• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Christian pregnancy centers freak out after CA turns tables

Sykes said:
California Law Adds New Twist To Abortion, Religious Freedom Debate : Shots - Health News : NPR

Full bill

Further parsed



Oh, but now it's not okay! TRAP laws were peachy keen, jellybean but shoe on other foot? Cue widespread panic in the streets.

Sucks to be them.
Click to expand...


If the religiously-based facility takes no state or fed $, I have a hard time supporting this.

I'd prefer to see CA publish this information publicly in more places, in the media, etc etc etc rather than impose the will of the state directly on the facility against their beliefs.

I hope people will note that this is consistent with my political beliefs but it is not what I'd prefer.
 
HowardBThiname said:
Then I have to ask you - HOW can you criminalize abortion, as you suggest, and not make women subservient? The act of criminalization by itself forces a woman who is pregnant with an unwanted child to carry it to term. And, then what? What are her options? Adoption? You would certainly put orphanages back in business, because right now, every state has waiting lists of children to be adopted that languish in foster homes until 18. Or, would you force the women to raise these unwanted offspring? That sounds like a recipe for disaster since they're aborting because they're not able to raise a child.

The other question I have for you is what punishment would you levy against women who went the back-alley abortion route? You're claiming that abortion is murder, so are you ready to charge them with murder? Life in prison?

I'd really like to hear your ideas because I don't think you've thought this through.
Click to expand...

See my signature for a partial answer to your question.
 
RabidAlpaca said:
This. Both sides of the issue have to go out of their way to inform women of their options so that they can make an educated decision on the matter. How can anyone disagree with that, regardless of which side you're on? Getting upset about educated women is rather silly, isn't it?
Click to expand...

No one is getting upset about educating women, what we don't like is is the partisan attack that this bill is.
 
soot said:
I think the argument that the pro-life position has anything to do with subordinating anyone is patently ****ing retarded.
Click to expand...

At its foundation, the pro-life movement is no different from extremist Islam that forces women to wear burkas. It's about controlling the actions of the female race, radical Islam, too, like the pro-life movement, bans abortion and forces women to carry unwanted pregnancies to term.

There's really not a handful of difference between the two.
 
HowardBThiname said:
At its foundation, the pro-life movement is no different from extremist Islam that forces women to wear burkas. It's about controlling the actions of the female race, radical Islam, too, like the pro-life movement, bans abortion and forces women to carry unwanted pregnancies to term.

There's really not a handful of difference between the two.
Click to expand...


lol.

Oh, wow.

I wish you would have opened with this abject insanity when you first posted to put all future things you said in context.
 
Lursa said:
If the religiously-based facility takes no state or fed $, I have a hard time supporting this.

I'd prefer to see CA publish this information publicly in more places, in the media, etc etc etc rather than impose the will of the state directly on the facility against their beliefs.

I hope people will note that this is consistent with my political beliefs but it is not what I'd prefer.
Click to expand...

I have had this issue as well. I wonder if someone can answer whether or not they accept public funding or not. But this is what I found.

On Friday, California Gov. Jerry Brown officially signed into law a landmark piece of legislation that passed in the state assembly by a large margin back in May. It's known as the Reproductive FACT Act, which targets crisis pregnancy centers in California, and it includes two major requirements. The first is that each crisis pregnancy center facility clearly informs women if it is not in fact a licensed medical clinic. For the 40 percent of California crisis pregnancy centers that are licensed clinics, the other major requirement is that clinic staff make patients aware of the fact that the state offers financial assistance for abortion services, prenatal care, and contraception.
Click to expand...

Bustle

If my assumption is correct, the first type of pregnancy crisis center likely receives no funds. And realistically, I have no problem with requiring them to have a sign that states it is not a medical clinic - if there is a consistent issue with women assuming they can receive medical care there. My guess, is the second type of crisis center does deliver patient care and likely receives some public funds. If, this is true, I have no issue whatsoever that they are required to give accurate medical information including information on resources.
They should be able to do this in a way that clearly does not show they advocate in such options.
 
HowardBThiname said:
At its foundation, the pro-life movement is no different from extremist Islam that forces women to wear burkas. It's about controlling the actions of the female race, radical Islam, too, like the pro-life movement, bans abortion and forces women to carry unwanted pregnancies to term.

There's really not a handful of difference between the two.
Click to expand...

Those kind of comments are pure idiocy. It's not about the women, it's about the babies. All that crap that you spewed lives ONLY in the minds of pro-abortion supporters and NOWHERE else.
 
HowardBThiname said:
At its foundation, the pro-life movement is no different from extremist Islam that forces women to wear burkas.
Click to expand...

LMFAO at you.

What absolute nonsense.

It's inconceivable that anyone could actually believe that.
 
So much for the separation of church and state. Sad when government tells religious organizations what to teach.
 
JayDubya said:
lol.

Oh, wow.

I wish you would have opened with this abject insanity when you first posted to put all future things you said in context.
Click to expand...

Your posts back up my assessment. I understand it's hard to hear - no one likes to be seen for whom they truly are - if they know the civilized world despises what they are. That's the way it is with extremists. The men who keep women hidden burkas tell us they do it for the "right" reasons. Those who would force women to carry unwanted pregnancies to term, also claim they do so for the right reasons. But, at the end of the day, both radicalized positions result in the removal of womens' rights.
 
HowardBThiname said:
Your posts back up my assessment. I understand it's hard to hear - no one likes to be seen for whom they truly are - if they know the civilized world despises what they are. That's the way it is with extremists. The men who keep women hidden burkas tell us they do it for the "right" reasons. Those who would force women to carry unwanted pregnancies to term, also claim they do so for the right reasons. But, at the end of the day, both radicalized positions result in the removal of womens' rights.
Click to expand...

No your hateful statements of complete delusion are not hard to hear, they just bugger belief that anyone could legitimately say such nonsense in good faith.

Treating all human beings equally is not comparable to forcing one gender to wear burkas. It's the opposite principle, in fact.

You're the one who supports treating folks differently on the basis of gender.
 
JayDubya said:
No your hateful statements of complete delusion are not hard to hear, they just bugger belief that anyone could legitimately say such things in good faith.
Click to expand...


If you find my comments hateful, why don't you ask yourself why you are so intent on fulfilling them? Nowhere have I found a comment of yours that offers even a little understanding into why women might feel the need to abort. You're just focused on yourself and on your condemnation of them because they're not falling in line. You use the term "baby" instead of "fetus" even for very early pregnancies, yet you know full well they are not the same. Your position is judgmental and controlling. It's a radicalized position. It has nothing in common with compassion or understanding.

Fortunately, it is not the position of civilized society so it will never be law. But, I'd be willing to be Sharia nations have strict bans on abortion. Stuff like that is right up their alley. Wow, that sounds familiar, doesn't it?
 
HowardBThiname said:
If you find my comments hateful, why don't you ask yourself why you are so intent on fulfilling them? Nowhere have I found a comment of yours that offers even a little understanding into why women might feel the need to abort. You're just focused on yourself and on your condemnation of them because they're not falling in line. You use the term "baby" instead of "fetus" even for very early pregnancies, yet you know full well they are not the same. Your position is judgmental and controlling. It's a radicalized position. It has nothing in common with compassion or understanding.

Fortunately, it is not the position of civilized society so it will never be law. But, I'd be willing to be Sharia nations have strict bans on abortion. Stuff like that is right up their alley. Wow, that sounds familiar, doesn't it?
Click to expand...

You obviously don't actually read my words because here you are making **** up; also, you spelled "barbaric" wrong.

The reason for a premeditated homicide only goes to motive, it never excuses it.

You want me to understand why a parent would kill their own kid? No problem, I already do - because killing their kid removes an inconvenience and saves them money.
 
JayDubya said:
You obviously don't actually read my words because here you are making **** up; also, you spelled "barbaric" wrong.
Click to expand...

I drew a parallel - an accurate one judging from the responses here.

Actually, I used the terms "judgmental" and "controlling," not "barbaric," but it also defines, I suppose, those who force women to hide beneath burkas, as well as those who seek to force women to carry unwanted pregnancies to term. Yes, it is barbaric. Hat tip to you!
 
HowardBThiname said:
Did I hit a nerve?
Click to expand...

If you "hit a nerve" I wouldn't be laughing at you.

I'd be hurt maybe, or even a little angry, but I wouldn't be literally laughing about how astronomically stupid some people's ideas are.

No, you didn't hit a nerve.
 
HowardBThiname said:
I drew a parallel - an accurate one judging from the responses here.

Actually, I used the terms "judgmental" and "controlling," not "barbaric," but it also defines, I suppose, those who force women to hide beneath burkas, as well as those who seek to force women to carry unwanted pregnancies to term. Yes, it is barbaric. Hat tip to you!
Click to expand...

No no, you called the segment of "society" you support and are a part of "civilized" incorrectly and I was just telling you how to spell the accurate word correctly.
 
HowardBThiname said:
...it also defines, I suppose, those who force women to hide beneath burkas, as well as those who seek to force women to carry unwanted pregnancies to term.
Click to expand...

...it also defines, I suppose, those who eat salami sandwiches for lunch, as well as those who invest heavily in synthetic contracts.

Now, how or why any of those things are even remotely related in anyone's mind is a matter of speculation bordering on complete mystery.

People don't think things be like they is, but they do!
 
JayDubya said:
No no, you called the segment of "society" you support and are a part of "civilized" incorrectly and I was just telling you how to spell the accurate word correctly.
Click to expand...

LOL

We both know what you were trying to do. It was naive to think I wasn't a step ahead of you the entire time. :lamo
 
soot said:
...it also defines, I suppose, those who eat salami sandwiches for lunch, as well as those who invest heavily in synthetic contracts.

!
Click to expand...

I've never heard the term, "barbaric," applied to salami sandwich eaters, but...whatever blows your hair back.

I'm simply comparing the extremism of those who would force women to carry unwanted pregnancies to term, with those who would force women to remain hidden beneath burkas.

Very little, if any, difference there.
 
soot said:
If you "hit a nerve" I wouldn't be laughing at you.

I'd be hurt maybe, or even a little angry, but I wouldn't be literally laughing about how astronomically stupid some people's ideas are.

No, you didn't hit a nerve.
Click to expand...

And yet you've been unable to refute the parallels.

Funny that.
 
HowardBThiname said:
We both know what you were trying to do
Click to expand...

I didn't try to do it, I did it. I told you exactly what I think of your "society" with no respect for equality or human rights.
 
faithful_servant said:
Those kind of comments are pure idiocy. It's not about the women, it's about the babies. All that crap that you spewed lives ONLY in the minds of pro-abortion supporters and NOWHERE else.
Click to expand...

Exactly what many pro-life people think, but wont admit. The women dont matter, the unborn are more important. Check out my signature below, from Ram, and see if you also concur?

Even more strange, there are no 'babies' involved in abortion, altho there are 'unborn babies' if you want to use the term accurately. I'm not being disingenuous or dehumanizing....just realistic. I dont fantasize personification of the unborn...that is a personal choice some make but if so, they have no right to force that fantasy on others.

All would like babies to be born (IMO) but most pro-choice people just place the mother's life and needs and future (and those of her family, present and future) ahead of those of the unborn. Not hateful, but really when I think of what the opposite would mean for women...to force them to remain pregnant...I see that that can indeed be hateful. Women are fully aware of what happens to their bodies and lives and families.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom