Republican Women and Democrat women have some important issues in common with each other = powerful partners

Me saying is a state of fact. Abortion is not illegal in the U S.

false.


The supreme court did not make it illegal. It's a state rights issue.

& some states have made it illegal. which is what i said from the start. but it will not end with the states.


Funny shit you democrats

i am not a (D).


give two shits about women's right past abortion

you have it backwards - after the cord is cut, then (R)s don't care. that's why every bill intro'd to improve schools, remove lead from them, raise taxes to fund them properly ... hell - i remember rush limbaugh saying kids should learn to dumpster dive during the summer instead of funding breakfast & lunch programs.

which is not a right at all.

of course it is a right. bodily autonomy is the most fundamental right one can have.
 
images.jpg
 
You mean before 6 weeks. Most people are also fine with the 10-15 week restriction on birth control abortions, something that will become more apparent as the anger over Roe passes,

lol ... you think the issue will somehow lessen & go away? is that why abortion access has passed in every referendum it was intro'd on?


and likely some abortionist in a State like NY will get caught aborting perfectly healthy late term fetuses like Gosnell was.

just like it wasn't happening en mass b4 r v wade was overturned ... it isn't going to happen in the future.



As for viability, leave an infant alone for more than a day or two, and are they viable after that?

nice try ... but 10 - 15 weeks is not a fully formed human being already born.

 
Stop saying it like it makes your statement real. It doesn't.


I'm in the middle. 10-15 week bans for birth control abortions work for me.

then don't have an abortion after that. see how easy that was? would you vote for anyone who wants to raise taxes for all those post born kiddies living outside the womb? if there was a nation wide ban on abortion from the start - - - would you have a problem with that?
 
lol ... you think the issue will somehow lessen & go away? is that why abortion access has passed in every referendum it was intro'd on?




just like it wasn't happening en mass b4 r v wade was overturned ... it isn't going to happen in the future.





nice try ... but 10 - 15 weeks is not a fully formed human being already born.


And when people find out it allows NY style abortions to the last second if the Mother has a cold, it will swing the other way.

It's happening, it's just Gosnell was sloppy and got caught.

It's far along enough to deserve the protection of the Government, and 10-15 weeks is more than enough time to figure out if you want it or not.
 
then don't have an abortion after that. see how easy that was? would you vote for anyone who wants to raise taxes for all those post born kiddies living outside the womb? if there was a nation wide ban on abortion from the start - - - would you have a problem with that?

Sorry, but as an American Citizen I have the right to have an opinion and vote for the laws of my choosing, regardless of their impact directly on me. Does that mean women shouldn't decide if we go to war because they can't get drafted?

"if you want an abortion, don't live in fucking Alabama" See how that works?

It would be unconstitutional without an amendment, and I wouldn't vote for it. again, 10-15 weeks for birth control abortions.
 
And when people find out it allows NY style abortions to the last second if the Mother has a cold, it will swing the other way.

It's happening, it's just Gosnell was sloppy and got caught.

It's far along enough to deserve the protection of the Government, and 10-15 weeks is more than enough time to figure out if you want it or not.

gosnell was also a serial killer. not any different than nutty nurses who kill post born babies or elderly patients. stop talking like that is the norm or ever will be.
 
gosnell was also a serial killer. not any different than nutty nirses who kill post born babies or elderly patients. stop talking like that is the norm or ever will be.

And he hid behind lenient abortion laws and lack of desire to dive into any investigation because it "might make the pro lifers point for them"

In NYC all a woman has to do is convince 1 doctor her health is at risk and she can abort a perfectly viable fetus right up to the second of birth. It's the way the law was written.
 
And he hid behind lenient abortion laws and lack of desire to dive into any investigation because it "might make the pro lifers point for them"

In NYC all a woman has to do is convince 1 doctor her health is at risk and she can abort a perfectly viable fetus right up to the second of birth. It's the way the law was written.

Addressing New York’s New Abortion Law​

By Angelo Fichera
Posted on February 4, 2019 | Updated on May 23, 2019
https://www.factcheck.org/2019/02/addressing-new-yorks-new-abortion-law/
 

Addressing New York’s New Abortion Law​

By Angelo Fichera
Posted on February 4, 2019 | Updated on May 23, 2019
https://www.factcheck.org/2019/02/addressing-new-yorks-new-abortion-law/

LOL Factcheck.org,

Text from the actual law:

A health care practitioner licensed, certi- 43 fied, or authorized under title eight of the education law, acting with- 44 in his or her lawful scope of practice, may perform an abortion when, 45 according to the practitioner's reasonable and good faith professional 46 judgment based on the facts of the patient's case: the patient is within 47 twenty-four weeks from the commencement of pregnancy, or there is an 48 absence of fetal viability, or the abortion is necessary to protect the 49 patient's life or health.

Notice the terms are OR, not AND between viability and protecting health.

Not life, health. So if the mother thinks she may get a rash due to being pregnant, and the doctor acts in good faith, the fetus can be aborted regardless of viability or the time of the pregnancy.

Why write the law to allow that if you don't think someone would want to do that?
 
LOL Factcheck.org,

Text from the actual law:



Notice the terms are OR, not AND between viability and protecting health.

Not life, health. So if the mother thinks she may get a rash due to being pregnant, and the doctor acts in good faith, the fetus can be aborted regardless of viability or the time of the pregnancy.

Why write the law to allow that if you don't think someone would want to do that?

so how many have?
 
so how many have?

How would we know with HIPAA laws and the type of Doctors who would do this obviously not being the type to "slice and tell"?

Again, why not write the law to just cover the life of the mother, or take viability into account as well?
 
false.




& some states have made it illegal. which is what i said from the start. but it will not end with the states.




i am not a (D).




you have it backwards - after the cord is cut, then (R)s don't care. that's why every bill intro'd to improve schools, remove lead from them, raise taxes to fund them properly ... hell - i remember rush limbaugh saying kids should learn to dumpster dive during the summer instead of funding breakfast & lunch programs.



of course it is a right. bodily autonomy is the most fundamental right one can have.
Of course you aren't a democrat. That's why you an other democrat deniers here at usmb are defending democrats.
 
Of course you aren't a democrat. That's why you an other democrat deniers here at usmb are defending democrats.

i am an indie - always have been but right now there's only one party hell bent on bringing antiquated fascist ideology to this country. that is the more important point here. & i have voted for more (R)s than you might think - but ironically most have ended up in prison. so bite me.

download (1).jpg
 

Forum List

Back
Top