Lets end the "pro-life" "pro-choice" bullshit shall we

[Edgetho]

Abortion somehow became a political issue. One where simply being for or against it automatically puts you into one of the "camps" Dem or Repub.

Lets be honest. No one "Likes" abortion and no one thinks a woman should have an abortion under any and all circumstances. There may be those types but they are the fringe.

The topic we should be discussing is Abortion is legal. Because its legal it is available legally and should be. Having something be legal while making it hard as hell to get is interfering with something that is legal for a reason that has nothing to do with legality.

Restricting access is about morals. Whats moral and whats legal are 2 diff things. While I understand how someone can see it as morally wrong I don't see how hiding or restricting or making hoops to jump through helps legally.

Its like someone hiding traffic lights because they don't like them. The result is accidents will happen because someone didn't like or agree with it.

So while you might not agree with the act of getting an abortion....making it harder, more painful etc does nothing to change the legality its just being a nuisance really.

This board has lost its ability to say "Con on one issue and Dem on another" now its either all or nothing and nothing is "all or nothing"

I actually agree with a lot of this, and I am pro-choice. I agree the issue has been used by both political parties as a wedge issue and as means to manipulate voters, particularly women.

However, the Gosnell story that liberals and the MSM tried to bury, mortified me. If the liberal line about "It's a Women's Health Issue," means anything, abortion clinics need to be closely monitored. The doctors need to be properly credentialed, and the clinics need to be up to day surgical care standards.

Many women who get abortions are poor, minorities, often vulnerable, and uneducated. Gosnell and his ilk proved they can be easily abused. If it is truly about a woman's health, improve the care of standards of these clinics.

How can there be poor and uneducated women in this Country?

Didn't dimocraps declare a War on Poverty FIFTY FUCKING YEARS AGO?

Haven't we spent over 15 TRILLION FUCKING DOLLARS!!

Which is more than all the money we have ever spent on ALL THE WARS WE HAVE EVER FOUGHT IN OUR ENTIRE HISTORY!!!!!

Costs of Major U.S. Wars

I mean, even WWII only cost 4 Trillion in 2008 dollars. WWI was 253 Billion in 2008 dollars. And the costliest war we ever fought (casualty-wise), the Civil War was only 45 Billion for the North and 15 Billion for the South.

15 Trillion and what do we have to show for it? Nothing, just more dimocrap scumbags wanting more, more, more.

dimocraps are such scumbag losers it's just incredible

 

[Edgetho]

I don't see how being prolife is bs.

Nor do I see how supporting the execution of an innocent unborn child is anything but being against life.

Try turning down the hyperbole to about a 3

Why? Because you're getting your ass kicked?

 

[flacaltenn]

I actually agree with you here. If someone wants a prostitute they should be able to get one just don't legislate to make prostitution legal but before you get one someone shove a snake cam in your ass for shits and giggles. Same with abortion...but lets be honest they don't want to make it rare. They want to choke it off or make it uncomfortable as possible just because. I don't agree with that neither do I agree with making prostitution legal as long as you do it on a bed of nails

I detect an amount of unexpected bias on your part.. To SOME reasonable folks having to travel to Nevada to visit a brothel or to Colorado to smoke a doobie would be akin to doing it "on a bed of nails"..

And in the case of rabid abortion fans, the recent laws in Texas would ALSO be onerous and evil.. When in essence, they are no different than making sure the brothel operated under the proper liquor licensing and health inspections.

You are never gonna please the zealots. Govt shouldn't try. But govt SHOULD make certain that even life-damaging and crazy freedoms are practiced as humanely and safely as possible. If that means that you have to travel a hundred miles to get an safe and humane abortion, so be it.

That's where we differ. Since abortions are sought by an overwhelming number of the poor putting the abortion providers 100 miles away is a checkmate situation. Poor have no money *click*, Need Money to travel *Check*, No money for both *Check and Mate*

When I speak about the bed of nails I'm referring to the transvaginal bullshit shoving probes in women just to make it uncomfortable.

I'm sure there's a lot of poor people who need a doobie.. So this is an ECONOMIC issue to you? It's about "a right" to have EASY access to abortion? Having abortion SHOULD BE a choice.. But it also should be an INFORMED choice.

If I was personally volunteering to fund some poor unfortunates abortion, that's the restriction I would put on my "altruism and charity".

That's why I don't see counseling and a good picture of the fetus (with or without a transvaginal intrusion) to be "a real bed of nails".. If you're gonna allow freedom, you should impart enough knowledge to make "INFORMED" consent.

Same for any freedom with obvious potential DAMAGING effects.

 

[Zoom-boing]

Pro-life sees the unborn for what they are, a human being; pro-choice sees the unborn as an inconvenient nuisance.

You can blather all day about legality and shit. The fact is abortion ends the life of another human being and that is why people who are pro-life want restrictions/regulations placed on it. Oh the horror of having morals that believe killing a human being because "it" is a nuisance is wrong. Bugger off.

I mean you can always ask someone but I guess putting it through your filter is easier to process.

"legality and shit"?

Regular Plato we got here

^ Dodges point ... and shit.

Pro-life sees the unborn for what they are, a human being; pro-choice sees the unborn as an inconvenient nuisance.

You can blather all day about legality and shit. The fact is abortion ends the life of another human being and that is why people who are pro-life want restrictions/regulations placed on it. Oh the horror of having morals that believe killing a human being because "it" is a nuisance is wrong. Bugger off.

uh being pro-choice does not mean you dont have morals. This is why this will never be settled. People like you saying stupid hyperbolic shit.
Soon allie will be in here to turn it into her rant on how the left are nazi's.

When you don’t see anything wrong with killing a human being because they are an inconvenient nuisance uh yeah, you lack morals.

Abortion somehow became a political issue. One where simply being for or against it automatically puts you into one of the "camps" Dem or Repub.

Lets be honest. No one "Likes" abortion and no one thinks a woman should have an abortion under any and all circumstances. There may be those types but they are the fringe.

The topic we should be discussing is Abortion is legal. Because its legal it is available legally and should be. Having something be legal while making it hard as hell to get is interfering with something that is legal for a reason that has nothing to do with legality.

Restricting access is about morals. Whats moral and whats legal are 2 diff things. While I understand how someone can see it as morally wrong I don't see how hiding or restricting or making hoops to jump through helps legally.

Its like someone hiding traffic lights because they don't like them. The result is accidents will happen because someone didn't like or agree with it.

So while you might not agree with the act of getting an abortion....making it harder, more painful etc does nothing to change the legality its just being a nuisance really.

This board has lost its ability to say "Con on one issue and Dem on another" now its either all or nothing and nothing is "all or nothing"

I think a lot of folks consider what's inside the female to be "human life", and therefore should be protected regardless of what the woman wants or does not want to do. I mean, there are good points on both sides of the equation.

Personally, I don't like abortion but can't quite make the leap to making that decision for someone else (and make it illegal). Two reasons for this are:

1.) if you make abortion illegal, people still will get them under considerably riskier circumstances
2.) who am I to tell a woman who was raped, and whose pregnancy poses a risk to health that she can't get an abortion. I just don't want to get in there, personally...

But I do think casual abortions (ie healthy mom who got pregnant in a non traumatic) should be difficult to get.

That's incredibly rare but it begs the question - Does anyone really believe that making it difficult to get a safe and legal abortion, or not allowing those women to abort -

Does anyone believe that THAT will make for a better mother? A well fed child even though born to someone who can hardly afford to feed themselves? A responsible father (sperm donor) stepping forward to take HALF the responsibility for the next 20 years?

If people care about the fetus, they would want that fetus to be wanted, loved, cared for, fed, educated.

Fetuses are just a political football for the rw's.

Just as no one has the right to control any woman's reproduction, no has the right to ask why she is aborting. And that will never ever change.

If people cared about the fetus they would want them to not be killed.

Pro-life sees the unborn for what they are, a human being; pro-choice sees the unborn as an inconvenient nuisance.

You can blather all day about legality and shit. The fact is abortion ends the life of another human being and that is why people who are pro-life want restrictions/regulations placed on it. Oh the horror of having morals that believe killing a human being because "it" is a nuisance is wrong. Bugger off.

I mean you can always ask someone but I guess putting it through your filter is easier to process.

"legality and shit"?

Regular Plato we got here

Very indicative of the way fetuses are used for political ends.

These are the same people who whine about drone killings while praising the deaths of hundreds of thousands of children by the illegal and unnecessary Iraq tax-funded slaughter.

Another one who ignores the point.

CC.. I'm pro-choice on damn near everything. But I figured out a long time ago that because I support a right for these things to be individual decisions, doesn't mean that I LIKE it or even APPROVE of it..

As for the arg. about "not making it harder, because it's legal" ---- that's a diff story. I would expect that all the Women's Issues voters would WANT abortions to be in a safer and cleaner enviro.. But as you see in Texas right now --- EVEN LEGISLATING minimum standards for abortion clinics is an "unwanted intrusion" on "their access" to womens' services.

I don't mind making prostitution or drug access "a little harder". As long as one still has the choice to participate or not. So I see nothing wrong or inconsistent in restricting ACCESS to choices. For abortion that would include limits on late term or partial birth abortion, a waiting and counseling period, or standards for care.

If someone was to have a sudden urge to visit a Nevada brothel, I truly wouldn't mind if there was a billboard on the road coming in advocating chastity and marraige fidelity..

I actually agree with you here. If someone wants a prostitute they should be able to get one just don't legislate to make prostitution legal but before you get one someone shove a snake cam in your ass for shits and giggles. Same with abortion...but lets be honest they don't want to make it rare. They want to choke it off or make it uncomfortable as possible just because. I don't agree with that neither do I agree with making prostitution legal as long as you do it on a bed of nails

Wrong, skippy.

Pro-life sees the unborn for what they are, a human being; pro-choice sees the unborn as an inconvenient nuisance. The fact is abortion ends the life of another human being and that is why people who are pro-life want restrictions/regulations placed on it. Oh the horror of having morals that believe killing a human being because "it" is a nuisance is wrong.

 

[flacaltenn]

CC...

Give it up.. I re-read the OP.. And this is where you went off the rails...

So while you might not agree with the act of getting an abortion....making it harder, more painful etc does nothing to change the legality its just being a nuisance really.

Speaking to your opposition who in the most part believe any abortion is akin to murder ----
you really shouldn't casually call ANY restrictions on that practice --- "a nuisance"..

It kinda places you far to the extremes on this topic..

 

[GHook93]

Abortion somehow became a political issue. One where simply being for or against it automatically puts you into one of the "camps" Dem or Repub.

Lets be honest. No one "Likes" abortion and no one thinks a woman should have an abortion under any and all circumstances. There may be those types but they are the fringe.

The topic we should be discussing is Abortion is legal. Because its legal it is available legally and should be. Having something be legal while making it hard as hell to get is interfering with something that is legal for a reason that has nothing to do with legality.

Restricting access is about morals. Whats moral and whats legal are 2 diff things. While I understand how someone can see it as morally wrong I don't see how hiding or restricting or making hoops to jump through helps legally.

Its like someone hiding traffic lights because they don't like them. The result is accidents will happen because someone didn't like or agree with it.

So while you might not agree with the act of getting an abortion....making it harder, more painful etc does nothing to change the legality its just being a nuisance really.

This board has lost its ability to say "Con on one issue and Dem on another" now its either all or nothing and nothing is "all or nothing"

I fall on the right side of the isle, but I believe in abortion rights during the 1st trimester and limited exceptions thereafter (2nd - victim of incest or rape) and 3rd (birth defects or mother's life is in danger). I think it's morally wrong and I see it as killing a baby, but I don't agree with child getting pregant having a baby, a rape or incest victim forced to have a baby etc.

I assume your referring to the Texas law. First, if you can't figure out after 5 month whether to terminate your pregancy or not, then I you should lose that choice outside of two exceptions (baby has birth defects or mother's life is in danger). Second, why shouldn't abortion clinics be close to hospitals and have admitting rights. If the baby survives and is born alive, then the execursioner must transition to savior and do what is necessary to save the baby, including admitting the baby to the hospital. Third, if current clinics aren't up to code fuck them! They either get up to code or move to a place they can get up to code. There is a market for abortion, therefore, if some go down because they don't want to get up to code, others will pop up to replace them!

The Texas law makes sense, liberals opposition to it makes NONE!

 

[Vox]

Name a murder as it is and ban it altogether - then we can move along.

As long as murder of the babies is permitted even at the age of the baby when she feels pain( a barbaric situation not permitted anywhere in the civilized world) - it will not go away.
It is a shame on this country.

 

[Vox]

Abortion somehow became a political issue. One where simply being for or against it automatically puts you into one of the "camps" Dem or Repub.

Lets be honest. No one "Likes" abortion and no one thinks a woman should have an abortion under any and all circumstances. There may be those types but they are the fringe.

The topic we should be discussing is Abortion is legal. Because its legal it is available legally and should be. Having something be legal while making it hard as hell to get is interfering with something that is legal for a reason that has nothing to do with legality.

Restricting access is about morals. Whats moral and whats legal are 2 diff things. While I understand how someone can see it as morally wrong I don't see how hiding or restricting or making hoops to jump through helps legally.

Its like someone hiding traffic lights because they don't like them. The result is accidents will happen because someone didn't like or agree with it.H

So while you might not agree with the act of getting an abortion....making it harder, more painful etc does nothing to change the legality its just being a nuisance really.

This board has lost its ability to say "Con on one issue and Dem on another" now its either all or nothing and nothing is "all or nothing"

I fall on the right side of the isle, but I believe in abortion rights during the 1st trimester and limited exceptions thereafter (2nd - victim of incest or rape) and 3rd (birth defects or mother's life is in danger). I think it's morally wrong and I see it as killing a baby, but I don't agree with child getting pregant having a baby, a rape or incest victim forced to have a baby etc.

And you do not see it is as morally wrong to cut the viable baby into pieces inflicting a torturous pain on the innocent human child instead of delivering her via c-section? What is wrong with you, people?! Why should it be abortion after the 22 weeks?!? Nowhere else it is torture and the murder of the baby( when there are instances of medical problems with the mother) except in the US.
Abortion at the advanced gestational age is also extremely dangerous to the mother - much more dangerous than c-section

 

[ClosedCaption]

How can there be poor and uneducated women in this Country?

Is this a real question? Like, Seriously?

 

[KevinWestern]

Damn, I love arguments based on the "I only pretend to care to score points" premise.

Explain this in more detail, windbag.

What makes going to a doctors office riskier that going to an unregulated clinic run by a racist asswipe like Gosnell?

If abortion is illegal, people will be still getting them via risky, unregulated methods and not by trained professionals. What is your point here?

Why does how a woman got pregnant change the value of human life?

Think you need to read my words more carefully before responding. Who said that the value of human life changes? I never did. All I said is that personally I don't feel comfortable stepping in and telling a 16 year old who was raped that she can't get an abortion, especially in the first few weeks of pregnancy.

I tend to be one of those who feels there's a difference between the unborn at 2 weeks vs maybe 4 months.

 

[ClosedCaption]

CC...

Give it up.. I re-read the OP.. And this is where you went off the rails...

So while you might not agree with the act of getting an abortion....making it harder, more painful etc does nothing to change the legality its just being a nuisance really.

Speaking to your opposition who in the most part believe any abortion is akin to murder ----
you really shouldn't casually call ANY restrictions on that practice --- "a nuisance"..

It kinda places you far to the extremes on this topic..

No I'm not saying ANY restriction is a nuisance. Of course there should be restrictions I'm referring to restrictions or procedures that are for no reason other than to create a burden just because.

I think you know that and if you didn't know you do

 

[KevinWestern]

Once a woman takes responsibility for getting pregnant, she is responsible for the baby inside her as well.

Yea, but as I brought up earlier there are many instances where the woman is not responsible for getting pregnant, like in situations where she was raped. Say a lady was raped and her pregnancy poses a grave danger to her health.

What then?

Life just sucks like that somehow.
But the baby didnt do anything wrong. Why should it die?

Well, just asking because your logic stream was based on the fact that the woman was taking "responsibility for getting pregnant".

And I dunno Rabbi, when a 13 year old is raped and the pregnancy poses a health risk, I don't oppose to her getting an early abortion. Well, perhaps I should word it in that "I wouldn't interfere".

 

[Borillar]

Pro-life sees the unborn for what they are, a human being; pro-choice sees the unborn as an inconvenient nuisance.

You can blather all day about legality and shit. The fact is abortion ends the life of another human being and that is why people who are pro-life want restrictions/regulations placed on it. Oh the horror of having morals that believe killing a human being because "it" is a nuisance is wrong. Bugger off.

And interestingly, after birth, the pro-choice people see the baby as a human being while the "pro-life" folks see it as a nuisance and tax burden.

 

[ClosedCaption]

Abortion somehow became a political issue. One where simply being for or against it automatically puts you into one of the "camps" Dem or Repub.

Lets be honest. No one "Likes" abortion and no one thinks a woman should have an abortion under any and all circumstances. There may be those types but they are the fringe.

The topic we should be discussing is Abortion is legal. Because its legal it is available legally and should be. Having something be legal while making it hard as hell to get is interfering with something that is legal for a reason that has nothing to do with legality.

Restricting access is about morals. Whats moral and whats legal are 2 diff things. While I understand how someone can see it as morally wrong I don't see how hiding or restricting or making hoops to jump through helps legally.

Its like someone hiding traffic lights because they don't like them. The result is accidents will happen because someone didn't like or agree with it.

So while you might not agree with the act of getting an abortion....making it harder, more painful etc does nothing to change the legality its just being a nuisance really.

This board has lost its ability to say "Con on one issue and Dem on another" now its either all or nothing and nothing is "all or nothing"

I fall on the right side of the isle, but I believe in abortion rights during the 1st trimester and limited exceptions thereafter (2nd - victim of incest or rape) and 3rd (birth defects or mother's life is in danger). I think it's morally wrong and I see it as killing a baby, but I don't agree with child getting pregant having a baby, a rape or incest victim forced to have a baby etc.

I assume your referring to the Texas law. First, if you can't figure out after 5 month whether to terminate your pregancy or not, then I you should lose that choice outside of two exceptions (baby has birth defects or mother's life is in danger). Second, why shouldn't abortion clinics be close to hospitals and have admitting rights. If the baby survives and is born alive, then the execursioner must transition to savior and do what is necessary to save the baby, including admitting the baby to the hospital. Third, if current clinics aren't up to code fuck them! They either get up to code or move to a place they can get up to code. There is a market for abortion, therefore, if some go down because they don't want to get up to code, others will pop up to replace them!

The Texas law makes sense, liberals opposition to it makes NONE!

See I think everyone can agree with the bolded for the most part.

Now the 2nd paragraph I agree on 5 months way too late unless serious problems are there. Your question is why not, but my question was Why in the first place..There is a reason to move them into out of the way areas, waaaaay away from the people who access it most. Its like putting Midget supplies on the top shelf. No you aren't technically stopping anyone but you know the effect it will have. Midgets cant reach 'em!

Ya know

 

[KevinWestern]

Damn, I love arguments based on the "I only pretend to care to score points" premise.

Elaborate a bit windbag. I want to understand the angle you're insulting me with.

What makes going to a doctors office riskier that going to an unregulated clinic run by a racist asswipe like Gosnell?

If abortions become illegal, there will be less access to clean facilities run by trained professionals and more instances of dangerous "do it yourself" fetus removal projects. What's your point?

Why does how a woman got pregnant change the value of human life?

I never said I thought the value of life was different, I just said that I can't bring myself to tell a 13 year old who has been raped that she can't have an early abortion, especially when that pregnancy has a good chance of causing harm to her.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Damn, I love arguments based on the "I only pretend to care to score points" premise.

Explain this in more detail, windbag.

If you want to actually discuss the issue based on facts, learn the facts. If you prefer to spout debunked talking points in order to pretend you care about an issue you are totally uninformed about, keep posting stupid shit.

What makes going to a doctors office riskier that going to an unregulated clinic run by a racist asswipe like Gosnell?

If abortion is illegal, people will be still getting them via risky, unregulated methods and not by trained professionals. What is your point here?

The number of abortions before and after Roe is almost constant, as is the number of deaths as a result of them.

Women were not forced to navigate the sewers in order to get an abortion before Roe was handed down, they went to doctors that did everything they could to make sure the patients lived through the experience because the alternative was going to jail for murder. Today we have a pro abortion political movement that prefers to see clinics unregulated because they are convinced that any restrictions on abortions is a slap in the face of their religion.

If the law actually makes a difference, women were probably safer when abortion was illegal. At the very least, it forced women to consider the consequences before they had sex.

Why does how a woman got pregnant change the value of human life?

Think you need to read my words more carefully before responding. Who said that the value of human life changes? I never did. All I said is that personally I don't feel comfortable stepping in and telling a 16 year old who was raped that she can't get an abortion, especially in the first few weeks of pregnancy.

I tend to be one of those who feels there's a difference between the unborn at 2 weeks vs maybe 4 months.

People keep saying stupid shit like you spout? That is a serious question, by the way.

You said you would never argue with a woman who got pregnant from rape if she wanted an abortion, yet you are willing to argue with one who got pregnant by voluntarily having sex. That imples that human life has a different value based on the method of conception, even if you don't come right out and say it.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

CC...

Give it up.. I re-read the OP.. And this is where you went off the rails...

So while you might not agree with the act of getting an abortion....making it harder, more painful etc does nothing to change the legality its just being a nuisance really.

Speaking to your opposition who in the most part believe any abortion is akin to murder ----
you really shouldn't casually call ANY restrictions on that practice --- "a nuisance"..

It kinda places you far to the extremes on this topic..

No I'm not saying ANY restriction is a nuisance. Of course there should be restrictions I'm referring to restrictions or procedures that are for no reason other than to create a burden just because.

I think you know that and if you didn't know you do

Like the restrictions in Texas that require doctors to have admitting privileges at hospitals? The very restriction you said was a burden, and that a court just said cannot be dismissed simply because it is?

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Abortion somehow became a political issue. One where simply being for or against it automatically puts you into one of the "camps" Dem or Repub.

Lets be honest. No one "Likes" abortion and no one thinks a woman should have an abortion under any and all circumstances. There may be those types but they are the fringe.

The topic we should be discussing is Abortion is legal. Because its legal it is available legally and should be. Having something be legal while making it hard as hell to get is interfering with something that is legal for a reason that has nothing to do with legality.

Restricting access is about morals. Whats moral and whats legal are 2 diff things. While I understand how someone can see it as morally wrong I don't see how hiding or restricting or making hoops to jump through helps legally.

Its like someone hiding traffic lights because they don't like them. The result is accidents will happen because someone didn't like or agree with it.

So while you might not agree with the act of getting an abortion....making it harder, more painful etc does nothing to change the legality its just being a nuisance really.

This board has lost its ability to say "Con on one issue and Dem on another" now its either all or nothing and nothing is "all or nothing"

I fall on the right side of the isle, but I believe in abortion rights during the 1st trimester and limited exceptions thereafter (2nd - victim of incest or rape) and 3rd (birth defects or mother's life is in danger). I think it's morally wrong and I see it as killing a baby, but I don't agree with child getting pregant having a baby, a rape or incest victim forced to have a baby etc.

I assume your referring to the Texas law. First, if you can't figure out after 5 month whether to terminate your pregancy or not, then I you should lose that choice outside of two exceptions (baby has birth defects or mother's life is in danger). Second, why shouldn't abortion clinics be close to hospitals and have admitting rights. If the baby survives and is born alive, then the execursioner must transition to savior and do what is necessary to save the baby, including admitting the baby to the hospital. Third, if current clinics aren't up to code fuck them! They either get up to code or move to a place they can get up to code. There is a market for abortion, therefore, if some go down because they don't want to get up to code, others will pop up to replace them!

The Texas law makes sense, liberals opposition to it makes NONE!

See I think everyone can agree with the bolded for the most part.

Now the 2nd paragraph I agree on 5 months way too late unless serious problems are there. Your question is why not, but my question was Why in the first place..There is a reason to move them into out of the way areas, waaaaay away from the people who access it most. Its like putting Midget supplies on the top shelf. No you aren't technically stopping anyone but you know the effect it will have. Midgets cant reach 'em!

Ya know

They don't have hospitals in Texas?

The problem that the clinics have is not that there aren't enough hospitals, it is that the doctors do not have admitting privileges. Ever wonder why a doctor that practices anywhere wouldn't be able to admit a patient to a hospital?

 

[Flopper]

Abortion somehow became a political issue. One where simply being for or against it automatically puts you into one of the "camps" Dem or Repub.

Lets be honest. No one "Likes" abortion and no one thinks a woman should have an abortion under any and all circumstances. There may be those types but they are the fringe.

The topic we should be discussing is Abortion is legal. Because its legal it is available legally and should be. Having something be legal while making it hard as hell to get is interfering with something that is legal for a reason that has nothing to do with legality.

Restricting access is about morals. Whats moral and whats legal are 2 diff things. While I understand how someone can see it as morally wrong I don't see how hiding or restricting or making hoops to jump through helps legally.

Its like someone hiding traffic lights because they don't like them. The result is accidents will happen because someone didn't like or agree with it.

So while you might not agree with the act of getting an abortion....making it harder, more painful etc does nothing to change the legality its just being a nuisance really.

This board has lost its ability to say "Con on one issue and Dem on another" now its either all or nothing and nothing is "all or nothing"

Maybe I'm not following you but I think it depends on what you mean when you say make it harder to get an abortion. If you make it so hard that that it would be equivalent to denying a woman's right to have an abortion, then that wouldn't fly or if you create laws whose primary intent is make an abortion inaccessible, then that wouldn't work either.

 

[Unkotare]

So while you might not agree with the act of getting an abortion....making it harder, more painful etc does nothing to change the legality its just being a nuisance really.

Do you feel the same way about gun control laws? Getting a pilot's license? Passing the Bar exam? Being certified as a physician?


"just being a nuisance really"