new abortion laws (Mart, Nash: condo, to buy, DMV)

[Need4Camaro]

I’m learning that rideshare drivers can be fined $10,000 for transporting a woman to an abortion clinic. I mean wtf? Are they supposed to kindly ask each woman that boards their car if they’re 6 weeks pregnant or more?

https://www.usatoday.com/story/tech/...rs/5719717001/

[thenewtexan]

Originally Posted by Need4Camaro

I’m learning that rideshare drivers can be fined $10,000 for transporting a woman to an abortion clinic. I mean wtf? Are they supposed to kindly ask each woman that boards their car if they’re 6 weeks pregnant or more?

https://www.usatoday.com/story/tech/...rs/5719717001/

Yep, it's true. All of it. Unfortunately the majority of Texas voters think this is a great idea and will vote for these same politicians. Again.

[jbcmh81]

Originally Posted by Kid Ashbury

No one disputes that innocent people have been put to death and that there is a strong case for being against the death penalty simply because of that (I am).

However there's zero hypocrisy in the fundamental premise of wanting innocent babies not to be murdered while wanting murdering criminals to be put to death.

Babies = innocent
Murderers = not innocent

Pretty simple stuff, but pro abortionists pretend not to understand the difference, same way they pretend babies in their mom's wombs are not separate people despite every bit of scientific evidence (including separate DNA) saying otherwise.

To the larger point, this whole conversation could be a lot honest if the pro abortionists would just drop the lies and say they're against a child's right to life if the child's mother decides to murder them. And the fact that the default retreat is "well what about pregnancy caused by rape?!", which is the cause of less than 1% of abortions (per voluntary surveys given to women who have abortions in the US) is a tacit admission that they can't make a sound, logical argument as to why women should get to murder their kids. They have to retreat to the absolute worst example they can think of, as if even that would justify the murder of a child.

Simply put: no one should have a right to murder a baby. That's it. That's the argument. And we're going to use it to win. Science and morality are NOT on the side of the abortionists and the dreadful attempt to reframe the murder of millions of babies as a "right to choose" will fail. Keep screaming about how babies aren't people before they're born. We're not listening to your evil anti-science lies anymore.

Roe v. Wade will eventually be voided just like Dred Scott v. Sandford was. And just like the slave owners and bigots did back then, you'll simply have to find a way to deal with it.

Except people put on death row, regardless of their established guilt, *are* unquestionably people. There is still widespread disagreement on when human life begins and what actually constitutes a baby. You don't get to decide for everyone else such a fundamental question, and trying to do so in such an insulting, arrogant manner won't change anyone's mind. You're only proving that this is about pushing a very narrow view of subjective morality onto everyone else through force because you place no value on anyone's views but your own. That's not morality, that's just fascism.

[jbcmh81]

Originally Posted by jdhpa

Thank you, thank you, thank you. You put that absolutely precisely right. Approximately 62 million babies have been aborted since Roe v. Wade. 62 million innocent people who had their lives taken away. I don't know how anyone could think that's a good thing.

There have been studies that also support that legalized abortion has been one of the factors- if not the main one- in the national reduction of crime rates the past 40 years, as fewer babies are born in poverty and broken homes, among other circumstances. How many lives- and I mean full, actual lives and not a completely subjective version of life- have been saved from that? It's not a zero sum game, and we can all go around and around on this.

[txmusicgal]

Originally Posted by Kid Ashbury

Simply put: no one should have a right to murder a baby.

Where is the outrage when kids are murdered in a mass shooting at school? That's someone's baby and no one should have a right to murder a baby. I don't understand how certain people are pro-life but are for gun rights. Look at all the kids that are living and die because someone got access to a gun.



No one has a right to tell a woman what she can and can't do with her body. Why aren't their laws regulating a man's body? It takes 2 people to get pregnant. Why does the man get off scot-free?

[jjbradleynyc]

Originally Posted by txmusicgal

Where is the outrage when kids are murdered in a mass shooting at school? That's someone's baby and no one should have a right to murder a baby. I don't understand how certain people are pro-life but are for gun rights. Look at all the kids that are living and die because someone got access to a gun.



No one has a right to tell a woman what she can and can't do with her body. Why aren't their laws regulating a man's body? It takes 2 people to get pregnant. Why does the man get off scot-free?

Totally agree, 100%.

From Methodist Pastor David Barnhart:

“The unborn” are a convenient group of people to advocate for. They never make demands of you; they are morally uncomplicated, unlike the incarcerated, addicted, or the chronically poor; they don’t resent your condescension or complain that you are not politically correct;
unlike widows, they don’t ask you to question patriarchy; unlike orphans, they don’t need money, education, or childcare; unlike aliens, they don’t bring all that racial, cultural, and religious baggage that you dislike; they allow you to feel good about yourself without any work at creating or maintaining relationships; and when they are born, you can forget about them, because they cease to be unborn.

You can love the unborn and advocate for them without substantially challenging your own wealth, power, or privilege, without re-imagining social structures, apologizing, or making reparations to anyone.

They are, in short, the perfect people to love if you want to claim you love Jesus, but actually dislike people who breathe.

Prisoners? Immigrants? The sick? The poor? Widows? Orphans? All the groups that are specifically mentioned in the Bible? They all get thrown under the bus for the unborn."

[Jimrob1]

Originally Posted by txmusicgal

Where is the outrage when kids are murdered in a mass shooting at school? That's someone's baby and no one should have a right to murder a baby. I don't understand how certain people are pro-life but are for gun rights. Look at all the kids that are living and die because someone got access to a gun.



No one has a right to tell a woman what she can and can't do with her body. Why aren't their laws regulating a man's body? It takes 2 people to get pregnant. Why does the man get off scot-free?

I agree with everything you said and you said it perfectly.

[BobTex]

Originally Posted by Bayarea4

So much for the sanctity of human life.

Skrew that. That "life" in utero has perpetrated no act of violence. That rapist is a violent animal, rabid in action, that needs to be destroyed.

That human life in the womb deserves the principle of implied protection.

Not so with someone attacking another, in this case the principle of self defense overrides all alonmg with this goes the principle of self determination. The attacker has a choice in determining his future while the human in utero has no choice.

[Mod cut: personal attack]

[As Above So Below...]

Originally Posted by BobTex

Skrew that. That "life" in utero has perpetrated no act of violence. That rapist is a violent animal, rabid in action, that needs to be destroyed.

That human life in the womb deserves the principle of implied protection.

Not so with someone attacking another, in this case the principle of self defense overrides all alonmg with this goes the principle of self determination. The attacker has a choice in determining his future while the human in utero has no choice.

Surely you can come up with some form of deeper thought instead of relying on some shallow catch phrase . . . or maybe you can't ! Shallow is as shallow does!

And discounting executing an innocent person to keep the institution of the death penalty alive is…

[BobTex]

Originally Posted by As Above So Below...

And discounting executing an innocent person to keep the institution of the death penalty alive is…

We ain't talking about the "Institution of the Death Penalty". Please pay attention to the context of my post. It was totally about my daughter having to put down an attacker in self defense. Jeese Louise!

[Mod cut: personal]