Trump Signs First Anti Abortion Legislation Today

[r9etb]

And can you identify that "magic moment" when a fetus becomes "viable"?

Actually, it's "viable" the entire time, within its natural environment.

The "viability" argument is like saying it's OK to kill astronauts because they can't live outside their spacecraft.

[dfwgator]

What is important is that the woman have a real and meaningful right to choose her future.   I don't object to a statute setting a specified time at which viability is assumed.  But a law that prohibits abortion before viability  - as reasonably defined - cannot stand.

And what about the future for the baby?

[Jazzhead]

Actually, it's "viable" the entire time, within its natural environment.

The "viability" argument is like saying it's OK to kill astronauts because they can't live outside their spacecraft.

I'm not saying it's "OK" to kill a fetus (or an astronaut).  The government is responsible for the spacecraft in which an astronaut rides.   But a woman is responsible for the "spacecraft" in which her fetus resides.   

  You're correct that a fetus, if left alone, will grow and be born.  That's why I agree with you that abortion, in most circumstances, is wrong.    But it still must be the woman's choice, because it will always be her burden, and hers alone.   It's not up to the government to compel her to reproduce.       

[Jazzhead]

And what about the future for the baby?

That's up to the woman to decide - not the state.   I know you don't like that answer, but it's the only answer that's consistent with the woman's liberty. 

[r9etb]

That's up to the woman to decide - not the state.   I know you don't like that answer, but it's the only answer that's consistent with the woman's liberty.

Why is it that you never, ever, EVER seem to answer the question about the humanity and rights of the child?

[txradioguy]

That's up to the woman to decide - not the state.   I know you don't like that answer, but it's the only answer that's consistent with the woman's liberty.

Why doesn't the man who helped create that life have a say?

Funny that you equate women's "Liberty" with her ability to kill an unborn baby.  How is that "Liberty"?

But then that's the problem with women's "rights" these days for the most part anyway.  Supporters of what passes for women's rights these days are only concerned with what's between a woman's legs...not between her ears.

[Cyber Liberty]

But it still must be the woman's choice, because it will always be her burden, and hers alone.       

You've never had to pay child support, have you?

[txradioguy]

Why is it that you never, ever, EVER seem to answer the question about the humanity and rights of the child?

Because that would require JH to look at what's happening from a human stand point...not the cold clinical one abortion supporters use.

Makes the position a little harder to justify and defend.

[Cyber Liberty]

Why is it that you never, ever, EVER seem to answer the question about the humanity and rights of the child?

He's not really big on the idea of "Natural Rights."  Ask him about the right to self-defense sometime.

[chae]

As a staunch pro-lifer (adopted when I was 4 days old, in 1976, bio-father was married and pressuring bio-mother to have an abortion)  I can't argue with people who are pro-abortion because it makes me irate.
It comes down to this: Is murder wrong?  yes or no? 
This whole "right to choose" is crap.  You chose to have sex or not.  you chose to get on the pill or not, you chose to use a condom or not.  And there's even the whole morning after pill which I object to. 
And don't even get me started on "rape exceptions".  Rape is bad, BUT if you rape someone and you have a 6 month old son when you do, and you get caught, the penalty is not the dismemberment of your 6-month-old.  And NO you aren't "forced to raise your rapist's child" unless you decide to not give it up for adoption.   
Point blank, it's murder. If you accept abortion as being ok, then you are saying that you are ok with murder if the person being killed is considered inconvenient to someone else, and that is hideous.

[Jazzhead]

Why is it that you never, ever, EVER seem to answer the question about the humanity and rights of the child?

I haven't dodged your question - I've been very explicit in stating my belief that abortion is wrong.

But it's not up to me (or you) to decide - and it certainly shouldn't be up to the state.

An adult woman must have the right to decide for herself.   Persuade her to do the right thing!   

[txradioguy]

An adult woman must have the right to decide for herself.   Persuade her to do the right thing!

But by your own statements here...I can't.  I'm a man and have no say in the decision.

[Norm Lenhart]

That's up to the woman to decide - not the state.   I know you don't like that answer, but it's the only answer that's consistent with the woman's liberty.

She did decide. She had sex. That carries the inherent risk of pregnancy. At conception, a new life with it's own humanity came into being and 'trumped' her 'choice' to regret her actions.

No one requires sex to live. Sex is a choice, not an imperative to live. She chose sex, she got pregnant, now she can carry to term and give the child up for adoption. Actions have consequence. The woman could avoid them by celibacy.

[Jazzhead]

You've never had to pay child support, have you?

Nope.  I've stuck with my spouse, and my children.   

[Wingnut]

As a staunch pro-lifer (adopted when I was 4 days old, in 1976, bio-father was married and pressuring bio-mother to have an abortion)  I can't argue with people who are pro-abortion because it makes me irate.
It comes down to this: Is murder wrong?  yes or no? 
This whole "right to choose" is crap.  You chose to have sex or not.  you chose to get on the pill or not, you chose to use a condom or not.  And there's even the whole morning after pill which I object to. 
And don't even get me started on "rape exceptions".  Rape is bad, BUT if you rape someone and you have a 6 month old son when you do, and you get caught, the penalty is not the dismemberment of your 6-month-old.  And NO you aren't "forced to raise your rapist's child" unless you decide to not give it up for adoption.   
Point blank, it's murder. If you accept abortion as being ok, then you are saying that you are ok with murder if the person being killed is considered inconvenient to someone else, and that is hideous.

Very well said.  But remember Liberalism is a mental disease.  So what you and I see as a living human organism they only see as a gob of tissue to be thrown out in the trash.

[Jazzhead]

But by your own statements here...I can't.  I'm a man and have no say in the decision.

You have the power of persuasion.  Stick with your partner, help her out financially, give her moral support.  Play your cards right, and she'll do the right thing.   (Many if not most abortions come about because the man has headed for the hills.  If men were more responsible, there'd be a lot fewer abortions.)   

But, no, you have no right whatsoever to force your partner to abort, or to give birth.   And neither should the state.   

[Cyber Liberty]

Nope.  I've stuck with my spouse, and my children.

Then you are approaching the subject of "burden" from a position of ignorance.  Not everybody is blessed with a spouse like yours.  Try to see things from somebody else's point of view once in a while.

[Jazzhead]

She did decide. She had sex. That carries the inherent risk of pregnancy. At conception, a new life with it's own humanity came into being and 'trumped' her 'choice' to regret her actions.

No one requires sex to live. Sex is a choice, not an imperative to live. She chose sex, she got pregnant, now she can carry to term and give the child up for adoption. Actions have consequence. The woman could avoid them by celibacy.

I doubt very much that you've "chosen celibacy".   Your seconds of pleasure leads to nine months of burden for the woman.   The decision is hers, bub - it has to be.     

[r9etb]

If you accept abortion as being ok, then you are saying that you are ok with murder if the person being killed is considered inconvenient to someone else, and that is hideous.

Thanks for your post.  You hit on the real issue, right here.  Setting the "hard choices" aside for the moment; if you look at the typical arguments for abortion they very often do come down to arguments of convenience.  "It's not the right time in my life to have a baby.  I'd have to quit school.  It's too expensive." 

One also hears the "better off dead" argument -- I can't justify bringing a child into my situation (i.e., she's better off dead).  A form of this is the eugenic argument, so often applied in practice to Downs babies.

That said, we shouldn't minimize the distress of the women are faced with a pregnancy they didn't want.  It's difficult.  It can be scary.  Their lives will be harder, and their children's lives are often very difficult, indeed.  Pregnancy does affect women's bodies, and there's a non-zero risk from carrying a baby to term.

These things can be addressed -- and need to be addressed if we're to do away with abortion.

[r9etb]

I haven't dodged your question - I've been very explicit in stating my belief that abortion is wrong.

"Wrong," why?  What makes it so? 

[Jazzhead]

Then you are approaching the subject of "burden" from a position of ignorance.  Not everybody is blessed with a spouse like yours.  Try to see things from somebody else's point of view once in a while.

So what are you saying?  That a man shouldn't be financially responsible for the child he produces?   That's exactly the attitude that forces so many women to seek abortions - and often, it's the man who leans hard on his partner to take care of his little problem with a trip to PP.   

[Wingnut]

  Your seconds of pleasure leads to nine months of burden

Burden?  How Obama of you.

[Norm Lenhart]

I doubt very much that you've "chosen celibacy".   Your seconds of pleasure leads to nine months of burden for the woman.   The decision is hers, bub - it has to be.   

Are you inferring that a woman can become pregnant in some other way, excluding rape, than by choice? Are women so ignorant as to not have the capacity to act on the word 'no'? So mindless as to let sexual urges override intelligence?

Actually 'Bub', The decision may be made by her but it's murder. No way around it. And advocating for it is evil defined.

[Jazzhead]

That said, we shouldn't minimize the distress of the women are faced with a pregnancy they didn't want.  It's difficult.  It can be scary.  Their lives will be harder, and their children's lives are often very difficult, indeed.  Pregnancy does affect women's bodies, and there's a non-zero risk from carrying a baby to term.

Thank you.  That is the reality, and why it must be the woman's decision.   

The best way to make abortion obsolete is to make unplanned pregnancies obsolete.   

[InHeavenThereIsNoBeer]

Rape is wrong, but women should have no say about it, and certainly not the state.

A rapist must have the right to decide for himself.   Persuade him to do the right thing!   

[dfwgator]

I doubt very much that you've "chosen celibacy".   Your seconds of pleasure leads to nine months of burden for the woman.   The decision is hers, bub - it has to be.   

Unless she's raped, the decision is hers.  If she doesn't want a baby, she tells the man, "No!".  And if the man doesn't obey, it's rape.

[Jazzhead]

Are you inferring that a woman can become pregnant in some other way, excluding rape, than by choice? Are women so ignorant as to not have the capacity to act on the word 'no'? So mindless as to let sexual urges override intelligence?

Actually 'Bub', The decision may be made by her but it's murder. No way around it. And advocating for it is evil defined.

It's not murder.  If it were, you'd be advocating the death penalty or life in prison for a woman who has an abortion.   

[r9etb]

Thank you.  That is the reality, and why it must be the woman's decision.   

Nope. 

The best way to make abortion obsolete is to make unplanned pregnancies obsolete.

Well, sure.  But in the meantime you seem determined to avoid taking a moral stand on the killing of an unborn child.

[Jazzhead]

Unless she's raped, the decision is hers.  If she doesn't want a baby, she tells the man, "No!".  And if the man doesn't obey, it's rape.

Hah!   The usual situation is that both want sex, but when a pregnancy occurs the man heads for the hills (or worse, leans hard on the woman to take care of "her" problem).   

[Cyber Liberty]

So what are you saying?  That a man shouldn't be financially responsible for the child he produces?   That's exactly the attitude that forces so many women to seek abortions - and often, it's the man who leans hard on his partner to take care of his little problem with a trip to PP.

That's not what I'm saying (nice try at putting words into my mouth).  If I say what I'm thinking I'll have a Mod in here slapping me from one side to the other, so I think I'm just going to leave this conversation.  May god have mercy on your soul if @chae ever gets her hands on you.

[dfwgator]

  Your seconds of pleasure leads to nine months of burden for the woman.   

You mean being "punished with a baby"?  Gee, where have I heard that one before?

[Norm Lenhart]

It's not murder.  If it were, you'd be advocating the death penalty or life in prison for a woman who has an abortion.

It's murder. You are ending a life that is not asking to be terminated. And even if that someone was, current law defines euthanasia as murder in most places. You don't get to redefine reality to justify your beliefs.

[Norm Lenhart]

Hah!   The usual situation is that both want sex, but when a pregnancy occurs the man heads for the hills (or worse, leans hard on the woman to take care of "her" problem).

"You can't always get what you want..."
-Rolling Stones

[Wingnut]

You mean being "punished with a baby"?  Gee, where have I heard that one before?

 

[Norm Lenhart]

"punished with a baby"

I'll take "What is a phrase or concept no conservative ever entertained?" for $1000 Alex

[chae]

@r9etb


Life itself is risk.  There is nothing that you do ever that doesn't have inherent risk.  My brother could have died when this crazy lady decided to protest CPS taking her kids by plowing into the side of our house, where my brother's bedroom was.  Everything in life is risky.

[Cyber Liberty]

"punished with a baby"

I'll take "What is a phrase or concept no conservative ever entertained?" for $1000 Alex

I don't think we're dealing with a conservative here, Norm.  This the second thread I've been on where he's demonstrated out-an-out leftism.  Living proof TBR tolerates all views.

[Norm Lenhart]

I don't think we're dealing with a conservative here, Norm.  This the second thread I've been on where he's demonstrated out-an-out leftism.  Living proof TBR tolerates all views.

Oh I know. His leftist opinions here are far from new. I just hope people/lurkers here see it for what it is and don't subscribe to the same evil.

[Wingnut]

Living proof TBR tolerates all views.

Dem Plant!

j/k.....  Jazzy H ain't no plant.  A closeted liberal maybe.   A plant not.

[Hoodat]

Hoodat,  I have no interest in arguing abortion with you.

Translation:  I am unable to come up with a legal basis for denying Federal and State legislatures the Constitutional right to establish their own laws regarding abortion.

I think it's wrong just as you do

But not as wrong as protecting a unique individual life inside the womb.

but I oppose the government imposing my or your morality on others.

BS.  You are the one her supporting the government imposing the morality of five men in black robes upon the rest of the nation while denying self-determination to the citizenry in shaping the very society in which we live.

States have laws against theft.  These laws impose someone's morality upon the society of a State.  So who gets to decide what set of moral rules are imposed?  The people of that State, of course.  This is how our Founding Fathers intended it.  We the people choose who will govern us.  We the people choose how our society will be shaped.  We the people choose to protect property rights by passing laws against theft.  This wasn't done by five tyrants in black robes.  It was done by the very people who live in that society.  That isn't government-imposed morality.  That is a legally binding moral code chosen by the people, for the people.

Yet you are the one who demand that the citizenry be denied that right.  It is you imposing your morality on the rest of us using the point of a government gun while denying us the ability to assess for our own society exactly where the line should be drawn.

It is you, sir, that sides with tyranny.  It is you forcing your belief on us without recourse.  And it is you that tramples on the Constitution of the United States of America just because you arrogantly think you know what is better for the citizens of Georgia.

This is a decision that every adult woman in America has had the right to make FOR HERSELF for over 40 years now.

And slavery was a decision that every slave owner in American had the right to make for him/herself for over 80 years.

That is how is should be, and must remain.

Again, based upon what?  Emotion?  Seriously, you keep repeating that claim - that it must remain legal.  But you have absolutely zero to back it up.  So we have the Constitution of the United States of America on one side, and your baseless emotional appeal on the other.  How do you suppose those two line up?

I am sick of this issue keeping conservatives and libertarians from advancing their agendas.

I am sick of people pretending to be libertarians yet advocating tyranny.  Upholding the Constitution is my agenda.  What is yours?

It is a narrow issue pushed by religious social conservatives,  and they simply cannot be permitted to have their way, at the expense of the rest of our issues.   

What does religion have to do with this?  It is a Constitutional issue - not a religious one.  Roe would have been equally egregious if it had banned abortion in every state.

Why should any woman agree to the abrogation of the most precious right she possesses?

The most precious right she possesses?  Really?  You actually think that the right to kill a child is the most precious right a woman has?  Wow.  Just wow.

[dfwgator]

Dem Plant!

j/k.....  Jazzy H ain't no plant.  A closeted liberal maybe.   A plant not.

Reminds me of "Sakic" at TOS.  (Jazzy, you aren't Sakic, are you?)

[Wingnut]

@Hoodat

Hoodie,

Save your breath brother.  Jazzy is like a gas.  He fills all the space available.  Take his space away and all that is left is a popcorn fart.

[truth_seeker]

Rape is wrong, but women should have no say about it, and certainly not the state.

A rapist must have the right to decide for himself.   Persuade him to do the right thing!

I say an American should be legally able to kill his dog, his cat, his parakeet.

It is not a human, and keeping them may be inconvenient.

[Cyber Liberty]

Dem Plant!

j/k.....  Jazzy H ain't no plant.  A closeted liberal maybe.   A plant not.

Heck, this one ain't even in the closet, Wingding.

[r9etb]

Life itself is risk.  There is nothing that you do ever that doesn't have inherent risk.  My brother could have died when this crazy lady decided to protest CPS taking her kids by plowing into the side of our house, where my brother's bedroom was.  Everything in life is risky.

Quite true.  But my point is that we cannot forget that, for the women we're talking about, being pregnant and having a child is far from cost-free. 

Jazzhead is correct that abortion is currently legal; and the only way to change that is, first, to remind people of the hideous reality of the act itself.  But it also requires us to address the "but, what about" sort of questions that are generally used to disguise the reality of it.

So if we're against abortion, then as a practical matter we should seek ways for women to avoid pregnancy (not that difficult, these days); and for those who are pregnant, make it easier to avoid abortion.

And, of course, to utterly shame and ruin those people and organizations who make millions of years dollars killing babies.

[Hoodat]

The standard retort to your question is because it's their body.  Somehow that eliminates us totally from the picture...unless of course the woman decides to have the baby then it's only the man's wallet the woman is interested in.

@driftdiver
@txradioguy

I am waiting for the pro-choice position to be applied to men in that men should have a choice whether they want to pay child support or not.  Their wallets.  Their rights.  Government, keep your hands off!

[Norm Lenhart]

Heck, this one ain't even in the closet, Wingding.

More like proudly marching in the Castro District in full leather gear.

[Wingnut]

Heck, this one ain't even in the closet, Wingding.

More like proudly marching in the Castro District in full leather gear.

Loud Proud and in assless chaps?

[DCPatriot]

So.....a Conservative that doesn't agree with the social conservatives on abortion is deemed a straight out liberal in here?

This is why there isn't a "Religion" category in here.   

[Wingnut]

So.....a Conservative that doesn't agree with the social conservatives on abortion is deemed a straight out liberal in here?

This is why there isn't a "Religion" category in here.   

Did they serve Tapioca pudding or jello squares for desert at the home tonight?