victims throughout the period of prenatal development. Another thirteen
States have laws that recognize the unborn as victims during only part
of their prenatal development, and seven other States criminalize
certain conduct that ``terminates a pregnancy'' or causes a
miscarriage.
Click to expand...

Some states consider the unborn victims and have penalties for "terminating a pregnancy" against the will of the prospective mother but no one has ever been found guilty of 2 counts of murder for killing a pregnant woman.

By its own terms, H.R. 503 does not apply to ``conduct
relating to an abortion for which the consent of the pregnant
woman has been obtained or for which such consent is implied by
law.'' The bill also does not permit prosecution ``of any
person for any medical treatment of the pregnant woman or her
unborn child,'' or ``of any woman with respect to her unborn
child.''
Click to expand...

None of the laws apply to a woman who consents to getting an abortion.
 
Earl said:
The left can not answer this:

Quote Originally Posted by PostmodernProphet View Post
science proves you wrong......if the unborn was not alive it wouldn't be necessary to kill it.......
Click to expand...

No one is saying it has to be killed...except people like you trying to make a point that is invalid. It is akin to the assertion you people make that since the universe is a creation...there has to be a creator.

Well...the universe may not be a creation.

As for the killing...if there is no person to kill, there is no killing. Crushing an acorn is not cutting down an oak tree.

In any case, on the issue we are discussing...there is no way to avoid short-changing someone or something. Either a pregnant woman loses control over her own body...or a fetus is expelled.

We KNOW FOR CERTAIN that a pregnant woman IS A LIVIING HUMAN. Some people argue that a fetus is a living humans...and some argue that a fetus is NOT a living human. I think it makes more sense to give the benefit of the doubt to the woman, whom we KNOW to be a living human...rather than to the fetus, which may or may not be.

Since the PRIMARY objection to abortion is motivated by religious considerations...we have to think about the religious response to the question of what happens in an abortion.

I'm willing to discuss that.
 
Frank Apisa said:
If a pregnant woman chooses to terminate the pregnancy occurring in her own body, she should be allowed to make that choice...and to have the procedure be a safe one...with the assistance of competent medical help.

She should have that choice.
Click to expand...
why should she have the choice of killing another living human being?......
 
PoliTalker said:
Hello BartenderElite,



I would like to hear the results of a poll.

One question: "What does the world really need?"

The one answer I would expect to be unheard or very rare:

"More humans."

What humanity ought to do for itself is to pass out free contraception and make abortion as widely available as possible - particularly in the poorest regions of the world.

We are drawn to feeding the poor. OK, that's all good. But we are fools if the free food doesn't come with birth reduction. That will save more suffering than all the free food we can produce.
Click to expand...

Republicans would prefer we force the woman to have a child and then refuse support and starve the child.
 
PostmodernProphet said:
I'm sorry, but considering the other options available, particularly adoption, there is no other way of looking at it but to say you people think killing unborn children is a good thing....time to fucking cope with the reality of your choices.......
Click to expand...

Once again...very faulty logic on your part.

It is entirely possible to be pro-choice...and not think killing unborn children (having an abortion) is a good thing.
 
The states seeking to restrict abortions are far less populated than the states not doing so,

Thus those aforementioned 24 US states do not represent anything close to half the population.

Yet another reminder of how fucked up our constitutional federal system is.

The founders must have all been junkies.
 
Frank Apisa said:
Once again...very faulty logic on your part.

It is entirely possible to be pro-choice...and not think killing unborn children (having an abortion) is a good thing.
Click to expand...

once again faulty logic on your part.....unless you are talking about your choice of what to have for lunch instead of choice whether to kill an unborn child.......THAT is either good or it is bad.....if it is bad you should not permit anyone to do it......logic at its most fundamental.......
 
The left can not answer this:

Quote Originally Posted by PostmodernProphet View Post
science proves you wrong......if the unborn was not alive it wouldn't be necessary to kill it.......

Not one far left loon has answered this...not one.

If the unborn child is not alive, why kill it?
 
Earl said:
No.

These states say it is a child. More to come.



Tracking the States Where Abortion Is Now Banned
The New York Times
https://www.nytimes.com › abortion-laws-roe-v-wade
Most abortions are now banned in 13 states following the Supreme Court's decision to overturn Roe v. Wade. Georgia also bans abortion at about six weeks of ...
Click to expand...

when you say Georgia bans abortion after 6 weeks that means Georgia has NOT banned abortion. The ban they tried to pass was after 6 weeks and even that ban was shot down.

A Georgia judge on Tuesday overturned a state law prohibiting most abortions after about six weeks of pregnancy, blocking it from being enforced. The decision means that abortions will — for the first time since July — in most cases be allowed in Georgia, up to 22 weeks of pregnancy.

No state has completly banned abortions.
 
Port Tack said:
when you say Georgia bans abortion after 6 weeks that means Georgia has NOT banned abortion. The ban they tried to pass was after 6 weeks and even that ban was shot down.

A Georgia judge on Tuesday overturned a state law prohibiting most abortions after about six weeks of pregnancy, blocking it from being enforced. The decision means that abortions will — for the first time since July — in most cases be allowed in Georgia, up to 22 weeks of pregnancy.

No state has completly banned abortions.
Click to expand...

Yes they have and the Georgia ruling will be appealed.

Six Months Post-Roe, 24 US States Have Banned Abortion or Are Likely to Do So.

More to come...the will of the people.

https://www.context.news/money-power-people/roe-v-wade-which-us-states-are-banning-abortion
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top