Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
It hurts but due to ignorance it only hurts a little. I remember when Obama ran in 2008 the majority of pro-life voters (not activists but just ordinary voters) thought that Obama was the anti-abortion candidate. They liked him and saw themselves in him.
Most people on here who are opposed to abortion want ALL abortion banned outright. Any exception made to that is an extreme position to take with them.
I cant speak for most people on here , but think there is a lot of common ground that could be found but for the pro abortion forces that pretty much want what we are seeing in these proposed laws.
I cant speak for most people on here , but think there is a lot of common ground that could be found but for the pro abortion forces that pretty much want what we are seeing in these proposed laws.
We want these decisions to be left to those who are trained to make them. That's not you or anyone else on this board. Only the doctor and her patient are qualified in any given situation to know what is best or necessary.
That is what the pro-choice people want. And that must be non-negotiable. No lay person should be making medical decisions for people they don't even know, whose situations they have no understanding of. That's just common sense.
I cant speak for most people on here , but think there is a lot of common ground that could be found but for the pro abortion forces that pretty much want what we are seeing in these proposed laws.
It seems that what you want are obstacles put in place to delay or make it very difficult for a woman to obtain a legal procedures.
If medical practices need to be put in place to protect the woman such as:
Needs to be done in a hospital for health/safety
Transvaginal Ultrasound reduces complications from the procedure
...then the medical community can come up with that. They already do for all other medical procedures. Why does a politician need to make the the two items above a medical necessity to get a legal procedure?
What common ground is it that you think the two sides could come together on?
Being against a legal procedure in this country is certainly your right and I would encourage anyone to challenge a legal procedure at the highest levels to get it overturned, but use the regular legal process to do so. It is wrong to use the political process masquerading as "common sense" and "medical care" when we all know it is an effort to chisel away at rights.
I watched it. Do you have a point to make? One thing I've noted is how much conservatives care about the unborn. They don't care nearly as much for the born. They continue to cut programs that benefit the newly born and their families. Republicans are proposing legislation that would reverse the ACA. They would like to make it more difficult for low income women to afford birth control and well baby check ups. They are cutting support for social services for low income families. They don't adequately fund private schools. Basically it's once the baby is born you're on your own. How compassionate.
Did you not hear of the law just passed in New York, or similar ones right now being proposed in New Mexico, Massachusetts , Rhode Island and Vermont. Or Oregon?
Quite the contrary, modest, common sense measures are being rolled back.
I would argue just as some one else on this thread has pointed out, that since its inception RoevWade has been the law of the land and it has survived 46 years and 5 Republican Presidents and their Supreme Court picks all the while the left clamoring in hysterics about how each one of them was out to take away a womans "right to choose". Yet fighting the most obvious common sense measures like no tax payer funding , informed consent and late term abortions.
The good news for those on the pro life side the tide is turning in spite of the aggressive push by the abortion lobby.
But people who want all abortion banned lost quite severely last year when Ireland voted to repeal its ban on abortion. I think very few states will ban abortion should Roe v. Wade be overturned. States that do ban will become export states for abortion. Who in their right mind wants that?
The "kill babies" thing is a lie, a straw man, and is completely made up.
The vast majority of reasonable voters know it's a ruse and won't believe this nonsense.
That's why I voted "no difference."
I did the same. I believe hardly any woman who has gone through the rigors of a pregnancy wants a late term abortion, unless the doctor advises it to save her life.
Just the fact that it has nothing to do with a womans healthcare. It is about another individual living human being.
So you quite passionately believe the life of the unborn baby must always come ahead of the mother's. If two deaths, that of the fetus and the mother, happen after an abortion could not be given, then surely it had to come to be, due to the will of God.
If I - or any taxpayer - is subsidizing the operation, then I have the power to step in and offer my opinion.
If you want exclusive doctor/patient privileges, then pay for it yourself.
Since the US taxpayers are paying millions of dollars for the military's Viagra, I guess that would mean that we have every right to question the patients and doctors to offer our opinions--correct?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
