Can Reps modify abortion stance?

[USwings]

By all means hop in your time machine, to your made up future. Make erroneous comparisons if that floats your boat. It doesn't change the facts, or reality that abortion is legal,

For now.

and that President Obama will be picking the next justices for the Supreme Court.

You hope Obama will be picking the next justices for the Supreme Court. Further, such justices need to be approved by Congress.



Oops, you are incorrect. The Supreme Court does not make law, they only interpret law. Congress makes law. If Congress creates a new law respecting abortion, all the Supreme Court can do is interpret this new law, not make it, change it or otherwise modify it.[/SIZE][/FONT][/B]

This is what I said: Quote: Originally Posted by USwings
It doesn't change the facts, or reality that abortion is legal, and that President Obama will be picking the next justices for the Supreme Court. In case you don't understand, any rulings affecting abortion will be decided by the Supreme Court.

Do you know what a ruling is? If you need to rewrite my post to make your arguments, I won't take you seriously, schools out.

The law is not going to change for the better in our lifetime.

We'll see.

Pat yourselves on the back all you want about your delusions. Thick skulls are thick skulls, I can make it any simpler for you to understand. There's likely to be 30 million abortions in the next 20 years in the US. Nothing your talking about is going to stop them. The government is not going to stop abortions, only mothers will.

We'll see. Further, that there will be 30 million children killed over the next 20 years and you act so giddy about it and proud of your confidence that you're right? Despicable is the only word I can think of at the moment to describe such a nonchalant attitude.

I don't know CG, I'm just scratching my head. Your argument is "we'll see" and "for now". My point is, facing the awful reality of 30 million abortions to come, your plan to use government to stop them is futile. The only way to stop an abortion it to convince the mother to have her baby. You are blinded by your bias, and your plan is useless. I have never said I advocate abortion. You worship the law and government, they are not God. They will not stop abortions. The road you are on leads nowhere, your map is out of date.

Your other arguments are about elementary operations of government, which I assume everyone already knows. They don't change my point. The president chooses the new justice.

"The nine justices have an average age of 67. Several have battled health problems, and Justices Antonin Scalia, Anthony M. Kennedy, and Ruth Bader Ginsburg will pass their 80th birthdays in the next four years. Though court-watchers tend to tiptoe around discussions of the longevity of justices, who have lifetime appointments, they say it would be no surprise if more than one were to retire in the next four years."

 

[koshergrl]

"A Houston woman got an abortion for her 12-year-old mentally disabled daughter in an effort to hide evidence that her son sexually assaulted the girl.."

Authorities say mother forced daughter to abort pregnancy | The Daily Texan

So we got a mom in Texas. How many to go before we reach 64%?

And can you imagine, a special child, at the ripe age of 12, being raped, and the mom (legal gardian) choosing to not have her special child go through with the pregnancy? What's the world coming to? (tip: its senses)

Jesus fucking christ. The Lifers are getting loonier by the day.

Actually, the child was raped by her brother, and the mother forced her into an abortion clinic to hide the rape.

It's what abortions are good for. Hiding crime.

"
A retrospective study of women seeking health care inquiring about their history of pregnancy loss found that of among American women who reported having had an induced abortion, 64 percent "felt pressured by others" to have the abortion.[3] The same study found that those women who reported feeling pressured to have an abortion also reported higher rates of negative psychological reactions which they attributed to their abortions.
In another study of 252 women who were seeking peer group support to cope with their past abortions, fifty-five percent of the women stated that they felt “forced” by others to choose the abortion, sixty-one percent said they felt as though others were in control of their lives, and forty-four percent were still hoping that the abortion counselor would present another alternative on the day they went to the abortion clinic.[4] While this sample was limited to women seeking counseling for negative post-abortion reactions and therefore may not be representative of all women seeking abortions, it shows a high rate of not only feeling pressured, but even "forced" to choose abortion among those women who end up the most dissatisfied with their abortion "choice."


The 64 percent comes from: Rue VM, Coleman PK, Rue JJ, Reardon DC. Induced abortion and traumatic stress: A preliminary comparison of American and Russian women. Med Sci Monit, 2004 10(10): SR5-16.

http://www.abortionrisks.org/index.php?title=Coerced_abortion

 

[JakeStarkey]

Not in the sense of Crimes against Humanity.

I like your ingenuity, but . . .

64 percent of abortions in the US involve coercion.

That's forcible abortion, skippy.

 

[JakeStarkey]

The process has to be wrenching for women, of course. But "urged" in no sense compares to Nazi "coercion." They are not the same things.

koshergrl will come back with scrambled arguments that don't make much sense, so I will leave it to others to deal with her insanity.

But . . . it was nice to see her lucid for a bit.

64 percent of abortions in the US involve coercion.

That's forcible abortion, skippy.

Nope. Just urged.

Those who were 'urged' likely suffer severe depression and wracking guilt for years afterwards, along with many of the rest.

Women who have abortions 'face double the risk of mental health problems' | Mail Online

 

[koshergrl]

PP's policy of not reporting crimes, forcibly aborting women who obviously don't want an abortion, of assisting criminals hide coercion counts as crimes against humanity.

And the CDC is complicit....

 

[USwings]

Unkotare null 3 makes a fallacy of comparison.

We prosecute car theft, but we almost never prosecute for abortion.

Um... no, not really.

People won't tolerate murderers. They'd take them out and lynch them if the government did nothing.

That's kind of the point. We don't have 1.2 million murders in this country. We do have 1.2 million abortions. And we'd have the same amount even if they were illegal.

A car is stolen every 30 seconds in the US each year, but we still have laws against auto theft.

So it's not about stopping abortion, it's about having the law. Well at least you admit the law would not stop them from happening. What's the point of having the law again?

 

[JakeStarkey]

The no-compromise evangelicals and allies are statist right wing progressives who want Big Government to prevent abortion except for life of the mother, and some of them don't want any abortion for any reason.

Such a law if passed would never be enforced, and the women of America would make the GOP a historical inanity of the past.

Unkotare null 3 makes a fallacy of comparison.

We prosecute car theft, but we almost never prosecute for abortion.

A car is stolen every 30 seconds in the US each year, but we still have laws against auto theft.

So it's not about stopping abortion, it's about having the law. Well at least you admit the law would not stop them from happening. What's the point of having the law again?

 

[USwings]

The legality doesn't matter.

"Crimes against humanity: murder, extermination, enslavement, deportation, and other inhumane acts committed against civilian populations, before or during the war; or persecutions on political, racial or religious grounds in execution of or in connection with any crime within the jurisdiction of the Tribunal, whether or not in violation of the domestic law of the country where perpetrated.”"

Crimes of War – Crimes Against Humanity

Your talking about WAR crimes and international law. Non of which applies to abortion in the US.

 

[koshergrl]

Of course it applies to abortion in the US...as well as euthanasia. You're just arguing the same (defeated) argument. Just because it's currently legal doesn't mean it's not murder.

 

[Cecilie1200]

And if we did do something stupid like make abortion illegal, someone still would "take care of that sort of thing". Rich women will have doctors that do it...poor women will have coat hangars.

Good, let the poor women have coat hangers. They deserve a coat hanger. Then, they'll face the consequences of their actions and they'll experience some semblance of what that unborn child is going through. And, insofar as the rich women, their doctors can be arrested just as easily as any other doctor can be.

Keep abortion safe and legal...just make it rare.

Safe for whom? The dead kid?

And hey, here's a novel idea. Why don't we give that kid a chance to be adopted? And, make a law which states that as long as there is an American child that needs adopted, people can't adopt children from foreign countries like Angelina Jolie does?

Safe for the woman. The fetus or zygote isn't a "kid".

I have an even more novel idea. Get your fucking laws out of my vagina and let me make private medical decisions with my doctor without your assistance.

Get your skeezy vagina out of my pocketbook and stop asking for taxpayer dollars to pay to scrape out the baby you made the last time you got tanked on Cuervo, or to pay for your birth control pills so you can safely get tanked on Cuervo again.

 

[Cecilie1200]

Guy, you are not the law. Again: your cultist evangelical sharia values are not the law.

I didn't say I was the law, Joke.

YOU said "A fetus is not a child", and I provided visual evidence that your assertion is wrong.

Want to try again?

I think leftists really believe that if they passed a law declaring that skunk cabbages are now roses, that would actually make them roses.

 

[Antares]

I am willing to bet that line to put something in your vagina isn't very long, jus sayin.

And if we did do something stupid like make abortion illegal, someone still would "take care of that sort of thing". Rich women will have doctors that do it...poor women will have coat hangars.

Good, let the poor women have coat hangers. They deserve a coat hanger. Then, they'll face the consequences of their actions and they'll experience some semblance of what that unborn child is going through. And, insofar as the rich women, their doctors can be arrested just as easily as any other doctor can be.

Keep abortion safe and legal...just make it rare.

Safe for whom? The dead kid?

And hey, here's a novel idea. Why don't we give that kid a chance to be adopted? And, make a law which states that as long as there is an American child that needs adopted, people can't adopt children from foreign countries like Angelina Jolie does?

Safe for the woman. The fetus or zygote isn't a "kid".

I have an even more novel idea. Get your fucking laws out of my vagina and let me make private medical decisions with my doctor without your assistance.

 

[Cecilie1200]

The law would get out of wytch's vagina if she'd stop stuffing it there.

Do you even try to make sense?

Just out of curiosity, have you ever been pregnant?

I have. Three times. Just for the record, I declined to kill any of my children. What did you want to say about pregnancy that you thought would clinch your argument against babies?

 

[koshergrl]

I have four children, and I lost one child in a miscarriage at 24 weeks.

It was definitely a baby.

I also contributed a lot of time, money and heartache helping to raise two more who aren't mine.

 

[Antares]

The ONLY reason they won't call it a "baby" is to ease the guilt they feel.

 

[koshergrl]

Oh I know. It's the same thing they do with the "murder" terminology.

 

[Cecilie1200]

Unkotare null 3 makes a fallacy of comparison.

We prosecute car theft, but we almost never prosecute for abortion.

A car is stolen every 30 seconds in the US each year, but we still have laws against auto theft.

So it's not about stopping abortion, it's about having the law. Well at least you admit the law would not stop them from happening. What's the point of having the law again?

Are you seriously trying to say that you think laws do nothing whatsoever to deter actions, smply because they're not 100% effective?

 

[CrotchetyGeezer]

But that's the point, they didn't enforce them.

Do you know how many women were arrested for having abortions before Roe v. Wade?

Exactly 2. 1 in 1911, one in 1922.

Arrests of abortions were a little more common, but not much. For instance, Ruth Barret, the notorious "Dr. Ruth" of Portland, Oregon, performed some 40,000 abortions between 1918 and 1968. They didn't start arresting her until the 1950's, and even then, she got very light sentences when she was convicted.

So in other words you're contradicting yourself. First you say they didn't enforce them and then immediately in the next two paragraphs, you admit they in fact did. Further, in many instances, they didn't need to enforce them as the women pretty much faced their consequences by achieving their own death or irreversible and severe injury. The only reason they didn't get arrested is because they weren't caught. Had they been caught in the act, they most likely would have been arrested so trying to make a case that not many were arrested, because there was really no way of having caught them in the act, is pretty stupid.

Guy, go back and read what I said.

My point is that the enforcement was so lax that it became meaningless.

To say enforcement was lax because multitudes of women weren't being caught aborting their children is stupid.

If someone committed 40,000 murders over a 50 year period, and they didn't arrest her until 30 years in, gave her a slap on the wrist, and she went right back to killing, that would be a pretty lax murder law.

But that is EXACTLY what happened to Ruth Barnett. (and sorry, had to correct the name spelling).

And the only reason why she came to anyone's attention was that she botched a few of her procedures and women were injured.

I think it's a little more complicated than you like to make it out to be and, rather than typing the entire article I will just post this link which is a pretty in-depth look at this woman. Further, that you cite one woman in the state of Oregon...what's this supposed to mean? It wasn't all simply a matter of anything being lax. It was a matter of finding appropriate evidence, it was a matter of some having their own interests in mind and, of course, it was a matter of having good lawyers.

Life Advocate Magazine Archives -- Getting Away With Murder -- Part 1

And, lastly, WTF has 1918 to 1968 got to do with today?

 

[JakeStarkey]

Never in American history have abortion laws been anything but a farce. Two prosecutions in over 100 years. And the fact that Congress will never pass such a law, knowing full well that 90% of those who voted for such a bill would not return to Congress.

It's the Women of American, you right wing statist progressives who want Big Government to do your will, who are your enemies, no one else.

 

[CrotchetyGeezer]

And if we did do something stupid like make abortion illegal, someone still would "take care of that sort of thing". Rich women will have doctors that do it...poor women will have coat hangars.

Good, let the poor women have coat hangers. They deserve a coat hanger. Then, they'll face the consequences of their actions and they'll experience some semblance of what that unborn child is going through. And, insofar as the rich women, their doctors can be arrested just as easily as any other doctor can be.

]

Sometimes you just have to leave the comments of the anti-Choice zealots hanging there to demonstrate the misogyny.

Sometimes you just have to leave the comments of the anti-Child zealots hanging there to demonstrate the misogyny and misandry.

What is it you have against women, dude?

What is it you have against little baby girls and boys, dude?