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.
You're not answering the very simple question I asked. It's not a stranger's business what someone else does with their own body. And to drive the point home further, the majority of these so called pro-life advocates really aren't pro-life. I say this because they care little for the people who are already on this earth. They want welfare benefits cut, Medicaid cut, WIC cut, Section 8, and God forbid the minimum wage be raised so people can afford to live without being on welfare. Then they insist women be forced to have babies they can't afford because they are suddenly so concerned about life Even more ironically, they are usually advocates for increasing defense (as in war) spending.
Do what you want to your own body, no argument there.
Killing another? Nope, that's wrong. Let me know when women's body's have 20 toes, 20 fingers, 2 heads, 4 legs, 4 lungs, etc.
The problem is access. Six weeks is very close to the time that a pregnancy can be diagnosed. Then a woman has to get to someone who is willing to do an abortion. In some states, there are waiting periods and other hoops that must be jumped through. Some women have to save up money to pay for the procedure. Reducing abortion later in pregnancy can be facilitated by making it easier to get it done earlier, not harder.
Then there is the issue of teenagers who do not tell their parents as soon as they suspect they are pregnant.
That is also far too early to diagnose fetal anomalies.
Access? You think 14000 public healthcare facilities isn't enough access?
The child you kill having an abortion could have grown up to cure cancer.....or push me out of the way from being hit by a bus.
You don't know.
In any case, this scenario is just as likely as any law abiding citizen's guns posing a threat to you as an individual.
Or, the pregnancy I terminated could have resulted in a loser who thinks women shouldn’t be allowed to make decisions about their bodies. That would have sucked!
"It is unlawful for any person to manufacture, import, sell, or deliver armor piercing ammunition"
18 U.S.C. 922(a)(7),(8),27 C.F.R. 478.37
So maybe only certain ammunition.
And if the Supreme Court did say ammunition was constitutionally protected then you would have to say that that was a decision by an activist court as the constitution doesn't mention ammunition. So if you wish to be a strict constructionist every law restricting the ownership of arms by the people is unconstitutional, however any law restricting ownership of ammunition wouldn't be.
Does the law specify what constitutes "armor piercing" ?
Are we talking body armor or tank armor?
Plenty of run of the mill "normal" ammo will easily defeat some types of body armor.
If the law doesn't get into specifics, then one could easily argue that it is overly vague/broad and therefore unconstitutional.
I just think that those who try to justify their selfish and irresponsible behavior by calling a fetus "just a clump of cells" need to be more honest with themselves about what they are doing.
That and I don't believe that abortion should be publicly funded in any way shape or form.
If you're morally OK with ripping your child from your womb with an Elctrolux.....that's between you and the deity of you choice.
Just don't ask me to pay for it.
I had an abortion at 7 weeks. I know some anti-choices have a fetish for the image of a “child ripped from your womb” but I’m reality, I pass larger menstrual clots each month.
Normal people understand bc has a failure rate and those failures can result in unwanted pregnancies and then abortions. Still, ...
What about the 50% of women who were not using any bc method in the month they became pregnant. That seems like a high % if there's a true concern over unwanted pregnancy/abortion.
Even among the 50% who did use bc in the month of pregnancy, not all used them consistently or properly. Condoms, among the least reliable methods, is the most frequently used, followed by the pill, and then what should barely be called a bc method, withdrawal.
For those who agree abortion should be safe, legal, andrare, those stats aren't terrific; for those who leave out andrare, the stats don't matter.
For some women who did not use contraception it was a deliberate choice. Women who abort because of fetal anomalies often had planned and wanted the pregnancy, for example.
For some, access to contraception, especially the more effective (and more expensive) long acting methods is not as easy as buying condoms. There are still millions of women who are uninsured, despite the ACA. That access is especially true for teens.
More numbers on contraceptive method use in the US:
Of note, despite the view some posters here have that PP exists only to do abortions, the proportion of their clients choosing the more highly effective methods (IUDs, implants, and injections) has increased.
You're not answering the very simple question I asked. It's not a stranger's business what someone else does with their own body. And to drive the point home further, the majority of these so called pro-life advocates really aren't pro-life. I say this because they care little for the people who are already on this earth. They want welfare benefits cut, Medicaid cut, WIC cut, Section 8, and God forbid the minimum wage be raised so people can afford to live without being on welfare. Then they insist women be forced to have babies they can't afford because they are suddenly so concerned about life Even more ironically, they are usually advocates for increasing defense (as in war) spending.
We've been through all this before. Just search my posts if you want answers. Woman's body is left in tact. Babies body is torn into pieces.
I had an abortion at 7 weeks. I know some anti-choices have a fetish for the image of a “child ripped from your womb” but I’m reality, I pass larger menstrual clots each month.
The word "ripping" is equally valid in describing an abortion as it is when Liberals use it to describe immigration officials temporarily separating kids from their illeagl immigrant parents.
The word "ripping" is equally valid in describing an abortion as it is when Liberals use it to describe immigration officials temporarily separating kids from their illeagl immigrant parents.
Scientifically, those are children not fetuses. Do you understand the various states of development? I learned it in 7th grade, but maybe you were out sick that day.
You must be equally outraged by those children being separated by their parents, I assume? I mean obviously you care soooo much about “children”?
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.
Even more ironically, they are usually advocates for increasing defense (as in war) spending.
