• 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!

Judge stops Oklahoma abortion law

Founder's views are irrelevant.
It was on their views that the organization was established. They are relevant because they are the foundation and backbone of why the organization operates.
They should accept donations from anyone who will donate. Racist or not. Racist's money spends just as good as non-racists.
Why though? The man was donating with the intent of specifically wanting to kill black babies. Money is money regardless of who holds it, but should they accept donations from a blatant racist that wants to use Planned Parenthood to further his racist agenda through black abortions?
They put clinics in neighborhoods that need them, which are poorer neighborhoods, which are often minority neighborhoods.
Why not in the suburbs though? As stated before, 60% of abortions are roughly white women. They are still the majority. One can argue that the black abortion rate is higher because they target those areas. Do you think it would be different if they weren't in black neighborhoods and were primarily located in white ones or in the suburbs?
How can they "go out of their way" to ensure and promote abortions for black women? Tell me how they market this service to black women. Show me their racist marketing campaign. Hell, show me ANY abortion marketing campaign. I'll just wait over there while you spin your wheels.
They market it by being in the black neighborhoods. They aren't going to be openly racist about marketing campaigns, but they target black women through the location that they chose to put their clinic in. The fact is that the organization had no opposition to accepting money from a blatant racist, they were founded by a racist eugenicist, and they even agreed with the racist on the phone saying it was "understandable" to want to kill black babies.
 
BS. A baby is "viable" at the moment of conception, otherwise, there would never be conception at all.

Both your high school Health and Biology teachers need to be fired immediately...

Just so you know, if you were to remove a fertilized egg, it will not grow into a baby... Even if you water it and love it.



If the baby wasn't viable, it would naturally cease to exist.

Sorry, Doctor Knownothin', viable means it can survive outside the mother's body.
 
It was on their views that the organization was established. They are relevant because they are the foundation and backbone of why the organization operates.
Umm... no. The irrelevant founder's views are not the backbone of why the organization operates.

Why though? The man was donating with the intent of specifically wanting to kill black babies. Money is money regardless of who holds it, but should they accept donations from a blatant racist that wants to use Planned Parenthood to further his racist agenda through black abortions?
Why not? Money is money. Spends the same.

Why not in the suburbs though? As stated before, 60% of abortions are roughly white women. They are still the majority. One can argue that the black abortion rate is higher because they target those areas. Do you think it would be different if they weren't in black neighborhoods and were primarily located in white ones or in the suburbs?
Suburbs aren't where low cost clinics are needed.

They market it by being in the black neighborhoods. They aren't going to be openly racist about marketing campaigns, but they target black women through the location that they chose to put their clinic in. The fact is that the organization had no opposition to accepting money from a blatant racist, they were founded by a racist eugenicist, and they even agreed with the racist on the phone saying it was "understandable" to want to kill black babies.
They agreed with the 'racist' so they could get their money. If I needed money for my organization, I'd agree with whatever the **** a donator said in order to get their money too.

Abortion services comprise only 3% of the services they provide. Do you understand that at all? They do so much more than abortions, abortions are a tiny, tiny percentage. So, in those minority neighborhoods, 97% of what they are doing is giving low cost birth control, gynecology services, and pre-natal care. Do you have a problem providing low cost care to minorities or something? Your insistence that they shouldn't be operating where they do seems to indicate you do.

Why do you not want minorities to have access to low cost birth control, gynecology care, std testing, pre-natal care, and general healthcare?
 
WRONG!!!!!

It was a bad law created by a group of reglious zealots who cannot understand their religion has no place on the Senate floor.

That law is a direct violation of federal precedent. The republican party needs to be told to keep their religious beliefs out of politics or they need to be permenantly barred from holding office.

You don't have to be religious to think that murder is wrong. Or to believe that abortion is murder.
 
You don't have to be religious to think that murder is wrong. Or to believe that abortion is murder.

For the latter, yes, you do have to resign yourself to allowing other people think for you...
 
WRONG!!!!!

RIGHT!!!! :2wave:

It was a bad law created by a group of reglious zealots who cannot understand their religion has no place on the Senate floor.

Your opinion of the law means nothing. The law is what we are discussing.

That law is a direct violation of federal precedent. The republican party needs to be told to keep their religious beliefs out of politics or they need to be permenantly barred from holding office.

Please go back to school. States can and do have different abortion laws :roll:
 
Judge stops Oklahoma abortion law - UPI.com

Once again, the party of "small government" :roll: , the Repubs, continues its efforts to give gov't more and more intrusive powers, this time allowing them to stick their arrogant noses into women's health rights.

So you don't celebrate this law as Pro-Life's admittance that abortion is acceptable so long as the woman has an ultrasound?

How strange.
 
So you don't celebrate this law as Pro-Life's admittance that abortion is acceptable so long as the woman has an ultrasound?

How strange.

Abortion's legal, and has been since before all of us were even born.
Why should we care whether "Pro-Life" finds it "acceptable" or not?
Frankly, I don't want them to find it acceptable. I find their impotent outrage amusing.
 
Abortion's legal, and has been since before all of us were even born.
Why should we care whether "Pro-Life" finds it "acceptable" or not?
Frankly, I don't want them to find it acceptable. I find their impotent outrage amusing.

Hmm, I find the irony they put into the law amusing.

Take that immigration law in Arizona as another example. Did you know that it's a pro-illegal law, not an anti-illegal law as mainstream hypes it up as? The reason being is that before this law, cops could stop and demand papers from anyone at any time. Now, under this new law, cops can only request papers of people they are already detaining for another crime.

So, w/e, haters gona hate.
 
Your opinion of the law means nothing. The law is what we are discussing.


LOL!!!!!
:2rofll::2rofll::doh:doh

So, lemme get this straight... In a discussion, the only opinion that matters is... yours?

No wonder you're so uptight, being around here must drive you crazy, all these people discussing things and giving their own opinion and point of view... How dare they!!

Maybe you should start your own discussion forum and join it 20 times, then discuss issues with 20 people who all agree with you...
 
So you don't celebrate this law as Pro-Life's admittance that abortion is acceptable so long as the woman has an ultrasound?

Another of your famous apples and orange :spin:

All this law was intended to do was try to insert the rights' "Only my opinion matters" into another accepted and upheld law by trying to force more emotion onto a pregnant woman in an already emotional issue. They don't get that they can't overturn RVW so they try to bully their noses into other people's business by trying to force conditions on when a woman can do what the law already says they can do. The anti-womens-rights idiots simply look foolish and backwards when they attempt these kinds of charades.
 
RIGHT!!!!

Your opinion of the law means nothing. The law is what we are discussing.

The law we're discussing was influenced by right-wing religious zealots. Why do you think the judge in question stopped it?

Please go back to school. States can and do have different abortion laws :roll:

As long as those abortion laws are consistant with Roe vs Wade, yes, they can. States CANNOT pass laws that violate FEDERAL law. As of the current day and age, Roe vs. Wade is still the law of the land (EVEN IN TEXAS AND OTHER RIGHT-WING RELIGIOUS ZEALOT-INFLUENCED STATES) .

Don't like it? TOO BAD. The SCOTUS trumped the right-wing zealot-assholes back in the 70's when it decided in favor of womens' rights.
 
You don't have to be religious to think that murder is wrong. Or to believe that abortion is murder.

That view is exculsively that of the far right wing and it's religion-influenced cronies.

For the record, I don't much like it either; however, I do not belive that a group of religious zealots should have the right to create laws based on their religious zealotry.
 
Vader: "I do not belive that a group of religious zealots
should have the right to create laws based on their religious zealotry."


Really .. I agree . . . especially if there those Secular Humanists
 
Last edited:
Vader: "I do not belive that a group of religious zealots
should have the right to create laws based on their religious zealotry."


Really .. I agree . . . especially if there those Secular Humanists

I hear that term alot, but have never met one. Personally, I am an atheist, which is something different. Further, can you show where secular humanists are making laws based on any religious faith?
 
Yet to all who received him, to those who believed in his name

Redress: "I hear that term alot, but have never met one.
Personally, I am an atheist, which is something different.
Further, can you show where secular humanists are making laws based on any religious faith?"


well .. since you you don't know what secular humanism is . . .
I guess I can't help you


Secular Humanists

secular humanism IS a religious faith

even no-belief is a belief

I am an atheist, which is something different

no .. not really

I'm sorry if this is a little off-track Redress .. but since you're an atheist ..
maybe you can explain this:


how do cells and DNA code ( a digital language/communication system ) develope from
un-unconscious / un-Intelligent (mindless) Chaotic-accidental/Randomness . . . .


continue . . . >>
 
Last edited:
Yet to all who received him, to those who believed in his name



truth too hard for the left to comprehend
 
Last edited:
Re: Yet to all who received him, to those who believed in his name

truth too hard for the left to comprehend

Umm.... what "truth" would that be? That a 21 week old fetus has a hand??
 
Re: Yet to all who received him, to those who believed in his name

Umm.... what "truth" would that be? That a 21 week old fetus has a hand??

Say it isn't so! :lol:
 
God, I just wish the federal government would stop sticking their noses into people's business! If I want to kill it, let me! It's MY property! They have no right to tell me what to do with my property! I can do with it what I want and no government should stand in my way!

Doesn't that sound like Mississippi circa 1858....?

Actually, this was a state judge that made the decision, which I happen to agree with.

But the issue here is that Oklahomans should work this out for themselves. The Federal government has no business sticking their noses in it. So far, it is a state issue, and that is where it needs to remain.

You know, I find a lot of irony here. First of all, the ideologues who scream smaller government are the ones foisting big government on it's citizens. And second of all, the ideologues who always want government intervention are telling the government to keep its nose out of their business.

Does anybody else find it amusing when Conservatives act like Liberals and Liberals act like Conservatives? Or is it closer to the truth that Liberals and Conservatives alike spout their ideology, except in cases where it applies to them, where they end up taking the positions of their opponents?

Is this really politics? Not really. It's human nature, which is something that trumps political platforms on a daily basis. LOL.
 
Last edited:
I can be Biblical too, so I have a question for you.



truth too hard for the left to comprehend

Has the fetus taken it's first breath, which is the definition of when life begins, according to the Bible (Genesis 2:7)?
 
Re: Yet to all who received him, to those who believed in his name

Say it isn't so! :lol:

No seriously! Like, they do have hands and stuff. Feet too, if'n you can believe it!
 
to those who believed in his name .. he gave the right to be called children of God

Danarhea: "Has the fetus taken it's first breath,
which is the definition of when life begins


what a freakn intelligence assulting idiot . . .

News Flash Danarhea .. God is no longer creating man from the dust of the ground ..
try a modern day scientific-medical-biology book

the life of the flesh is in the blood
 
Last edited:
Re: to those who believed in his name .. he gave the right to be called children of G

Danarhea: "Has the fetus taken it's first breath,
which is the definition of when life begins


what a freakn intelligence assulting idiot . . .

News Flash Danarhea .. God is no longer creating man from the dust of the ground ..
try a modern day scientific-medical-biology book

the life of the flesh is in the blood

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press

If the Christian Bible is going to be used to make some of our laws, why not go all-out and adopt Sharia Law while we're at it? I've always been fond of cutting off the hands of thieves.
 
Back
Top Bottom