Abortion was 50/50. Now it is quicksand.

[MagicMike]

By the numbers--
1. War--Read the definition (Are you really that slow?) Do you know what the word "justification" means? Non sequitur
2. Death Penalty--self explanatory, I live in a state that has no death penalty. Abortion is a death penalty.
3. Mass Shootings--I have never committed one, what do you think? Are you for them?
4. Gun Control--Nope. I have done nothing that would justify disarming myself. That disarming would do absolutely nothing to prevent mass shootings.
5. Apparently you have problems understanding the meanings of words. I have provided you with the common definitions for two words that you choose to disregard. That is the definition of STUPIDITY.

You are just talking in circles without actually answering questions.
First of all YOU don't get to define abortion for others as "murder."
The removal of an unwanted cellular mass from inside a woman's body is not "murder."
The Supreme Court decided that in 1973.
The Dobbs decision doesn't change that fact.
It was a poor decision in the first place but nevertheless it did not codify this medical procedure as "murder"....which of course is illegal at both the state and federal level.
So yeah, you calling it "murder" is just your subjective opinion....which of course you are perfectly free to impose upon yourself (and your own body) but NOT on others.
Also your (supposed) "outrage" over these imaginary "murders" is hypocritical and outright laughable given your sanctimonious acceptance of other murders
Those (mass shooting) murders are perfectly acceptable to you....as long as YOU PERSONALLY don't have to be inconvenienced by any measures to prevent them.
That is called a double standard.
A difficult place to be for those trying to claim any kind of "moral" high ground.

 

[Concerned American]

irst of all YOU don't get to define abortion for others as "murder."

The act falls within the definition moron. I didn't define it.

The removal of an unwanted cellular mass from inside a woman's body is not "murder."
The Supreme Court decided that in 1973.

It is not a random cellular mass--the person has a heartbeat. The SCOTUS overturned the poor 1973 decision that resulted in the MURDER of 64 million children since it's misguided inception.

So yeah, you calling it "murder" is just your subjective opinion.

It fits the definition of murder. I did not define it. Keep twisting yourself, you are the one talking in circles without a twit of support. Again, I have provided you with accepted proof by any thinking human. I am sorry if you are incapable of accepting that due to your democrat indoctrination.

sanctimonious acceptance of other murders

What murders have I accepted. Self defense is not murder. See the definition. I do not have the death penalty in my state--moot point. I have not accepted mass shootings. I just have not accepted YOUR and the democrats wrong-headed non-solution to the problem. I nor any weapon that I own have ever been involved in a crime. Why are you accusing and attempting to restrict my rights because of the actions of some unrelated, mentally deranged criminal. Indeed I believe it is your own sanctimony that you would presume to remove my rights for NO REASON.

inconvenienced by any measures to prevent them.

Short of removing firearms which is absolutely ineffective by any measure, you haven't proposed even one effective measure. How about holding criminals responsible for their actions. We have laws regulating the purchase and possession of firearms that YOU and the democrats have marketed as effective. What happened to them? Now you want to take my rights because you cannot hold people accountable because___________fill in the blank_________. Don't point fingers at me because you are following incompetence. BTW, NONE of this democrat distraction that you are pushing has a bit to do with the fact that ABORTION IS MURDER and you can twist and distract from now until doomsday and you will never change that FACT. Please return to the topic--it is not gun control, mass murders, or war.

 

[JoeC]

The modern day worshipers of Moloch. What is right or wrong isn't defined by the majority.

 

[JoeC]

A gun does not have a conscious. The shooter does.

 

[Rumpole]

Not according to accepted common societal definition.
murder

mûr′dər

noun​

1. The killing of another person without justification or excuse, especially the crime of killing a person with malice aforethought or with recklessness manifesting extreme indifference to the value of human life.
2. An instance of such killing

Sorry, there is NO consensus in U.S. law that a fetus is a 'person' subject to all the guarantees in the Bill of Rights.

By that simple fact, you cannot claim, to a legal standard, that abortion is murder. You will need a Supreme Court decree affirming that a fetus is a person and there is none, not even in Dobbs, and they apparently do not want to touch that one.

Cheers,
Rumpole

 

[FranklinRoosevelt_FTW]

There is an old saying, I’d call it a curse. Watch what you wish for. You just might get it.

For decades Conservatives dreamed of overturning Roe. They salivated at ending this right. They imagined that this would be the culmination of all their dreams.

Abortion was a 50/50 issue. Now, it’s Republican quicksand.

Six in 10 voters support legal abortion in most cases. Just over a third want it to be entirely or mostly illegal.

www.politico.com

For elected Republicans the trap is right here before them. If they back off of Abortion to represent the majority view, they alienate the base and lose their positions. If they embrace the base they still risk losing their positions to a majority populist view.

For decades Republicans claimed that the Democrats didn’t dare allow the issue onto the ballot as they would lose. It was a favorite claim of Rush Limbaugh as one example. But the truth turns out to be much stranger than fiction. Every time Abortion is on the ballot the Left wins.

Now this is apparently supported by polling which shows roughly 60% of the people supporting the right to an Abortion in most cases. In other words the standards of the old Roe decision.

So how did this happen? How did decades of polling get it so wrong? I think it is money where the mouth was syndrome.

I don’t like Abortions. I would prefer the woman choose another path. However my dislike doesn’t change my duty as an American to protect her rights. As I argue to protect other rights, even if the individual is doing something I disagree with, I argue in favor of the woman’s right to choose her own path.

For those who would argue it is a Sin. Perhaps it is. But I’m not the one who judges such things. That is God. That is between God and her. I may be able to pray that God have mercy. But that is about all I can do.

I always oppose someone having their rights stripped away. I would hope that you feel the same way. I suspect many of you do not.

Another Ukrainian Nazi. What the hell is with you people…. You lowlife hypocrites. Keep waving that Nazi flag of yours. You gotta be ashamed of yourself damn traitors

You don’t give a shit about people starving in Africa, or give a damn about the war in Yemen. The wars in Syria. You just get told what to think by the far left wing racists in the media. Keep waving that Nazi flag of yours see where it gets you.

 

[Foxfyre]

It didn’t seem to be far down the list in Wisconsin. It was the main issue being discussed.

In the Kansas Referendum for a change to the state constitution it was the only issue.

What the Supremes did in Roe was essentially return the rights to women they had at the founding of the nation. Then Abortion was legal. The first restriction on it some seventy years later was that the Abortion couldn’t take place after the quickening. That was defined as when the fetus started kicking. Say about 15 weeks on average.

What Roe did was make abortion legal everywhere for the first trimester. Say about 12 weeks. After that you could restrict it more for the second trimester and even more restrictions for the third. And remember this first trimester was accepted by the founders as permissible at the time this nation was formed.

So historically women had the right, and it was taken away. Roe restored those rights, and Dobbs took it away.

Doesn’t the intent of the Founders matter?

No. What Roe did was put the power with the Court instead of with the people where it belonged. That is essentially what Dobbs was all about. It returned the power to the people through their elected representatives rather than a dictate of an unelected and essentially unaccountable small oligarchy of appointed judges.

I am pretty darn sure abortion wasn't all that was talked about either in Wisconsin or Kansas. I know a lot of people in both states and they just aren't that tunnel visioned or shallow. But it might have been all a partisan left wing media was reporting.

I move in pretty large circles and Dobbs was mostly a shrug and was barely discussed at all. When it was discussed, it was within the context that the people in the states will decide the issue and not the courts. And in Kansas the people did vote down a state constitutional amendment re abortion as they did not want all abortion for any reason banned. But like most other states, in polling a majority of Kansas did want some restrictions on abortion.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

Try being honest for a change. We are not talking about miscarriages, early births, births that would be a danger to the mother, rape or incest--all very clearly excepted in so-called abortion bans. Those arguments are normal disingenuous democrat distraction. We ARE talking about abortion for the convenience of a slut that couldn't keep her legs together or think far enough ahead to prevent an unwanted pregnancy. In short MURDER. BTW, I hope you never go on a ventilator, you could not survive without it, so we can murder you as well, eh?

This is a lie.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

Historically, studies have shown that people don't like abortion, but still want the government out of it, with limitations.

True.

It's perfectly consistent to oppose abortion while defending a woman's right to privacy and supporting limited government.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

Don't you understand.......both the left and the Neocons conspired to make it that way.
It's how they plan to bring this country down....by using women to vote like idiots and put the communists in power to the point where they can't be stopped.

This is unmitigated idiocy.

 

[mudwhistle]

This is unmitigated idiocy.

No. I'm playing chess while you're playing checkers.
Too bad you can't understand what's going on.

 

[WinterBorn]

I get why people are against abortion. If you believe it is an independent life at conception, it follows that you would not want it killed.

But this all or nothing attitude from either side is ridiculous. But the total ban on any abortion procedures is the worst. Women are out there risking their lives because some tightass decided all abortions should be illegal.

Women are being sent home with a dead fetus in their womb because removing it is illegal. One in particular, an Anya Cook in Florida lost most of her amniotic fluid when she was 4 months pregnant. The fetus was going to die. That is not even a question. But she was sent home and the following day miscarried and lost half the blood in her body. And why? Doctors were not allowed to apply the only rational medical treatment, removing the fetus.

It is sadistic and barbaric.

 

[initforme]

Pro life doesn't end at birth. It should be supported when one is very sick and old. Those people are just as important as a baby. Probably more important.

 

[Concerned American]

But the total ban on any abortion procedures is the worst.

I could be wrong because I am not personally aware of the case, but reading what was reported here, I am more inclined to believe that she was mistreated by the medical establishment.

A devastating new story in the Washington Post details how Florida’s 15-week abortion ban almost killed a woman, despite the fact that the ban nominally has exceptions in place for the health of the pregnant person. The reporting comes as the state works to finalize a ban after six weeks of pregnancy, which likely presidential contender Gov. Ron DeSantis (R) is expected to sign.

Florida Woman Denied Abortion Miscarried in Hair Salon Bathroom, Lost Half Her Blood

Emergency room doctors had sent Anya Cook home due to the state's 15-week abortion ban. A nurse gave her antibiotics and promised to pray for her.

jezebel.com

 

[SavannahMann]

No. What Roe did was put the power with the Court instead of with the people where it belonged. That is essentially what Dobbs was all about. It returned the power to the people through their elected representatives rather than a dictate of an unelected and essentially unaccountable small oligarchy of appointed judges.

I am pretty darn sure abortion wasn't all that was talked about either in Wisconsin or Kansas. I know a lot of people in both states and they just aren't that tunnel visioned or shallow. But it might have been all a partisan left wing media was reporting.

I move in pretty large circles and Dobbs was mostly a shrug and was barely discussed at all. When it was discussed, it was within the context that the people in the states will decide the issue and not the courts. And in Kansas the people did vote down a state constitutional amendment re abortion as they did not want all abortion for any reason banned. But like most other states, in polling a majority of Kansas did want some restrictions on abortion.

In Kansas the people voted on a Constitutional Amendment regarding Abortion. There wasn’t a lot else to discuss concerning that particular ballot issue.

The Wisconsin Supreme Court Election was the most expensive in history. Everyone was pouring money into the race to make sure that every single voter knew what was at stake.

My rights as a gun owner aren’t left up to the people. Your rights to worship as you please aren’t left up to the people. Your right to be secure from unwarranted police searches aren’t left up to the people. Your rights for freedom of speech aren’t left up to the people. Why is a woman’s right to privacy “properly” left up to the people? Why not guns?

 

[SavannahMann]

Like the ones that investigated Trump's civil rights when they invaded MAL? Those?

No. They had a warrant which is required to protect his civil rights.

They were conducting a search in accordance with a warrant. They found documents that were not supposed to be there. They found documents that the Trump Legal team swore were not there.

 

[frigidweirdo]

I don’t believe in Rights. I believe in Right and Wrong. Nothing else. I didn’t define Right and Wrong. No human being did. They should be as instinctive to us as the yearly migration is to the animals.

We said killing was WRONG, and yet we still kill billions of animals a year.
"right and wrong" will often just be whatever we feel like it being.
Is abortion "wrong" when we have way too many people on this planet? We're not struggling for survival any more. We're struggling with over population.

 

[BrokeLoser]

Sorry, there is NO consensus in U.S. law that a fetus is a 'person' subject to all the guarantees in the Bill of Rights.

By that simple fact, you cannot claim, to a legal standard, that abortion is murder. You will need a Supreme Court decree affirming that a fetus is a person and there is none, not even in Dobbs, and they apparently do not want to touch that one.

Cheers,
Rumpole

What’s odd is that you tree-hugging weirdos see an eagles egg as an eagle…WTF?

 

[BrokeLoser]

We said killing was WRONG, and yet we still kill billions of animals a year.
"right and wrong" will often just be whatever we feel like it being.
Is abortion "wrong" when we have way too many people on this planet? We're not struggling for survival any more. We're struggling with over population.

Is that why you keep recruiting Mexicos people by the millions…because we’re over-populated?

 

[Foxfyre]

In Kansas the people voted on a Constitutional Amendment regarding Abortion. There wasn’t a lot else to discuss concerning that particular ballot issue.

The Wisconsin Supreme Court Election was the most expensive in history. Everyone was pouring money into the race to make sure that every single voter knew what was at stake.

My rights as a gun owner aren’t left up to the people. Your rights to worship as you please aren’t left up to the people. Your right to be secure from unwarranted police searches aren’t left up to the people. Your rights for freedom of speech aren’t left up to the people. Why is a woman’s right to privacy “properly” left up to the people? Why not guns?

Your rights to worship, to be secure from unwarranted searches, free speech etc. do not involve the rights of another person. With abortion it is not just the woman's rights/privacy to consider but that of the unborn person she carries. Whatever your opinion about the rights of that baby, that is what makes abortion different from all the other rights you use as illustration. Our rights do not extend to our right to abuse or neglect or endanger our born children and the state has a lot of say about that. And civilized moral people care about the welfare of children even when their parents do not.

So the argument is actually whether that baby has fewer rights a minute or hour or a week or two or months before it draws its first breath of air. And also the fact that none of us became who we are without first going through the zygote, embryo, etc. states of human development. And that is the crux of the abortion dilemma.