• 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!

Alabama Senate approves near-total ban on abortion; sends bill to the governor

TheParser said:
For goodness' sake.

1. Much ado about nothing.

2. It will go to the Supremes.


3. The Supremes will strike it down.


4. The losers will be (a) the liberal media and (b) third-rate celebrities desperate to get their names in the news.
Click to expand...

The losers will be Republicans who are trying to straddle an issue that cannot be straddled.
 
TurtleDude said:
while I support most legal abortions, one can honestly argue that as medical science advances, the date of viability appears sooner and thus progress would be decreasing the time for abortion to be legal in terms of fetal development.
Click to expand...
Actually viability is not a function of technology but one of development and that has not change in any significant way.
 
SmartCat said:
Brian Lyman, Montgomery Advertiser Published 10:08 p.m. ET May 14, 2019 | Updated 10:08 p.m. ET May 14, 2019

MONTGOMERY, Ala. The Alabama Senate on Tuesday passed a bill criminalizing abortion in nearly all cases, approving the most sweeping restrictions on the procedure in the United States and almost certainly guaranteeing a legal challenge.

The measure passed the Senate 25-6 after more than four hours of often emotional debate that at one point led to the introduction of spectators who had abortions after being raped. The chamber rejected putting exceptions in for rape and incest on a 21-11 vote.

The bill now goes to Gov. Kay Ivey, who has not indicated whether she would sign it.

Sponsored by Republican Rep. Terri Collins, the bill would make it a felony punishable by life or 10 to 99 years in prison to perform an abortion in the state of Alabama. Attempting to perform an abortion would be a felony, punishable by one to 10 years in prison.

Alabama abortion bill approved in state Senate; bill goes to governor

----------

This will certainly go to the Supreme Court. I will be interested in seeing how the largely Republican Supreme Court votes on this.

I do not believe that the leaders of the Republican Party really want the Roe vs Wade Supreme Court Decision of 1973 to be overturned. The Roe decision led to the creation of the religious right. This is a mass movement of largely lower middle class whites who rarely have much enthusiasm for Republican tax cuts for the rich. Most evangelical whites voted for Jimmy Carter in 1976. Because President Carter avoided the abortion issue, anti abortion evangelicals and Roman Catholics became disenchanted with him.

In 1979 Jerry Falwell formed the Moral Majority. This persuaded Evangelicals to abandon a sincere, born again Christian president to vote for a man who had signed a law legalizing abortion as governor of California, who had divorced his first wife, and who rarely attended church.

Since then the Republican Party has been dancing an awkward pirouette around the abortion issue. Every four years the Republican Party platform condemns abortion. Nevertheless, when Republican presidents have Republican Senates they somehow manage to avoid advancing justices to the Supreme Court who overturn the Roe decision when they have the opportunity to do so.

As long as abortion is off the table democratically, pro abortion people who vote Republican because of economic issues feel that it is safe for them to do so. Anti abortion people who lack enthusiasm for Republican economic policies vote Republican because for them social issues are more important than economic issues.

Donald Trump has promised Evangelicals that he will appoint anti abortion justices to the Supreme Court. Therefore most Evangelicals support Trump even though his piety is even more dubious than Reagan's.

Speaking for myself, I am in favor of legal abortion, but I dislike the Roe vs Wade decision. I think it was a flimsy piece of legal reasoning. I also believe that the Democrat Party will benefit if Roe is overturned.
Click to expand...
Alabama, the ****hole of America.
 
SmartCat said:
If "pro life" people were really in favor of pro life, they would support universal health care given free of charge to those too poor to pay for it. They rarely are, however. They oppose abortion because they want non marital sex to be punished with unwanted pregnancies.
Click to expand...

Projection...you have no idea what "pro-life" people favor, including me.

It's totally hypocritical to say that the decision to bear a child should be between a woman and her doctor, yet have bureaucrats deciding what procedures a person should receive when seeking healthcare for other matters.

As for abortion, Alyssa Milano finally said that women should withhold sex from men to protest abortion laws. Guess what? This is exactly what most social conservatives believe should be happening in the first place. However, most people want their pleasure without consequences and pregnancy is a consequence of sex. Don't want babies? Don't have sex. Rape and incest are different stories, and should be excepted. That simple.

Start your own thread if you want to debate healthcare.
 
HumblePi said:
Okay, thank you for the correction. I'll just leave it at the Freedom Caucus then.
Click to expand...

When you seek to smear a group, you should be accurate. It was similar to leftwing hysterics who claimed the Late Judge Bork was a religious extremist, even though his first wife was Jewish-at least two of his children-Charlie and Ellen, considered themselves Jewish, and after his first wife died of cancer-he married someone who had left the catholic church. Bork attended prep school with my father and as my late father noted-the prep school was -like most of the day-Protestant-but Bork did not attend chapel
 
prometeus said:
Alabama, the ****hole of America.
Click to expand...

Actually, based on physical issues and a lack of sanitation, San Francisco is apparently a more accurate place to smear with such a term
 
tres borrachos said:
"Conservatives" (who by the way, we should start simply calling "Alt-Right Trump Devotees"), are lying when they say they want smaller government. They are also obsessed with sex. Gay sex, hetero sex that results in a pregnancy, and so on. It's creepy and I never really noticed until I rejected the party of Trump.

Stay the hell out of peoples' bedrooms and women's uteruses.
Click to expand...

You may be correct, referring to the alt-right as Conservatives is probably a misnomer.
 
jwzg said:
Projection...you have no idea what "pro-life" people favor, including me.

It's totally hypocritical to say that the decision to bear a child should be between a woman and her doctor, yet have bureaucrats deciding what procedures a person should receive when seeking healthcare for other matters.

As for abortion, Alyssa Milano finally said that women should withhold sex from men to protest abortion laws. Guess what? This is exactly what most social conservatives believe should be happening in the first place. However, most people want their pleasure without consequences and pregnancy is a consequence of sex. Don't want babies? Don't have sex. Rape and incest are different stories, and should be excepted. That simple.

Start your own thread if you want to debate healthcare.
Click to expand...

I like how you ignore the use of contraceptives, or do you want those banned also, hummmm.
 
tres borrachos said:
If this does go to SCOTUS, as I suspect it will (and should), I don't think it will stand. I would never personally have an abortion, having had 2 very painful miscarriages, but it is a woman's right to have an abortion, and I think overturning Roe will also not bode well for the Republicans.
Click to expand...
I agree -- even for the conservatives on the SCOTUS, who are itching to overturn Roe, this bill is too blatant. It has no provision for rape or incest.
 
prometeus said:
Actually viability is not a function of technology but one of development and that has not change in any significant way.
Click to expand...

So preemies that now survive and earlier and earlier times -when they would have surely died a couple decades ago, has no relevance in this debate?
 
Casper said:
I like how you ignore the use of contraceptives, or do you want those banned also, hummmm.
Click to expand...

Pay for your own. You want people out of your bedroom, right?
 
MTAtech said:
I agree -- even for the conservatives on the SCOTUS, who are itching to overturn Roe, this bill is too blatant. It has no provision for rape or incest.
Click to expand...

agreed and that is a guarantee it will be 86d but here is a question (I used to volunteer at PP so I have heard all of the arguments). The position of the anti abortion movement is far sounder-logically-if they believe innocent life is innocent life, rather than jettisoning some "innocent life" based on the actions of the rapist or the incestuous sperm donor. Now, politically and socially, that position is untenable and even many anti abortion rank and file reject it. But for the true believers-it makes sense.
 
MTAtech said:
I agree -- even for the conservatives on the SCOTUS, who are itching to overturn Roe, this bill is too blatant. It has no provision for rape or incest.
Click to expand...

That last part is what really got me. Rape and incest are two of the most unimaginable things to me, a woman. If God forbid either of those things had happened to me, the last thing I would want to do is carry a baby that was conceived out of hate and/or disease.

This bill is as hideous as anything the GOP has tried to pimp in years.

I also don't think the dumbasses in the GOP realize how horrific this makes them look. Horrific, sick and cruel.
 
SmartCat said:
If "pro life" people were really in favor of pro life, they would support universal health care given free of charge to those too poor to pay for it. They rarely are, however. They oppose abortion because they want non marital sex to be punished with unwanted pregnancies.
Click to expand...

Yep. Much is made about protecting the fetus, but once it's born they go all "BOOTSTRAPS!!".
 
jwzg said:
And you, from yours. Either debate, or shut up.
Click to expand...
A post (post #25) isn't worthy of "debate" when the post asserts 'the Left wants to decide who lives and dies' and that NY "passed and signed a bill which allows the death of a child right before they're born." One doesn't give credibility to incoherent rambings, which the remainder of the post's body contains. I don't debate Jesus freaks on the subway either.
 
TurtleDude said:
agreed and that is a guarantee it will be 86d but here is a question (I used to volunteer at PP so I have heard all of the arguments). The position of the anti abortion movement is far sounder-logically-if they believe innocent life is innocent life, rather than jettisoning some "innocent life" based on the actions of the rapist or the incestuous sperm donor. Now, politically and socially, that position is untenable and even many anti abortion rank and file reject it. But for the true believers-it makes sense.
Click to expand...

That's a valid point and one I struggle with. I think that once viability has been established, then we have a problem. The idea is to keep the innocent from bearing the burden whether that be a pregnancy by force or abortion for the sake of convenience.
 
MTAtech said:
A post (post #25) isn't worthy of "debate" when the post asserts 'the Left wants to decide who lives and dies' and that NY "passed and signed a bill which allows the death of a child right before they're born." One doesn't give credibility to incoherent rambings, which the remainder of the post's body contains. I don't debate Jesus freaks on the subway either.
Click to expand...

Point out where those claims are false.
 
Another example of how constant vigilance is needed or creeping conservatism will try to undo all the good liberals have accomplished.
Conservatism is about taking a snapshot of a moment in history, saying it was the perfect moment and trying to duplicate and preserve that moment through legislation. For most conservatives that moment happened in their father's lifetime.
God help us all if conservatives get away with this as the first step in realizing their agenda.
 
Grand Mal said:
Another example of how constant vigilance is needed or creeping conservatism will try to undo all the good liberals have accomplished.
Conservatism is about taking a snapshot of a moment in history, saying it was the perfect moment and trying to duplicate and preserve that moment through legislation. For most conservatives that moment happened in their father's lifetime.
God help us all if conservatives get away with this as the first step in realizing their agenda.
Click to expand...

You seem to argue that the creeping crud of collectivization is always good. Some "conservatism" is pernicious if it prevents the movement towards more freedom-example the defenders of Slavery in the South or Stalinism in the Soviet Union. However, the left is well known for attacking many rights that "conservatives" defend.
 
If Roe v. Wade gets overturned, there should be an accompanying provision that mandates the male who impregnated the woman to be financially responsible for her hospital bills and forced to take custody and bear all the responsibility for raising that child until the age of 21.
 
Verax said:
Might as well outlaw interracial marriage and homosexuality while we're going backwards.
Click to expand...

interracial marriage and homosexuality don't kill babies, not even close to same thing as abortion. in interracial marriage and homosexuality two legal adults make their choices, where is the second consenting person in an abortion?
 
HumblePi said:
If Roe v. Wade gets overturned, there should be an accompanying provision that mandates the male who impregnated the woman to be financially responsible for her hospital bills and forced to take custody and bear all the responsibility for raising that child until the age of 21.
Click to expand...

Why isn't the woman equally responsible?
 
tres borrachos said:
That last part is what really got me. Rape and incest are two of the most unimaginable things to me, a woman. If God forbid either of those things had happened to me, the last thing I would want to do is carry a baby that was conceived out of hate and/or disease.

This bill is as hideous as anything the GOP has tried to pimp in years.

I also don't think the dumbasses in the GOP realize how horrific this makes them look. Horrific, sick and cruel.
Click to expand...

I completely agree with you but I do see those who think all abortion-save the life of the mother (where "self defense" is implicated)-is wrong based on the "innocence" of the fetus-are logically (if not politically savvy ) more consistent than those who discard the "innocent life" argument based on the actions of a rapist or incestuous impregnator
 
HumblePi said:
If Roe v. Wade gets overturned, there should be an accompanying provision that mandates the male who impregnated the woman to be financially responsible for her hospital bills and forced to take custody and bear all the responsibility for raising that child until the age of 21.
Click to expand...

in cases where the impregnation was forced or due to incapacitation of the mother-I agree.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom