Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Americans DON'T support a woman's right to choose at 9 months. How long will it be before the left get that? And, Americans DO support lower inflation and a better economy. How long will it be before the left get that? Right now Trump is on course for beating Biden in 2024. How long will it be before the left get that?
In 2016 Hillary had a 2% advantage in popular vote and still lost by quite a bit. The latest poll shows Trump with a 7% lead over Biden.
The only right wingers doing any shooting are Muslims.
Yeah.....that's why you support abortion and why Trannies are killing children in Christian schools.
Cuz it's just talking-points.
The Michigan vote passed because if it didn't, a 1931 law banning abortion with no exceptions for rape or incest would have gone into effect.
This is what I mean. Right wing cruelty is backfiring. Bigly.
As for Vermont, that's a deep blue state. The home of socialist Bernie Sanders.
A cancerous tumor is composed of living cells.LOL, Thank you--is the male counterpart of that union being consulted before the murder? Nope, weeeeellllll, I guess that just isn't too important is it. The child is being murdered.
You are composed of living cells. Is killing you okay?A cancerous tumor is composed of living cells.
Is the removal of a tumor "murder?"
So your answer is yes?You are composed of living cells. Is killing you okay?
Isn't this fun?
Link.death among poor females goes up when abortion is banned
You're one crazy motherfucker.You show that you are a racist, sexist, right wing pig who does not care about facts.
Every shooter in the last several years has either been a total anti-government nutcase or a leftist lunatic.Right wing Nazis are overwhelmingly shooting up schools.
You are spouting talking points.
Troll somewhere else or at least read the entire thread. You are off base and it emphasizes your contrarian intentions. Re: your contention that my remarks dehumanize--LMAO, what is more dehumanizing than the taking of a human life. Quit projecting.Second, the statement seems to suggest that all abortions are for "convenience"
None of which give license to murder. As you would have noted if you read the whole thread, there are "plan B" options that could be exercised the morning after--before any negligible development takes place. If that is not done, then adoption is a available.variety of reasons, including medical, financial, and personal
There is no right to murder.access to safe and legal abortion is a basic human right that should not be subject to judgment or stigma.
Murder has absolutely nothing to do with reproduction. The taking of a life is totally contrary to reproduction. Try your pretzel logic on some other liberal. Just because you repeat the party line does not make it so.The vast majority of people who support abortion rights believe that women should have the right to make their own reproductive choices,
The SCOTUS disagrees, take your tears to them.Abortion is a legal and constitutionally protected medical procedure
Again, read the thread. I am not going to rehash my position because you are too lazy to read.often necessary to protect the health and well-being of women.
They made it abundantly clear that a vote for the Liberal would be a vote to protect Abortion in Wisconsin. The Conservatives warned it would be the case. Huge amounts of money were spent making sure everyone knew what was at stake. The Liberal won and for the first time in a decade and a half Liberals have the majority in the State Supreme Court.
Kansas held a Vote on the Constitution of the State. The question. Should the State Constitution be amended to allow the Legislature to decide Abortion. The answer, again by about 60% of the voters. A resounding no.
I guess you can denounce them as proxy votes. But it appears to me to be quite clear.
Your concession is noted. I don't recall using any disparaging remarks pointed at any one person so your "ad hom" remark is more grasping. I also used no generalizations. Again, troll somewhere else, your uninformed remarks have added nothing.You really are not interested in a serious debate. Given your ad homs and generalities over a complex issue, you can't be taken seriously.
Cheers,
Rumpole
“Viability” is entirely irrelevant, they are human beings, they should be legal persons end of story.And when does a fetus become a 'person'? No one knows, this is not something that science can address. It is the subject of philosophy, so the only determinant is judicial decree. Under Roe, that was at 22 weeks or so. Until we have a judicial decree on that point (which some states do) we do not have a legally established 'viability'. No one is recommending abortion for a fetus that has reached viability, and is legally decreed as a 'person'. So, before that adjudicated point, there is no 'person' and thus there is no murder, and your statement has no legal consequence. If your reasoning is based on a philosophical or religious view, please understand that even the Bible, in many places, treats the unborn as a commodity, as chattel. so, there is very little in law and religion to support your view, other than your own philosophical stance, which carries no weight in this debate. If philosophy is the basis, then 'whose philosophy'? As you can see, if we go there, the destination is chaos.
Moot point, see above.
A fully developed person on a ventilator cannot survive without it, so lets just take people off of ventilators for the convenience of people around them regardless of whether or not they will eventually recover. Abortion is MURDER.The fact that it cannot survive outside of the mother does fly.
"Should' is not a legal concept, it is a philosophical concept, and is irrelevant.“Viability” is entirely irrelevant, they are human beings, they should be legal persons end of story.
Viability is building your house of standards on shifting sands.
Who cares about what judges say?"Should' is not a legal concept, it is a philosophical concept, and is irrelevant.
Viability is all that is relevant. Without a judicial decree establishing the viability threshold, you have no argument.
None. Your 'philosophy' on what a 'person' is, IS irrelevant.
Cheers,
Rumpole
Well, I guess you accept that there are alternatives to murder, good on you.Don't be surprised if they go after Plan B pills as well.
Do you pay attention to what you write? Plan B. Methinks you might be one of those irresponsible young women who have chosen to murder their offspring. Unfortunate.they would offer alternatives even if it costs a few dollars.
Your generalization is untrue.Then they attack mothers who need help.
