Republicans rethink abortion strategy after bruising midterms

[mystery-ak]

https://twitter.com/LifeNewsHQ/status/1608812473788006400

Report: At Least 34 Babies Born Alive in Botched Abortions Between 2020-2022

https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2022/12/30/report-at-least-34-babies-born-alive-in-botched-abortions-between-2020-2022/

[deb]

If you ever want to see the true nature of abortion, watch the movie “Gosnell”.

[Smokin Joe]

I hope that the national party takes only one position on abortion: it is a state matter.  There should be no federal regulation in this area, period.

Precisely. 

[roamer_1]

Nope.

Carry on.   

YEP. Your argument is with Yah, not with me. There is no way abortion is justified in his eyes... Of course you would have to have accessed apocryphal and pseudepigraphal texts to see the whole of it - In the beginning, one of the things taught by the Fallen was teaching women how to have abortions in their wombs... And prophetically, one of the hallmarks of the end times, proving the decadence and outright evil of society is the same - Enoch, as an instance, specifically enumerates abortion, showing that even the women have lost their way in the most natural thing they alone are hard-wired for.

And the occult confirms. If you better understood the spiritual power they get from blood sacrifice, and their heady encouragement of abortion in that use, I think you would change your mind.

Because in the end, that is what this is. An evil sacrifice.

[Right_in_Virginia]

YEP. Your argument is with Yah, not with me.

Nope.  It's with you.

[The_Reader_David]

I hope that the national party takes only one position on abortion: it is a state matter.  There should be no federal regulation in this area, period.

 

[The_Reader_David]

That word 'mother'.  I think it means something different to you than it does to me.

But if pregnancy is really a threat to "physical health and life", then why is a woman choosing to allow a man to ejaculate inside of her, knowing that it will lead to pregnancy?  Isn't that her deciding to exercise control over her body?

Sometimes the circumstance that makes continuing a pregnancy a threat to the life of the mother arises during the pregnancy.

Once one views a human embryo as a complete human being with a right to life, one faces the problem of how to handle ectopic pregnancies:  allow the embryo to continue growing and both child and mother die.  Thus the standard treatment, carried out even in hospitals run by the Roman Catholic Church, is to remove the embryo from the mother's fallopian tube, killing the child to save the mother's life, rather than letting both die.

There are far, far rarer circumstances in which a pregnancy properly situated in the mother's womb presents a similar threat to life.
In these circumstances, the abortion is in the nature of the defense of innocent life, namely the mother's.

[Hoodat]

Sometimes the circumstance that makes continuing a pregnancy a threat to the life of the mother arises during the pregnancy.

Once one views a human embryo as a complete human being with a right to life, one faces the problem of how to handle ectopic pregnancies:  allow the embryo to continue growing and both child and mother die.

In other words, a fetus will not survive a ectopic pregnancy.  But then again, it is up to the citizens of each State through their legislatures to enact their own laws regarding abortion.

Also, ectopic abortions represent a very small percentage of the total number of abortions.  So using them as an excuse to legalize all abortion is disingenuous.

[roamer_1]

Sometimes the circumstance that makes continuing a pregnancy a threat to the life of the mother arises during the pregnancy.

I know of no one - No matter how far to the right you go - No one objects to abortion in the face of a true risk to the life of the mother, especially if the life of the child will be lost anyway. No one. That is not the argument.

The argument comes when the 'life of the mother' exception is abused - And it has been abused extensively - to where 'welfare of the mother 'comes to include hardship, or psychological well being... And next thing you know, it means anything at all, and nothing at all... and the exception becomes a rubber stamp.

Likewise the incest and rape clause. While I am generally against this exception, as enumerated elsewhere on this thread, I would be willing to entertain the idea in the case of true rape and incest. But again, that is not where it goes. If all a woman has to do is declare rape, with no criminal investigation, nothing but her word on the matter, then again the exception becomes a rubber stamp.

Despite the whining and crying and throwing dirt in the air, it is not a matter of compassion, but rather a matter of abuse of law... and the two exceptions becoming the very means of allowance. And we are right back to abortion as birth control.

[Sighlass]

I know of no one - No matter how far to the right you go - No one objects to abortion in the face of a true risk to the life of the mother, especially if the life of the child will be lost anyway. No one. That is not the argument.

The argument comes when the 'life of the mother' exception is abused - And it has been abused extensively - to where 'welfare of the mother 'comes to include hardship, or psychological well being... And next thing you know, it means anything at all, and nothing at all... and the exception becomes a rubber stamp.

Likewise the incest and rape clause. While I am generally against this exception, as enumerated elsewhere on this thread, I would be willing to entertain the idea in the case of true rape and incest. But again, that is not where it goes. If all a woman has to do is declare rape, with no criminal investigation, nothing but her word on the matter, then again the exception becomes a rubber stamp.

Despite the whining and crying and throwing dirt in the air, it is not a matter of compassion, but rather a matter of abuse of law... and the two exceptions becoming the very means of allowance. And we are right back to abortion as birth control.

^THIS^

[Hoodat]

I know of no one - No matter how far to the right you go - No one objects to abortion in the face of a true risk to the life of the mother, especially if the life of the child will be lost anyway. No one. That is not the argument.

It is a moral equivalence fallacy.  The argument comes down to anyone who opposes abortion wants women to die.  It's complete BS.  But that is essentially what they are saying.

[Smokin Joe]

It is a moral equivalence fallacy.  The argument comes down to anyone who opposes abortion wants women to die.  It's complete BS.  But that is essentially what they are saying.

Well, they lie.

Besides, anyone who promotes abortion definitely wants babies to die, and that is what they are trying to draw scrutiny from.

In genuine cases where the life of the mother is in physical peril, and the baby will die anyway, OK.

In the instance of rape or incest, however, the one undeniably innocent party is the one people are calling for getting the death penalty. I cannot support that.

[Right_in_Virginia]

I know of no one - No matter how far to the right you go - No one objects to abortion in the face of a true risk to the life of the mother .....

The argument comes when the 'life of the mother' exception is abused ....

Likewise the incest and rape clause. While I am generally against this exception, I would be willing to entertain the idea in the case of true rape and incest.

Do you hear yourself??    You're making the strongest case yet for the execution of sperm donors às the best way to end future abortions.

[roamer_1]

Do you hear yourself??    You're making the strongest case yet for the execution of sperm donors às the best way to end future abortions.

Do you hear yourself? Once again the woman is absolved of responsibility and someone else gets to die.

I already said that in cases of rape I would personally pull the trigger against the convicted - That is a criminal manner, and a wholly different story.

But in the case of two consenting adults, rather the result is levied upon BOTH. BOTH chose to fornicate outside of the bonds of marriage. BOTH should be made to own up to the consequences.

As I said, historically that is done by marriage. But if you are so bound and determined to kill people, then the consequences should fall equally.

[Hoodat]

Do you hear yourself??    You're making the strongest case yet for the execution of sperm donors às the best way to end future abortions.

That may be the stupidest statement you have ever posted on this forum.

[Right_in_Virginia]

But in the case of two consenting adults, rather the result is levied upon BOTH. BOTH chose to fornicate outside of the bonds of marriage. BOTH should be made to own up to the consequences.

What the hell does this     have to do with the victims of rape and incest?

[Right_in_Virginia]

That may be the stupidest statement you have ever posted on this forum.

That you're reading every one of my posts on this forum is a bit disturbing .......   

[Hoodat]

That you're reading every one of my posts on this forum is a bit disturbing .......   

OK, I stand corrected.  Among the posts of yours that I have read, that one may be the stupidest.  There may be posts of yours here that are stupider, but I haven't read them.

[Right_in_Virginia]

OK, I stand corrected.  Among the posts of yours that I have read, that one may be the stupidest.  There may be posts of yours here that are stupider, but I haven't read them.

    

[catfish1957]

Because justice is not politics! And never should be!

Again, as pro-life as I am, I also know that politcal cover that was given to the left by this act during the last election, may (is) be giving Joe Biden and his minions the green light to destroy every aspect of this nation in terms of economy, border security, and overall moral fiber.

I am afraid we are in a "seeing the forrest for the trees" scenario.  Think justice is being exploited now?  Just wait if the destruction continues via political degradation shiving left leaning laws, regulations, and mandates down our throats.......... And that destructuon is and has beeb  helped along via a well strategized wedge issues.

[roamer_1]

What the hell does this     have to do with the victims of rape and incest?

No we're not. I already said, over and over, I would kill a rapist myself.
That pretty well takes it off the table (since way back in the thread).

The rapist is guilty. The child is not.

[Right_in_Virginia]

Jack Posobiec
@JackPosobiec

The real question is who told Lindsey Graham to publicly push for a federal abortion ban in the middle of a close election

12:08 PM · Jan 2, 2023

[Right_in_Virginia]

Yossi Gestetner
@YossiGestetner

Trump writes that "the people that pushed so hard, for decades, against abortion, got their wish from the U.S. Supreme Court, JUST PLAIN DISAPPEARED NOT TO BE SEEN AGAIN."

A graph on abortion ad spending.👇🏼

Not only did Dems outspend, but note the GOP drop off after the ruling!



11:12 AM · Jan 2, 2023

[Cyber Liberty]

Jack Posobiec
@JackPosobiec

The real question is who told Lindsey Graham to publicly push for a federal abortion ban in the middle of a close election

12:08 PM · Jan 2, 2023

Mitch, obviously.

[Smokin Joe]

Do you hear yourself??    You're making the strongest case yet for the execution of sperm donors às the best way to end future abortions.

Execution? Don't be silly.
Who would take the trash out?
Some well placed sutures could accomplish the same thing.