Most Women Denied Abortions by Texas Law Got Them Another Way (Howe: cost, legal)

[spencgr]

Originally Posted by BobTex

70 million abortions, disproportionately affecting minorities, since 1973. Would make Margaret Sanger, The mother of Planned Parenthood, proponent of eugenics and racist, proud.

I do believe abortion is killing a life, and I am not in favor of it. But I am also not in favor of having an additional 70 million humans on this planet raised by (at least one) parent that didn't want them. I don't pretend to know what the correct solution is.

[Dopo]

Originally Posted by Soonhun

Regardless of whether I agree, I think most the "anti-abortion" people will feel the law was worth it if it prevented a single abortion.

There's a better option than "pass a law and throw them in jail"
A better option is to let all women that are thinking about getting an abortion that we, as a nation, are willing to give them a different option (help, adoption, etc, etc.) to encourage them to not do it.
Or even a better option ... offer free vasectomies.



But those options are not as fun as passing a law and throwing people in jail

[KathrynAragon]

Originally Posted by As Above So Below...

This I can respect.

Those who babble about the sanctity of life while cheering war and the death penalty are blatant hypocrites. I can respect consistency even if I dont agree with the position.

Thank you.

To complicate matters even further (and to alienate even more people, albeit unintentionally) I also believe that abortion, the death penalty, and war are sometimes necessary evils.

[As Above So Below...]

Originally Posted by spencgr

I do believe abortion is killing a life, and I am not in favor of it. But I am also not in favor of having an additional 70 million humans on this planet raised by (at least one) parent that didn't want them. I don't pretend to know what the correct solution is.

I appreciate your honesty.

[TexasHorseLady]

Originally Posted by Soonhun

Regardless of whether I agree, I think most the "anti-abortion" people will feel the law was worth it if it prevented a single abortion.

Some pro-choice individuals seem to be missing completely what the pro-life side is arguing for. The pro-life side isn't so just to control women's bodies, but because they see every individual fetus as a human life. In their point of view, the fact that 99 died but 1 survived, but would have died without the law, is still a small "victory" for life, as they see it. The only way this could backfire for them is if every single abortion that would have happened otherwise still happened, which wouldn't even cause them to change support for the law, or if this law somehow convinced more women to get abortions who would have otherwise not get abortions. But I'm having trouble thinking up what person would decide to get pregnant and then have an abortion, all specifically in protest of this law.

Sorry, but if the pro-control over other people's most intimate decisions (let's call it what it really is, shall we?) were really pro-life, they would not be seeking to ban abortion (because that guarantees a rise in maternal mortality, but to them, living women aren't life to be cherished) but would be promoting just as loudly the things that have been PROVEN to reduce abortion. For example, as has been shown to work, early and comprehensive sex education (and abstinence only need not apply as that has been shown NOT to work, both in studies and in actual life before Rowe v. Wade) and access from puberty to free or low cost effective birth control.

However, if you REALLY want to prevent abortion, you should be championing a law that requires the sex that can cause the MOST pregnancies and thus MOST abortion to, upon reaching puberty, to get a mandatory vasectomy, to be reversed only when the male has matured and proven that he is not only able and willing to support any results of his sexual activity but has also found a female that is willing to put in writing for the court that she agrees to procreate and raise children with them.

Think that's too intrusive on the male bodily autonomy? Welcome to the world of women.



Don't even pretend that it's not about control over women. We know better, and have known better for literally generations. Even when it's a woman seeking to control other women for reasons that truly do not bear looking at.

[ScoPro]

Originally Posted by As Above So Below...

So youre also against the death penalty?

You are equating the most innocent, defenseless human life with the most heinous convicted murderers?

[As Above So Below...]

Originally Posted by ScoPro

You are equating the most innocent, defenseless human life with the most heinous convicted murderers?

So you dont care about the sanctity of life?

[BobTex]

Originally Posted by As Above So Below...

So youre also against the death penalty?

Apples and oranges. Such a simple question you ask without the regard to the wording of my original statement where I specifically stated that unborn life is "innocent". This versus all death penalty cases are the result of a crime, judgement, and multiple appeals that review the judgement.

So are you equating the deaths (aborted unborn death and the judged death of a perceived murderer)?


To be fair there is some capital punishment I deem wrongful. There is also some that I think should be a public spectacle in as shameful a way as possible and there is a middle road such as we do it now. But again an unborn child deserves no death sentence.

JMNSHO

[SyZ]

Originally Posted by Cida

That's something that anti-abortion people often ignore. If a woman is desperate to get an abortion, she probably will - even if it puts her in jeopardy.


Most Women Denied Abortions by Texas Law Got Them Another Way
“The law has not done anything to change people’s need for abortion care; it has shifted where people are getting their abortion.”
https://www.nytimes.com/2022/03/06/u...omen-data.html

People still murder even though it's illegal. Should we therefore make murder legal?

[BobTex]

Originally Posted by As Above So Below...

This I can respect.

Those who babble about the sanctity of life while cheering war and the death penalty are blatant hypocrites. I can respect consistency even if I dont agree with the position.

Where does this "cheering" narrative come from? Who actually cheers for war? How insane is that thought? I guess Hitler cheered for war. I think others hope for it. I'd surmise that FDR and George Bush both could arguably fall into that category.

Now, I don't cheer for those who are sentenced to death but I think it is definitely a punishment that should be on the table, and in degrees as I stated in my previous post.

Life is precious. Those who spill innocent blood are apparently indifferent to that. Do you feel no empathy for those that are innocently snuffed out? A hard heart is a helluva thang !

I have no respect for anyone that would stand up for anyone that willingly destroys an innocent life, in fact they are almost on the same low rung that the killer is.

And again, I think some capital cases are wrongly prosecuted and sentenced.

So AASB . . . Do you think Lawrence Brewer and John King should have been spared?

















I don't !








You should reap what you sow as much as possible. There deaths shoulda been on the courthouse square for their total inhumanity!