What would America be like if the anti-Abortion types win?

[JoeB131]

I'm just wondering how long God's gonna sit back and let all those babies be murdered?
I would think that if God really cared, he'd step in at some point and do some serious wrist slappin.
I mean seriously....how many innocents will need to die before there's some intervention? 1 million? 1 billion? 1 trillion? 1 quadrillion? 1 quintrillion? 1 sextillion? 1 septillion? 1 octillion? 1 nonillion? 1 decillion? HOW MANY???

What's more important.... free will or the sanctity of innocent life made in God's own image?
What good is free will if it results in profound torture and endless cruelty?

If God stood back while "His People" were being killed by the Nazis, he isn't going to get worked up about a bunch of fetuses... Next.

Yeah right, Martha Plimpton brags about abortion in front of her fans. Said her first one was the best with a cheering crowd. Liberals have cheapened life so much, you have people celebrating killing inocent babie and it's only going to get worse from here.

Again, I'm still awaiting for you to offer an alternative that doesn't look like the hot mess the Philippines are.

 

[JoeB131]

Oh bullshit.....After patriotism, mewling about the pooooor is the second-to-last refuge of the scoundrel.

That's nice, but you still didn't answer my point. Is it equitable that a rich woman can fly to any state that abortions are still offered, but a poor woman will get stuck with whatever laws the inbreds in her state capitol come up with?

No need to look at hellholes like the Philippines. Look at the US. It will be like the America I grew up in again. Great. I lived in it.

You really think people weren't having abortions when you were growing up? What time was this in?

 

[22lcidw]

Here's a good way to prevent a lot of abortions. Get men to stop walking away from their own flesh and blood and even deny their own flesh and blood. Get men to keep their pants zipped and stop impregnating women then walking away to not even look back to see what they've caused.

I agree that men should face the consequences of their actions, and not be cowardly weasels who shirk responsibility.

But it takes two to tango, and something that always amazes me is how pro-abort women act as if it's ONLY the man who should be responsible. If you're not ready to be pregnant, then don't put yourself in the position to get pregnant and then play the innocent victim. Again, it should be BOTH who face the consequences of their actions. And facing the consequences doesn't mean killing the baby.

Women do this because they get away with it. They are a protected group. I am sorry. I am in my early 60's and everything we see is darker on Tv, movies, entertainment, comediennes and more. This with women having massive power. They do not realize people die. They die in huge numbers. And guys are the ones who have to do the killing when wars are started. So to start all of those pregnant teenagers must be forced to give information to impregnated them. And if the ones who impregnated them is without a job. To the workfarm. The pregnant teenager must do the same thing if without talents.

 

[BlueGin]

Here's a good way to prevent a lot of abortions. Get men to stop walking away from their own flesh and blood and even deny their own flesh and blood. Get men to keep their pants zipped and stop impregnating women then walking away to not even look back to see what they've caused.

I agree that men should face the consequences of their actions, and not be cowardly weasels who shirk responsibility.

But it takes two to tango, and something that always amazes me is how pro-abort women act as if it's ONLY the man who should be responsible. If you're not ready to be pregnant, then don't put yourself in the position to get pregnant and then play the innocent victim. Again, it should be BOTH who face the consequences of their actions. And facing the consequences doesn't mean killing the baby.

Exactly. And if you are too immature to discuss and use birth control to avoid getting pregnant..you are too damn immature to be having sex in the first place.

 

[JoeB131]

Have you ever once stepped back and objectively analyzed the lengths and mental gymnastics that you (personally and figuratively) undertake to defend abortion?

Nope. I'm a realist. A woman who doesn't want to be pregnant WILL FIND A WAY TO NOT BE PREGNANT.

How many ways can you tardz try to complicate and justify such a relatively simple thing?

The Constitution says ALL persons are entitled to the protections of our laws.

Except for slaves who were 3/5th of a white person... and Native Americans... Did you actually read the constitution?

If a child in the womb is a "person" they are automatically entitled. Whether it works out for the better in the Philippines, or not.

If my Aunt had balls, she'd be my uncle.

But it depends on what your end goal here is.

If your goal is to save "babies", the Philippines show that banning abortion just doesn't work. They abort the babies anyway. They risk jail and their health to do it.

On the other hand, if you goal is to punish women, you might be on the right track.

 

[JoeB131]

What a load of bullshit. If the pro life people win, each state will make its own abortion laws, just as they did before the Roe v. Wade mutilation of our Constitution. Some states will allow abortions and some states won't, so if a woman who lived in a state that didn't allow abortions wanted one, she would have to take a bus to a state that did allow them, and if she didn't have the bus fare, pro abortion fanatics like yourself would be happy to buy her a bus ticket.

But here's the problem with that...

Poor women in red states wouldn't be able to get abortions, but wealthy women in red states could take a trip.

Does this seem fair to you? It would seem that if anyone should be compelled to have a baby, it should be the affluent person, who has the resources to take care of it.

 

[sealybobo]

All their screaming about "infanticide" aside, do you ever wonder what our country would look like if the Anti-Choice fanatics got their way.

Well, thanks to the modern miracles of actually understanding there is a rest of the world out there, we have a real life example.

The Philippines, former American Colony, has exactly the kind of anti-choice laws you guys want.

How's that working out.. Well, let's review.

Unintended Pregnancy and Unsafe Abortion in the Philippines

• The Philippines abortion law is among the strictest in the world. Abortion is illegal under all circumstances and there are no explicit exceptions. Nonetheless, because of high levels of unintended pregnancy, abortion is common in the country. Projections that were based on the national abortion rate in 2000 (the most recent available) and that took into account population increase estimated that 560,000 abortions occurred in 2008 and 610,000 abortions took place in 2012.[2,8,9]

• About 1,000 Filipino women die each year from abortion complications, which contributes to the nation’s high maternal mortality rate. Projections that were based on data from 2000 indicate that 100,000 women were hospitalized for abortion complications in 2012; countless others suffered complications that went untreated.[4,9]

• The stigma surrounding abortion makes it difficult for women to seek postabortion care. Some women report feeling shamed and intimidated by health care workers and in some cases, women are not given pain relievers or anesthetics or are denied treatment all together. Others report being threatened that they would be turned over to the police.[5,8]

There would be millions more accepting personal responsibility as the proper way to do things instead of killing for convenience. Why do you oppose that?

Because life isn’t so precious I think a woman who’s newly pregnant can’t get an abortion if she wants one.

We don’t need her to have the kid. She won’t do a good job raising the kid. And you don’t like programs that pay for those kids.

We need her to practice personal responsibility and killing something for convenience isn't responsible.

What about those that do have the kids. Why should taxpayers a woman told to butt out of her choice be forced by the government she says should stay out of her business when that happen? If what she does isn't my business, when she chooses something she can't afford, it isn't my responsibility.

If you aren’t willing to pay for the child they can’t afford abortion is better than starvation.

It’s because of your attitude I am so pro choice.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

“What would America be like if the anti-Abortion types win?”

The question is inaccurate and should be rephrased, as everyone is anti-abortion and wishes to see the practice end.

“What would America be like when those hostile to privacy rights win?”

The conflict, therefore, concerns the means by which the practice should be ended, where those hostile to privacy rights who seek to ‘ban’ abortion in violation of the Constitution are clearly pursuing the wrong ‘solution.’

Indeed, it’s perfectly appropriate and consistent to oppose abortion while also defending a woman’s right to privacy.

 

[jehanne1431]

All their screaming about "infanticide" aside, do you ever wonder what our country would look like if the Anti-Choice fanatics got their way.

Well, thanks to the modern miracles of actually understanding there is a rest of the world out there, we have a real life example.

The Philippines, former American Colony, has exactly the kind of anti-choice laws you guys want.

How's that working out.. Well, let's review.

Unintended Pregnancy and Unsafe Abortion in the Philippines

• The Philippines abortion law is among the strictest in the world. Abortion is illegal under all circumstances and there are no explicit exceptions. Nonetheless, because of high levels of unintended pregnancy, abortion is common in the country. Projections that were based on the national abortion rate in 2000 (the most recent available) and that took into account population increase estimated that 560,000 abortions occurred in 2008 and 610,000 abortions took place in 2012.[2,8,9]

• About 1,000 Filipino women die each year from abortion complications, which contributes to the nation’s high maternal mortality rate. Projections that were based on data from 2000 indicate that 100,000 women were hospitalized for abortion complications in 2012; countless others suffered complications that went untreated.[4,9]

• The stigma surrounding abortion makes it difficult for women to seek postabortion care. Some women report feeling shamed and intimidated by health care workers and in some cases, women are not given pain relievers or anesthetics or are denied treatment all together. Others report being threatened that they would be turned over to the police.[5,8]

The little I know of you I see very little common ground, fyi. But I believe the question you raise here is very legitimate with no easy answers for pro-lifers like me. I would like to know more about what it was like in the U.S. pre-1973 and how pro-life organizations would respond to this question of what they would expect and what they would do if it became illegal.

Short of knowing that I would hope churches, esp, Catholic, would offer enormous resources to all mothers to financially support their carrying their child to term, and then offer free adoption services as there presently maybe 2 million couples seeking a child under one to adopt. (I’ve read that more than once). If they decide to keep the child then offer additional services and funding for a period. The government would have to do the very same, promote this widely and offer the necessary and needed support and funding to help all mothers who seek it. Expensive, yes, but far more moral than legalizing the practice.

Still, there would be a number of illegal and back door abortions, we need to acknowledge that and that there would be medical tragedies. I do not have an answer to this. I am still in favor of making abortion illegal, but I highly, highly doubt it will ever come to that in the U.S. Outlawing 3rd trimester abortions, yes, that may be, but entirely illegal does not seem at all possible in our secular and post-Christian society.

 

[JoeB131]

Sorry about that, but you get my point right?

Easy access to contraceptives????? WTF. Nothing is easier than preventing an unwanted pregnancy. NOTHING!

sounds like someone who never has to worry about getting pregnant.

If men had to be responsible for birth control, the rate of unwanted pregnancies would spike. If they were responsible for having the babies, the birth rate would drop.

First off, abortion was never illegal in all of the US. The legality of it was decided state by state, and while most states, all but three, either didn't allow it or allowed it only in special cases, such as the mother's health or rape or incest, if the states were allowed to decide the issue today, many states, perhaps most states, would allow abortion on request at least for the first trimester, so telling horror stories about pre 1973 US does not speak to the issue today.

The real horror of pre-1973 was that the abortion laws were pretty much like the prostitution laws... they were on the books, broken with regularity and rarely prosecuted.

The purpose of Roe, the mostly Republican Panel thought, was to strike down these archaic laws, just as they had previously done with less controversy in Griswald v. Connecticut.

But then the Evangelical nuts needed an excuse to get asses into Pews, so Abortion became the worst thing ever.

 

[Conservative65]

All their screaming about "infanticide" aside, do you ever wonder what our country would look like if the Anti-Choice fanatics got their way.

Well, thanks to the modern miracles of actually understanding there is a rest of the world out there, we have a real life example.

The Philippines, former American Colony, has exactly the kind of anti-choice laws you guys want.

How's that working out.. Well, let's review.

Unintended Pregnancy and Unsafe Abortion in the Philippines

• The Philippines abortion law is among the strictest in the world. Abortion is illegal under all circumstances and there are no explicit exceptions. Nonetheless, because of high levels of unintended pregnancy, abortion is common in the country. Projections that were based on the national abortion rate in 2000 (the most recent available) and that took into account population increase estimated that 560,000 abortions occurred in 2008 and 610,000 abortions took place in 2012.[2,8,9]

• About 1,000 Filipino women die each year from abortion complications, which contributes to the nation’s high maternal mortality rate. Projections that were based on data from 2000 indicate that 100,000 women were hospitalized for abortion complications in 2012; countless others suffered complications that went untreated.[4,9]

• The stigma surrounding abortion makes it difficult for women to seek postabortion care. Some women report feeling shamed and intimidated by health care workers and in some cases, women are not given pain relievers or anesthetics or are denied treatment all together. Others report being threatened that they would be turned over to the police.[5,8]

There would be millions more accepting personal responsibility as the proper way to do things instead of killing for convenience. Why do you oppose that?

Because life isn’t so precious I think a woman who’s newly pregnant can’t get an abortion if she wants one.

We don’t need her to have the kid. She won’t do a good job raising the kid. And you don’t like programs that pay for those kids.

We need her to practice personal responsibility and killing something for convenience isn't responsible.

What about those that do have the kids. Why should taxpayers a woman told to butt out of her choice be forced by the government she says should stay out of her business when that happen? If what she does isn't my business, when she chooses something she can't afford, it isn't my responsibility.

If you aren’t willing to pay for the child they can’t afford abortion is better than starvation.

It’s because of your attitude I am so pro choice.

You're pro choice because you believe it's OK to be personally irresponsible for the results of a choice that produced the pregnancy.

 

[JoeB131]

The little I know of you I see very little common ground, fyi. But I believe the question you raise here is very legitimate with no easy answers for pro-lifers like me. I would like to know more about what it was like in the U.S. pre-1973 and how pro-life organizations would respond to this question of what they would expect and what they would do if it became illegal.

Well, I'm old enough to remember what happened before 1973.

Women who wanted abortions went to their doctor's offices. Their doctors wrote down something else on the chart and performed and abortion. This is what the courts were putting an end to with Roe... not the abortions themselves, but the dishonesty of what was happening in OB/GYN offices all over the country.

Short of knowing that I would hope churches, esp, Catholic, would offer enormous resources to all mothers to financially support their carrying their child to term, and then offer free adoption services as there presently maybe 2 million couples seeking a child under one to adopt. (I’ve read that more than once).

Okay. You've pretty much filled all their needs after one year. Then what?

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

Correct.

Which goes to the fact that conservatives are not ‘small government.’

Conservatives are fundamentally authoritarian – they seek to compel conformity and punish dissent.

Their unwarranted hostility toward privacy rights is proof of that, where conservatives work to increase the size and power of the state at the expense of individual liberty by compelling women to give birth against their will through force of law.

Conservatives are not anarchists. Not even Libertarians are anarchists.

Anyone who is not an anarchist recognizes the need for societies to outlaw certain behaviors that are harmful to individuals or societies; and that the murder of an innocent human being is among these behaviors that society needs to outlaw.

Wrong.

Conservatives are authoritarians, they work to compel conformity – forcing women to give birth against their will through force of law is an example of conservative authoritarianism.

When conservatives seek to enact legislation compelling women to give birth against their will in violation of the right to privacy, they’re entering into the realm of Constitutional law – where Constitutional law is settled and accepted that prior to birth an embryo/fetus is not a ‘person,’ and not lawfully entitled to Constitutional protections, the privacy rights of the woman being paramount.

The right to privacy safeguards the liberty of each individual to decide such matters in accordance with his own good faith and good conscience – free from interference by the state, and free from the authoritarian right.

 

[Conservative65]

“What would America be like if the anti-Abortion types win?”

The question is inaccurate and should be rephrased, as everyone is anti-abortion and wishes to see the practice end.

“What would America be like when those hostile to privacy rights win?”

The conflict, therefore, concerns the means by which the practice should be ended, where those hostile to privacy rights who seek to ‘ban’ abortion in violation of the Constitution are clearly pursuing the wrong ‘solution.’

Indeed, it’s perfectly appropriate and consistent to oppose abortion while also defending a woman’s right to privacy.

If what women do with their bodies is a private matter, why do so many that choose to have kids they can't afford demand public money to support them?

 

[Conservative65]

Correct.

Which goes to the fact that conservatives are not ‘small government.’

Conservatives are fundamentally authoritarian – they seek to compel conformity and punish dissent.

Their unwarranted hostility toward privacy rights is proof of that, where conservatives work to increase the size and power of the state at the expense of individual liberty by compelling women to give birth against their will through force of law.

Conservatives are not anarchists. Not even Libertarians are anarchists.

Anyone who is not an anarchist recognizes the need for societies to outlaw certain behaviors that are harmful to individuals or societies; and that the murder of an innocent human being is among these behaviors that society needs to outlaw.

Wrong.

Conservatives are authoritarians, they work to compel conformity – forcing women to give birth against their will through force of law is an example of conservative authoritarianism.

When conservatives seek to enact legislation compelling women to give birth against their will in violation of the right to privacy, they’re entering into the realm of Constitutional law – where Constitutional law is settled and accepted that prior to birth an embryo/fetus is not a ‘person,’ and not lawfully entitled to Constitutional protections, the privacy rights of the woman being paramount.

The right to privacy safeguards the liberty of each individual to decide such matters in accordance with his own good faith and good conscience – free from interference by the state, and free from the authoritarian right.

Yet you have no problem with women that make the choice to have children they can't afford using the government to compel support for that child.

 

[jknowgood]

I'm just wondering how long God's gonna sit back and let all those babies be murdered?
I would think that if God really cared, he'd step in at some point and do some serious wrist slappin.
I mean seriously....how many innocents will need to die before there's some intervention? 1 million? 1 billion? 1 trillion? 1 quadrillion? 1 quintrillion? 1 sextillion? 1 septillion? 1 octillion? 1 nonillion? 1 decillion? HOW MANY???

What's more important.... free will or the sanctity of innocent life made in God's own image?
What good is free will if it results in profound torture and endless cruelty?

If God stood back while "His People" were being killed by the Nazis, he isn't going to get worked up about a bunch of fetuses... Next.

Yeah right, Martha Plimpton brags about abortion in front of her fans. Said her first one was the best with a cheering crowd. Liberals have cheapened life so much, you have people celebrating killing inocent babie and it's only going to get worse from here.

Again, I'm still awaiting for you to offer an alternative that doesn't look like the hot mess the Philippines are.

Sodom and the Roman Empire disagrees. I'm not worried I'm good.

 

[Conservative65]

The little I know of you I see very little common ground, fyi. But I believe the question you raise here is very legitimate with no easy answers for pro-lifers like me. I would like to know more about what it was like in the U.S. pre-1973 and how pro-life organizations would respond to this question of what they would expect and what they would do if it became illegal.

Well, I'm old enough to remember what happened before 1973.

Women who wanted abortions went to their doctor's offices. Their doctors wrote down something else on the chart and performed and abortion. This is what the courts were putting an end to with Roe... not the abortions themselves, but the dishonesty of what was happening in OB/GYN offices all over the country.

Short of knowing that I would hope churches, esp, Catholic, would offer enormous resources to all mothers to financially support their carrying their child to term, and then offer free adoption services as there presently maybe 2 million couples seeking a child under one to adopt. (I’ve read that more than once).

Okay. You've pretty much filled all their needs after one year. Then what?

We can only hope that every abortion is botched.

 

[JoeB131]

Thanks for being a proponent of irresponsible sexual intercourse.

Hey, real people have sex.
Real people make mistakes. They forget to take their pills, rubbers burst, whatever.

Some day, little boy, you'll have sex and realize this.

There would be millions more accepting personal responsibility as the proper way to do things instead of killing for convenience. Why do you oppose that?

Because real life doesn't work that way. Again, the Filipinos are probably more religious than we are... and man, if you want to see folks with a work ethic, they put Americans to shame.

Yet despite all these conservative "virtues", they have 560,000 abortions a year. Per capita, that is more than the US has.

Now we can argue all day about how things SHOULD be. Frankly, I'd like to round up all the guns and put racist like you in mandetory sensitivity training. But the real world doesn't work like that.

We need to make laws for how the world is, not how we'd like it to be.

 

[JoeB131]

Sodom and the Roman Empire disagrees. I'm not worried I'm good.

Sodom never existed, and Rome was a Christian Empire when it collapsed in on itself.

 

[Conservative65]

Thanks for being a proponent of irresponsible sexual intercourse.

Hey, real people have sex.
Real people make mistakes. They forget to take their pills, rubbers burst, whatever.

Some day, little boy, you'll have sex and realize this.

There would be millions more accepting personal responsibility as the proper way to do things instead of killing for convenience. Why do you oppose that?

Because real life doesn't work that way. Again, the Filipinos are probably more religious than we are... and man, if you want to see folks with a work ethic, they put Americans to shame.

Yet despite all these conservative "virtues", they have 560,000 abortions a year. Per capita, that is more than the US has.

Now we can argue all day about how things SHOULD be. Frankly, I'd like to round up all the guns and put racist like you in mandetory sensitivity training. But the real world doesn't work like that.

We need to make laws for how the world is, not how we'd like it to be.

Real people know what can happen when they do. Making a mistake doesn't mean an innocent life should be taken. I suspect you were a mistake.

Some day you'll think you grabby your quarter incher with your thumb and index finger is considered as having sex.