Losing on Purpose

gooseneck · Feb 19, 2020

Maybe there many people that are against abortion on moral grounds but do not understand what Pro Life legislation would look like. What would be the punishment for committing abortion to the mom? For the doctor? For a non doctor? For the person driving them to the location? Would a woman also be forbidden from drinking heavily while pregnant? The Pro-Life movement hasn’t defined what they mean by Pro Life therefore the movement just looks a lot like pointless noise and worthless emotional speeches that accomplish nothing. I can think of many ways to be pro-life that does not require incarceration of young misguided women. Maybe the pro life movement needs to take all that massive money and actually do something more than talk. Then people would see the significance. Funding more speeches is a waste of money. The National Right to Life PAC is plush with cash. Why are they so inactive in saving the lives of babies? Maybe it isn’t about saving babies but just providing high paying jobs to activists who stay employed as long as they are on the losing side of the argument.

swing_voter · Feb 19, 2020

gooseneck said:
Maybe there many people that are against abortion on moral grounds but do not understand what Pro Life legislation would look like. What would be the punishment for committing abortion to the mom? For the doctor? For a non doctor? For the person driving them to the location? Would a woman also be forbidden from drinking heavily while pregnant? The Pro-Life movement hasn’t defined what they mean by Pro Life therefore the movement just looks a lot like pointless noise and worthless emotional speeches that accomplish nothing. I can think of many ways to be pro-life that does not require incarceration of young misguided women. Maybe the pro life movement needs to take all that massive money and actually do something more than talk. Then people would see the significance. Funding more speeches is a waste of money. The National Right to Life PAC is plush with cash. Why are they so inactive in saving the lives of babies? Maybe it isn’t about saving babies but just providing high paying jobs to activists who stay employed as long as they are on the losing side of the argument.

Well, I think the abortion ship has sailed so there's not much you can do. At least abortions in the first trimester. Now it's about late term abortions were the baby can survive outside the womb, that's were the battle is.

When they pull a 8 month old baby out of the womb, does it cry? Do they kill it then? Or do they kill it before they pull it out?

I'm not a fan of late term abortions.

OrphanSlug · Feb 19, 2020

The issue itself is way too polarizing, filled with misinformation, and tactics designed to provoke emotional responses over rational discussion.

It is not that the National Right to Life PAC is losing, or losing on purpose, it is that the subject itself is destine to be a failure no matter what changes down the road.

BTW, "late term abortions" are just about always illegal despite the hype to the contrary.

soylentgreen · Feb 19, 2020

gooseneck said:
Maybe there many people that are against abortion on moral grounds but do not understand what Pro Life legislation would look like. What would be the punishment for committing abortion to the mom? For the doctor? For a non doctor? For the person driving them to the location? Would a woman also be forbidden from drinking heavily while pregnant? The Pro-Life movement hasn’t defined what they mean by Pro Life therefore the movement just looks a lot like pointless noise and worthless emotional speeches that accomplish nothing. I can think of many ways to be pro-life that does not require incarceration of young misguided women. Maybe the pro life movement needs to take all that massive money and actually do something more than talk. Then people would see the significance. Funding more speeches is a waste of money. The National Right to Life PAC is plush with cash. Why are they so inactive in saving the lives of babies? Maybe it isn’t about saving babies but just providing high paying jobs to activists who stay employed as long as they are on the losing side of the argument.

There are many articles on what occurred before roe. And none of them paint a good picture. It would not be a matter of incarceration or not. It would be once again, a matter of how many women must die before abortion is made legal again.

I can think of many ways to be pro-life that does not require incarceration of young misguided women.

And all of them no doubt will demonstrate the same conceited view of superiority as your sentence does. As well a falsely held belief that you know better so therefor have the right to tell women what to think and how to live.

Complaining about people doing nothing while offering nothing yourself makes you just as guilty of having nothing but talk. You say you can think of many ways. Care to share.

Scrabaholic · Feb 19, 2020

swing_voter said:
Well, I think the abortion ship has sailed so there's not much you can do. At least abortions in the first trimester. Now it's about late term abortions were the baby can survive outside the womb, that's were the battle is.

When they pull a 8 month old baby out of the womb, does it cry? Do they kill it then? Or do they kill it before they pull it out?

I'm not a fan of late term abortions.

Late term abortions do not happen without compelling reason. And they euthanise the fetus before removing it.

RaleBulgarian · Feb 19, 2020

OrphanSlug said:
The issue itself is way too polarizing, filled with misinformation, and tactics designed to provoke emotional responses over rational discussion.

Example;

swing_voter said:
When they pull a 8 month old baby out of the womb, does it cry? Do they kill it then? Or do they kill it before they pull it out?

Lursa · Feb 19, 2020

swing_voter said:
Well, I think the abortion ship has sailed so there's not much you can do. At least abortions in the first trimester. Now it's about late term abortions were the baby can survive outside the womb, that's were the battle is.

When they pull a 8 month old baby out of the womb, does it cry? Do they kill it then? Or do they kill it before they pull it out?

I'm not a fan of late term abortions.

Then feel free to rest easy, no abortions of healthy viable fetuses take place unless the mother's health is in danger. Do you object to that? Not only that...in such a case, they'd make every effort to save that fetus because obviously the mother/couple wanted it :doh

If you disagree, feel free to show the stats of how many such abortions take place...of healthy, viable fetuses. (that means 24 weeks or after but elective ones dont even occur after 21 weeks.

So no additional legislation is needed...they dont occur. That late they are more dangerous and more painful to the woman and she's already sacrificed everything for the pregnancy...at this point she can have it and make a cool $20,000 in a private adoption.

It makes zero sense to be concerned over late term abortions...it is a hysterical, dishonest, emotionally manipulative strategy of the pro-life side to continually bleat about it.

Lursa · Feb 19, 2020

Scrabaholic said:
Late term abortions do not happen without compelling reason. And they euthanise the fetus before removing it.

Yes, by law that lethal anesthetic injection is required.

Peter King · Feb 19, 2020

gooseneck said:
Maybe there many people that are against abortion on moral grounds but do not understand what Pro Life legislation would look like. What would be the punishment for committing abortion to the mom? For the doctor? For a non doctor? For the person driving them to the location? Would a woman also be forbidden from drinking heavily while pregnant? The Pro-Life movement hasn’t defined what they mean by Pro Life therefore the movement just looks a lot like pointless noise and worthless emotional speeches that accomplish nothing. I can think of many ways to be pro-life that does not require incarceration of young misguided women. Maybe the pro life movement needs to take all that massive money and actually do something more than talk. Then people would see the significance. Funding more speeches is a waste of money. The National Right to Life PAC is plush with cash. Why are they so inactive in saving the lives of babies? Maybe it isn’t about saving babies but just providing high paying jobs to activists who stay employed as long as they are on the losing side of the argument.

It will not help because women will then travel to states where abortion is still legal.

Patriotic Voter · Feb 24, 2020

Peter King said:
It will not help because women will then travel to states where abortion is still legal.

Women would do it because they badly NEED abortions. If you want to complain about abortion laws, do some research first to find out WHY women get them.

jimbo · Feb 25, 2020

OrphanSlug said:
The issue itself is way too polarizing, filled with misinformation, and tactics designed to provoke emotional responses over rational discussion.

It is not that the National Right to Life PAC is losing, or losing on purpose, it is that the subject itself is destine to be a failure no matter what changes down the road.

BTW, "late term abortions" are just about always illegal despite the hype to the contrary.

But far too many liberals want to change that. We're fighting that battle here in Va. Northram has advocated not only far late term, but at times post birth abortions. I'm not pro life or choice, but I am not pro murder.

OrphanSlug · Feb 25, 2020

jimbo said:
But far too many liberals want to change that. We're fighting that battle here in Va. Northram has advocated not only far late term, but at times post birth abortions. I'm not pro life or choice, but I am not pro murder.

I believe, and correct me where I am wrong, that you are referring to the failed "Repeal Act (HB 2491)" of Virginia? If so that is not quite what the failed bill suggested, even if poorly written. The final version of the bill had many sections taken out but I can still read them in strike.

It would have changed 2nd trimester to choice, and made the 3rd trimester a matter of risk to the mother. I should note the 3rd trimester section of the bill included that any viability for the child had to be met with life support.

Many of the literature, signature from the mother, and geographic location information that had to be provided to the mother were struck with the exception of the 3rd trimester section.

I did not find any section talking about after birth viability subject to "abortion" or termination at the choice of the mother.

It is worth noting...
- I do not like any version of the bill that I can find.
- I am not pro-life either, but myself find abortions as horrific.
- I tend to side with Libertarians on this issue even though I am very much not a Libertarian.

Peter King · Feb 25, 2020

Blue Donkey said:
Women would do it because they badly NEED abortions. If you want to complain about abortion laws, do some research first to find out WHY women get them.

Women almost always do it for important reasons, but in my opinion nobody needs to know what that reason is because women have the right to privacy when it comes to these things.

Patriotic Voter · Feb 25, 2020

Peter King said:
Women almost always do it for important reasons, but in my opinion nobody needs to know what that reason is because women have the right to privacy when it comes to these things.

Somehow the CDC knows how many women could not take care of babies or just did not want kids at the time in addition to all the medical conditions that necessitate abortions. There must be a way to do it anonymously.

Scrabaholic · Feb 25, 2020

jimbo said:
But far too many liberals want to change that. We're fighting that battle here in Va. Northram has advocated not only far late term, but at times post birth abortions. I'm not pro life or choice, but I am not pro murder.

He has not. Good grief. And there is no such thing as "post birth abortions".

Lursa · Feb 25, 2020

jimbo said:
But far too many liberals want to change that. We're fighting that battle here in Va. Northram has advocated not only far late term, but at times post birth abortions. I'm not pro life or choice, but I am not pro murder.

Late term elective abortions dont take place...and there is no such thing as a 'post birth abortion' :doh ...if you are this uninformed on the issue you should be reading, not posting.

ZERO elective abortions of healthy, viable fetuses happen. If they do, find the stats. All the other stats are easily available...so where are the numbers on those?

Good lord! :roll:

jimbo · Feb 25, 2020

Lursa said:
Late term elective abortions dont take place...and there is no such thing as a 'post birth abortion' :doh ...if you are this uninformed on the issue you should be reading, not posting.

ZERO elective abortions of healthy, viable fetuses happen. If they do, find the stats. All the other stats are easily available...so where are the numbers on those?

Good lord! :roll:

From USA today:

If a mother is in labor, I can tell you exactly what would happen. The infant would be delivered. The infant would be kept comfortable. The infant would be resuscitated if that's what the mother and the family desired. And then a discussion would ensue between the physicians and the mother. So I think this was really blown out of proportion," Northam said during a radio interview.

jimbo · Feb 25, 2020

Scrabaholic said:
He has not. Good grief. And there is no such thing as "post birth abortions".

"If a mother is in labor, I can tell you exactly what would happen. The infant would be delivered. The infant would be kept comfortable. The infant would be resuscitated if that's what the mother and the family desired. And then a discussion would ensue between the physicians and the mother. So I think this was really blown out of proportion," Northam said during a radio interview."

jimbo · Feb 25, 2020

Lursa said:
Late term elective abortions dont take place...and there is no such thing as a 'post birth abortion' :doh ...if you are this uninformed on the issue you should be reading, not posting.

ZERO elective abortions of healthy, viable fetuses happen. If they do, find the stats. All the other stats are easily available...so where are the numbers on those?

Good lord! :roll:

The video if you prefer:

Virginia abortion bill: controversy around Ralph Northam comments - Vox

Lursa · Feb 25, 2020

jimbo said:
From USA today:

If a mother is in labor, I can tell you exactly what would happen. The infant would be delivered. The infant would be kept comfortable. The infant would be resuscitated if that's what the mother and the family desired. And then a discussion would ensue between the physicians and the mother. So I think this was really blown out of proportion," Northam said during a radio interview.

Yes and that is the current law for any preemie or infant that is born with severe defects. Parents are allowed to consider 'comfort/palliative' care to keep the newborn comfortable until it dies or they can choose extraordinary measures to try and save the newborn. They make this decision with their Dr. It is current law, no different.

jimbo · Feb 25, 2020

Lursa said:
Yes and that is the current law for any preemie or infant that is born with severe defects. Parents are allowed to consider 'comfort/palliative' care to keep the newborn comfortable until it dies or they can choose extraordinary measures to try and save the newborn. They make this decision with their Dr. It is current law, no different.

Generally speaking, when someone makes a statement such as that, some sort of backup

Lursa · Feb 25, 2020

jimbo said:
Generally speaking, when someone makes a statement such as that, some sort of backup

Neonatal Palliative Care: Focus on Life

Comfort care of neonates at the end of life. - PubMed - NCBI

https://neoreviews.aappublications.org/content/5/11/e484

Neonatal Comfort Care Program - Newborn Care (Neonatology) - NewYork-Presbyterian/Morgan Stanley Children's Hospital

And there are plenty more.

Now can you explain why you object to NY or VA clarifying or reinforcing such laws for their states?

Scrabaholic · Feb 25, 2020

jimbo said:
"If a mother is in labor, I can tell you exactly what would happen. The infant would be delivered. The infant would be kept comfortable. The infant would be resuscitated if that's what the mother and the family desired. And then a discussion would ensue between the physicians and the mother. So I think this was really blown out of proportion," Northam said during a radio interview."

So? This proves nothing - well, except that he did not advocate it (so called post birth abortion).

gooseneck · Feb 5, 2021

soylentgreen said:
There are many articles on what occurred before roe. And none of them paint a good picture. It would not be a matter of incarceration or not. It would be once again, a matter of how many women must die before abortion is made legal again.

And all of them no doubt will demonstrate the same conceited view of superiority as your sentence does. As well a falsely held belief that you know better so therefor have the right to tell women what to think and how to live.

Complaining about people doing nothing while offering nothing yourself makes you just as guilty of having nothing but talk. You say you can think of many ways. Care to share.

Sure. I will share.

soylentgreen · Feb 6, 2021

gooseneck said:
Sure. I will share.

Please do so then.

Losing on Purpose

Is the National Right to Life PAC losing on purpose?

Yes

No

A sinister place...

certified batshit crazy

Tenacious

Tenacious

Smarter than trolls

A sinister place...

Smarter than trolls

certified batshit crazy

Tenacious

Tenacious

Tenacious

certified batshit crazy