Roe v Wade overturned????? Draft says so

[Guy Chamberlin]

On 12/12/2023 at 5:32 PM, teachercd said:

This is why, once again, I am right and my ideas are the ones that should be used

 

1.  Men have no say in abortion UNLESS it is for it.

2.  Clinics all over each state

3.  Abortions are free, period

4.  No ID needed, no age requirement or parents getting involved, no protesting at clinics within 200 yards.  

 

There, I solved another problem. 

 

But......you're the same guy who always lies to every woman he meets!

[Scarlet]

Just one example of the Republicans scrambling to cover their tracks.  When you vote for laws stating life begins at conception this is what happens.  They didn't think it through but now they're scrambling for two reasons.

 

1) people will hold them accountable at election time 

 

2) this will affect people they know who need IVF if they want to have kids.  

 

 

[Scarlet]

https://www.businessinsider.in/politics/world/news/125-house-republicans-including-speaker-mike-johnson-back-a-life-at-conception-bill-without-any-ivf-exception/articleshow/107953568.cms

 

"Most House Republicans have cosponsored a bill declaring that life begins from the moment of conception, a position under increased scrutiny after the Alabama Supreme Court ruled that frozen embryos are "unborn children."

 

"This Congress, 125 House Republicans — including Speaker Mike Johnson — have cosponsored the "Life at Conception Act," which states that the term "human being" includes "all stages of life, including the moment of fertilization, cloning, or other moment at which an individual member of the human species comes into being."

 

"The bill does not include any exception for in vitro fertilization (IVF), a reproductive treatment that allows mothers to fertilize several eggs outside the womb in order to increase the chances of a viable pregnancy"

 

[ZRod]

1 hour ago, Scarlet said:

https://www.businessinsider.in/politics/world/news/125-house-republicans-including-speaker-mike-johnson-back-a-life-at-conception-bill-without-any-ivf-exception/articleshow/107953568.cms

 

"Most House Republicans have cosponsored a bill declaring that life begins from the moment of conception, a position under increased scrutiny after the Alabama Supreme Court ruled that frozen embryos are "unborn children."

 

"This Congress, 125 House Republicans — including Speaker Mike Johnson — have cosponsored the "Life at Conception Act," which states that the term "human being" includes "all stages of life, including the moment of fertilization, cloning, or other moment at which an individual member of the human species comes into being."

 

"The bill does not include any exception for in vitro fertilization (IVF), a reproductive treatment that allows mothers to fertilize several eggs outside the womb in order to increase the chances of a viable pregnancy"

 

I was specifically told this was a state's rights issue, why would Congress be sponsoring this kind of legislation?

[Archy1221]

It is and should be a states rights issue because there is no congressionally passed law dictating otherwise.  
 

Republicans should keep it that way. 

[BigRedBuster]

I’m pretty close to this right now on the issue. There is no way in hell the government can figure out what’s best in each individual situation.  I want to keep reducing the number of abortions like has happened since the 70s. But, we also need to recognize that there needs to be major programs helping families, single moms and kids born in these situations so they have a chance at a good life. AND….sex education and birth control easily available for young people. 
 

 

[DevoHusker]

5 hours ago, BigRedBuster said:

I’m pretty close to this right now on the issue. There is no way in hell the government can figure out what’s best in each individual situation.  I want to keep reducing the number of abortions like has happened since the 70s. But, we also need to recognize that there needs to be major programs helping families, single moms and kids born in these situations so they have a chance at a good life. AND….sex education and birth control easily available for young people. 
 

 

Safe, legal and rare

[Scarlet]

These people are proposing that women who have abortions and doctors who perform those abortions be given the death penalty in the name of saving lives.  Even those who report to the E.R. in the midst of a miscarriage could be prosecuted for murder because, according to these people, most who do so are lying about it. 

 

The process of IVF will also be grounds for prosecution for murder because that egg that can frozen at -300f for 30 year is a human will full rights. 

 

They also propose that there be no exceptions for rape or incest but you know if their 14 year old daughter was raped and impregnated they're headed to the nearest state that allows for abortions.  Remember when we were all told sliding down this slippery slope was hyperbole?  

 

 

[teachercd]

Pro-lifers should be beaten, period.

 

If you don't want to get an abortion don't get one.

 

As far as "eye for an eye" yes, 100%, which is why we NEED the death penalty.  But clearly abortion is not murder.  Unless you are a crazy person. 

[Moiraine]

4 hours ago, Scarlet said:

These people are proposing that women who have abortions and doctors who perform those abortions be given the death penalty in the name of saving lives.  Even those who report to the E.R. in the midst of a miscarriage could be prosecuted for murder because, according to these people, most who do so are lying about it. 

 

The process of IVF will also be grounds for prosecution for murder because that egg that can frozen at -300f for 30 year is a human will full rights. 

 

They also propose that there be no exceptions for rape or incest but you know if their 14 year old daughter was raped and impregnated they're headed to the nearest state that allows for abortions.  Remember when we were all told sliding down this slippery slope was hyperbole?  

 

 

So humans can survive in -300 degress F for 30 years now? I guess I bought the wrong type of long johns.

[TGHusker]

On 3/30/2024 at 5:57 PM, teachercd said:

Pro-lifers should be beaten, period.

 

If you don't want to get an abortion don't get one.

 

As far as "eye for an eye" yes, 100%, which is why we NEED the death penalty.  But clearly abortion is not murder.  Unless you are a crazy person. 

 

Teach, no need to add stupidity on top of stupidity - speaking of the bold above.

 

I'm pro-life and I surely don't agree with that non-sense in the video.     

[teachercd]

10 minutes ago, TGHusker said:

 

Teach, no need to add stupidity on top of stupidity - speaking of the bold above.

 

I'm pro-life and I surely don't agree with that non-sense in the video.     

Those people are crazy.

[funhusker]

32 minutes ago, TGHusker said:

 

Teach, no need to add stupidity on top of stupidity - speaking of the bold above.

 

I'm pro-life and I surely don't agree with that non-sense in the video.     

So you believe there should be some room for choice when necessary?

[TGHusker]

57 minutes ago, teachercd said:

Those people are crazy.

agreed

[TGHusker]

47 minutes ago, funhusker said:

So you believe there should be some room for choice when necessary?

I agree with these:

Exceptions to state abortion bans generally fall into four general categories: to prevent the death of the pregnant person, when there is risk to the health of the pregnant person, when the pregnancy is the result of rape or incest, and when there is a lethal fetal anomaly.    

https://www.kff.org/womens-health-policy/press-release/what-are-the-exceptions-to-state-abortion-bans/

 

I will add:  I have know of situations where the mother did not abort the child that was a result of rape or incest.  That should be her choice - good can come out of evil.  Some people chose that possibility.  The same could be true of fetal anomalies - we have known of individuals born with great handicaps/anomalies that have gone on to live productive and in many cases inspirational lives.  Again - no one should be forced to 'chose' one way or the other.  

 

From a practical perspective - in a pluralistic society, there will never be 100% agreement on this.  So, I think we have to look at this from a compromised position.  No side gets all that it wants.  The alternative is that we become authoritarian which is the opposite of who we are as a nation.   1.  We can either be like China where the govt dictates the one child per family policy - forced abortions or like 2. Honduras  where abortions are banned in their totality by the govt since 1985.  

 

The gray area for me is time limits.   We've seen the draconian state laws that don't allow any abortions at all or limit them to 6 weeks. 

Time limits:  I'm still torn on time limits - 6 weeks is to restrictive especially if they preclude any of the above and because - in most cases one does not know of a pregnancy until 6 weeks at the earliest.    12 weeks seems reasonable for me.