• 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!

New Abortion Laws Too Extreme For Most Americans

Incredulous said:
Personally, IDGAF about that 21%.

Outlawing abortion in a country where a mere 6 weeks of unpaid maternity leave is required and your employer can deny covering your birth control if it goes against their "moral convictions" or "religious beliefs" is a war on women and a political tool used to further polarize. I'm more in line with Republicans fiscally, I just can't swallow their hypocrisy on minimizing the role of the government while having their noses all up in my uterus.
Click to expand...

Economic concerns are never a justification for murder. Therefore your argument is invalid.

Or you can answer, what level of welfare spending or government economic control of the economy would make you pro-life?
 
Obscurity said:
No one is advocating for late term abortion on demand, at all. The bills I've seen have been slandered and misconstrued by the evangelical lunatics, posting fake news and relying on smear merchants to stray the conversation.

No one aborts a baby nearly at term for "convenience." You're relying on an extreme minority of instances to install radical change that is both a grotesque power grab, and puts fake, fiction belief over real live human beings.
Click to expand...

If it's actually "no one" then why are people so reticent to put restrictions on it?
 
EMNofSeattle said:
Economic concerns are never a justification for murder. Therefore your argument is invalid.

Or you can answer, what level of welfare spending or government economic control of the economy would make you pro-life?
Click to expand...

That's not what I said and I'm not playing this game with you. Stop putting "words in my mouth" and pounce on someone else. :peace
 
Fishking said:
If it's actually "no one" then why are people so reticent to put restrictions on it?
Click to expand...

No one is asking for it, and the number of late term abortions is exceedingly tiny, like a miniscule percentage, that's why.

Because of stories like this:

Friend of mine and his wife were expecting their first. Two weeks from due date the doctor discovered an anomaly on the baby's brain stem. The anomaly was an inoperable fatal tumor that would end the life of the newborn within minutes. Because of state law at the time, my friend and his wife had to endure the remaining 2 weeks KNOWING the infant that the Mrs would LABOR for hours to deliver would inevitably die. Instead of a HUMANE abortion, my friends had to endure 48 hours of labor, give birth to a still born.

Why should YOUR feelings about THEIR situation dictate their options? Tell me. I've never gotten an answer to this question.

Your feelings about their situation don't exist unless presented to you. And then, you own them, not the other party. This is on YOU to deal with internally, not for you to externally exert legislative force to require people go through these horrendous ordeals.

That's why people are reticent to put restrictions on it. Because in red states, this family would have had to have had 3 doctor opinions, for example. Tie it in with no single payer, and they are not only suffering for the fiat feelings of others, but are also out hundreds and hundreds of dollars thanks to our ****ty system.

You guys lack ****ing perspective.
 
WCH said:
How about just plain of morality? Isn't that how we got to this point where we need abortion?
Click to expand...

Morality is defined by each individual. Religion attempts to construct moral values and to define our existence. Neither is applicable outside of oneself.
 
WCH said:
What's irrelevant is Leftist dudes arguing something THEY CLAIM is a Woman's right.
Click to expand...

The 7 (out of 9) justices on the mostly conservative bench that decided RvW disagree with you and your fantasy.
 
Fishking said:
If it's actually "no one" then why are people so reticent to put restrictions on it?
Click to expand...

Are you in favor of useless, feel-good laws that waste taxpayer $?

Such laws could do harm tho...to those that are experiencing a devastating tragedy...the ONLY people that seek such late term abortions: those with critical medical issues that they must face and consider terribly sad decisions: to sacrifice a woman's or unborn's life. So ONLY those people would then be further burdened by intrusive govt interference, law enforcement investigation and questioning.

So please explain why you believe such a law(s) is/are necessary? Is the hope of punishing one or two (potential, since there's no data showing it occurs) desperate women overriding your concerns for increasing those other familys' pain and suffering? The term 'inhumane' comes up alot in these discussions. Enforcement of such laws seems inhumane.
 
Scorps2000 said:
No one should have the right to kill an unborn child. RvW was a mistake it should have never passed. IMO Except of course for rape, incest or health of the mother.
Click to expand...

Here are a few things I have an issue with in your post.

First, you may think it is killing a child, the reality is that it is aborting/preventing a child to ever be "born"

Second, Roe v. Wade was not a mistake, it was the absolutely right decision

Third, who the hell makes you the person who has the right to determine what another woman does with her uterus and her health? You have no say in the matter as it is not your body.

Last but not least, women should always have the right to decide if they want to have an elective abortion, if it is rape or incest should not be an issue there as it is still 100% the woman's choice, not the choice of an overbearing and interfering government and not of anybody else.

Also, only a total idiot (and sadly about 20% of the pro-life movement is that crazy) would refuse a woman the right to abort to save her life or her health. About 10% of Americans wants a blanket ban on abortion, even if it is done to save the life of the mother.
 
WCH said:
I think you're too young and brainwashed by your chosen ideological bias to have a clear, honest opinion.
Click to expand...
Even if that were true and you have no ****ing idea, it would still be better than the brain of an ignorant religious zealot.

Maybe when your brain matures...
Click to expand...
When will your?
 
WCH said:
How about just plain of morality?
Click to expand...
Certainly not your morality. It is way too ****ed up, so keep it and stay the **** out of other people's lives.

Isn't that how we got to this point where we need abortion?
Click to expand...
How the hell would you know? Been holding the candle or been a peeping tom?
 
Obscurity said:
Morality is defined by each individual. Religion attempts to construct moral values and to define our existence. Neither is applicable outside of oneself.
Click to expand...

I would say society sets a moral code if they have any idea of values in the first place. Where did society find those values?
 
Lursa said:
Are you in favor of useless, feel-good laws that waste taxpayer $?

Such laws could do harm tho...to those that are experiencing a devastating tragedy...the ONLY people that seek such late term abortions: those with critical medical issues that they must face and consider terribly sad decisions: to sacrifice a woman's or unborn's life. So ONLY those people would then be further burdened by intrusive govt interference, law enforcement investigation and questioning.

So please explain why you believe such a law(s) is/are necessary? Is the hope of punishing one or two (potential, since there's no data showing it occurs) desperate women overriding your concerns for increasing those other familys' pain and suffering? The term 'inhumane' comes up alot in these discussions. Enforcement of such laws seems inhumane.
Click to expand...

Do you ever tire of being wrong? I know I get tired of correcting you. Again, if it's not a thing then the laws shouldn't be a problem.
 
Obscurity said:
No one is asking for it, and the number of late term abortions is exceedingly tiny, like a miniscule percentage, that's why.

Because of stories like this:

Friend of mine and his wife were expecting their first. Two weeks from due date the doctor discovered an anomaly on the baby's brain stem. The anomaly was an inoperable fatal tumor that would end the life of the newborn within minutes. Because of state law at the time, my friend and his wife had to endure the remaining 2 weeks KNOWING the infant that the Mrs would LABOR for hours to deliver would inevitably die. Instead of a HUMANE abortion, my friends had to endure 48 hours of labor, give birth to a still born.

Why should YOUR feelings about THEIR situation dictate their options? Tell me. I've never gotten an answer to this question.

Your feelings about their situation don't exist unless presented to you. And then, you own them, not the other party. This is on YOU to deal with internally, not for you to externally exert legislative force to require people go through these horrendous ordeals.

That's why people are reticent to put restrictions on it. Because in red states, this family would have had to have had 3 doctor opinions, for example. Tie it in with no single payer, and they are not only suffering for the fiat feelings of others, but are also out hundreds and hundreds of dollars thanks to our ****ty system.

You guys lack ****ing perspective.
Click to expand...

You'd be correct if my perspective was actually what you're talking about. It isn't, so you're wrong. I don't have an issue with situations like this resulting in abortion. I only pointed out that people don't want any restrictions at all. There is a reason for that and it's not because it never happens.
 
WCH said:
I would say society sets a moral code if they have any idea of values in the first place. Where did society find those values?
Click to expand...

Not from religion. The articles of Confucius outdated christianity by thousands of years. This is why Christian's fear science. It, without trying, undermines their claim to moral supremacy.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom