the alabama abortion attack

[workswithseed 2033]

55 minutes ago, Continental Op said:

Nah.  We need to let the fucktard who can't make a post without a grammatical error decide what is best for women!  

Is that right?

[Guest]

45 minutes ago, po elvis said:

if a person believes abortion is murder, how can they say it is ok if it is in a case of rape? it is murder or it is not. "well if you were raped, we allow this other human being to be murdered"? i think it takes away from their argument that it is murder.

 

I don't believe in those exceptions either, for the exact line of reasoning you describe.  The circumstances of the pregnancy do not remove the innocence of the unborn.

IMHO, the diciest decisions would be where one or both of the mother and child have a high likelihood of death and a choice has to be made in attempt to save one or the other.  That would be the only time when I could support an abortion.  i'm sure someone will find fault in that too... because it's such a clear cut, easy decision, right?

 

Edited May 19, 2019 by slorch

[bolverk 29360]

5 minutes ago, slorch said:

I don't believe in those exceptions either, for the exact line of reasoning you describe.  The circumstances of the pregnancy do not remove the innocence of the unborn.

IMHO, the diciest decisions would be where one or both of the mother and child have a high likelihood of death and a choice has to be made in attempt to save one or the other.  That would be the only time when I could support an abortion.  i'm sure someone will find fault in that too... because it's such a clear cut, easy decision, right?

 

That's the thing. None of these are easy decisions, but we allow autonomous human beings to make choices in this country. It's not up to you or me to make such a monumental decision for another person. The decision to terminate a pregnancy within a reasonable period should rest solely with the woman and her doctor --- not some gaping pussy hypocritical legislator.

[FondrenRoad 4378]

33 minutes ago, slorch said:

I don't believe in those exceptions either, for the exact line of reasoning you describe.  The circumstances of the pregnancy do not remove the innocence of the unborn.

IMHO, the diciest decisions would be where one or both of the mother and child have a high likelihood of death and a choice has to be made in attempt to save one or the other.  That would be the only time when I could support an abortion.  i'm sure someone will find fault in that too... because it's such a clear cut, easy decision, right?

 

So unborn are innocent, but minor children who are born to poor mothers deserve to starve if their mother can't make enough money. 

Conservatives could make better arguments about forcing raped women to have children if they first supported actual children.  It would go a long way if all these pro life folks were out there arguing for more funding for social services and child welfare instead of trying to gut both. 

5 years down the road, you'd call that same raped woman a welfare queen that needs a better job when she can't afford to feed the kid she was forced to have in the first place.   And you'd say it is unfortunate that the kid has to pay for the mother's decisions, but it's not your problem. 

Y'all act like fetuses are more important to y'all than children.  Really though, that isn't true either. You don't give a shit about fetuses or children. Both of your stances are about punishing women and about punishing women alone. 

[NowThis 931]

1 hour ago, po elvis said:

if a person believes abortion is murder, how can they say it is ok if it is in a case of rape? it is murder or it is not. "well if you were raped, we allow this other human being to be murdered"? i think it takes away from their argument that it is murder.

 

 

 

true, still an innocent fetus. 

[jimmyjazz 45513]

1 hour ago, FondrenRoad said:

Y'all act like fetuses are more important to y'all than children.

They aren't ACTUALLY more important than children, but they certainly act that way.  What's unimportant to the powers that be is women.

Now, why any woman would get on board with an anti-woman movement is beyond me, but hey, there are a lot of stupid people in this country.

[Asithappens 974]

2 hours ago, bolverk said:

I'm a bastard who could've been easily aborted. Both my birth mother and father were 16 when I was conceived in a field outside of Houston, so this subject matter hits very close to home. I was born two years before Roe v. Wade made abortion legal in the state of Texas, but my birth mother was given the choice by her stepfather to be flown to England to have an abortion. She chose instead to live in a Baptist home in Dallas for pregnant girls for several months to have me and adopt me out to a couple who couldn't get pregnant. It's a decision that I'm obviously grateful that she made.

And, yet, I still consider myself pro-choice.

Had she not had the option to give birth to me in that environment, which no longer exists (I was one of the last babies born there before it closed), I can imagine the choice would've been much more excruciating. But, in her case, she was able to look at a variety of options and chose to live in a dormitory for several months and had me anyway. You see, she chose to have me despite having been given other alternatives. Personally, I recognize how lucky I was but I also realize that my birth mom wouldn't have that same choice today.

This is a fetus at six weeks. Surely, we can agree that there should be parameters (there already are) such as limiting abortions on demand to the first trimester but also having exceptions for nonviability or the health of the mother beyond that. To insist that every single pregnancy should be carried to term is complete and utter bullshit that will absolutely ruin lives.

 

Is this where the "you know nothing, Jon Snow" post goes?  

[workswithseed 2033]

2 minutes ago, jimmyjazz said:

They aren't ACTUALLY more important than children, but they certainly act that way.  What's unimportant to the powers that be is women.

Now, why any woman would get on board with an anti-woman movement is beyond me, but hey, there are a lot of stupid people in this country.

Seems bigoted.

[Asithappens 974]

49 minutes ago, NowThis said:

true, still an innocent fetus. 

Wait. Don't evangelicals believe in original sin? 

There is no such thing as an innocent fetus.

[Guest]

58 minutes ago, jimmyjazz said:

They aren't ACTUALLY more important than children, but they certainly act that way.  What's unimportant to the powers that be is women.

Now, why any woman would get on board with an anti-woman movement is beyond me, but hey, there are a lot of stupid people in this country.

The notion that being for abortion is pro- women is where idiocy lies.

 

hellova sales job, for sure.

[hobbes2702 12771]

1 minute ago, slorch said:

The notion that being for abortion is pro- women is where idiocy lies.

 

hellova sales job, for sure.

This can’t be a real post.

[jimmyjazz 45513]

5 minutes ago, slorch said:

The notion that being for abortion is pro- women is where idiocy lies.

 

hellova sales job, for sure.

Probably the single most idiotic thing you've ever posted.  Congratulations.

[M12BH 544]

2 hours ago, slorch said:

The circumstances of the pregnancy do not remove the innocence of the unborn.

IMHO, the diciest decisions would be where one or both of the mother and child have a high likelihood of death and a choice has to be made in attempt to save one or the other.  That would be the only time when I could support an abortion.  i'm sure someone will find fault in that too... because it's such a clear cut, easy decision, right?

 

Well good for you, and next time you're pregnant and facing a high likelihood of death, you can decide whether to get an abortion.

No it's not clear cut and easy, and that's the whole point of why these absolute laws are so disgusting.

Anyway why is innocence, or lack thereof, a barometer of whether a woman should be forced to gestate? And who is to say that an embryo is more or less innocent than the girl or woman gestating it, and how should that determination have any effect on whether a girl or woman is forced to gestate something she didn't want or ask for? 

But OK let's assume for a moment that an embryo is innocent and that gives it some special status.  We ALL make decisions every day that result in the death of innocent others. One example - organ transplants.  Do you know how many innocent people die because they are waiting for organ transplants?  Should we force others to provide those organs (at the donors' expense) to those whose deaths are imminent?  And yeah I have some personal experience with this type situation and it's not very pretty. It's the most horrible, frustrating feeling to watch someone die in front of your eyes knowing that perfectly good livers, hearts and lungs are being shoved into the ground on a daily basis in the meantime. Why can't someone needing a lung to live just take yours?

Let me ask you, why shouldn't an innocent man, woman or child be able to walk into your house and stay there for, oh let's say nine months, if to do otherwise will result in the death of that innocent person?  Tell me, what would happen if you discovered someone in your house helping themselves to your food, clothing and money? I don't even think I have to guess.  Oh wait, let me guess...that person isn't innocent.  They are trespassing.  So is the "innocent unborn baby" placed by force or otherwise in the womb of a girl or woman who doesn't want it there.  Yeah, maybe she didn't use birth control.  Yeah, maybe you accidentally left your door unlocked.  Private property is private property, and nothing is so private as the inside and other end of a vagina.  We don't force anyone in this country to harbor others, innocent or otherwise, in their personal space against their will.  Or at least we didn't used to.  

 

 

 

 

[austingirl 2184]

7 hours ago, slorch said:

so, since folks are not perfect, they should accept murder?

Is it murder if a woman decides to terminate because she finds out at 8 weeks gestation that she has stage 3 kidney cancer and treatment to save her life will irreparably harm the baby? What about if she finds out at 19 weeks that the baby has trisomy 18 and might make it to term, but will only live for a few painful minutes after birth, so she decides to induce at 22 weeks to spare the baby and she and her family any more pain and heartache? And yes, I have close friends who dealt with both of those awful situations and fuck anyone who would call either one murder. 

The decision whether or not to have an abortion is usually the farthest thing from black and white possible, and while we're all allowed different opinions about it, I would love it if people would stop calling it murder. Doing so is unnecessarily inflammatory and makes it difficult to have a reasonable discussion. 

[Guest]

It is murder.  and I addressed the topic of having to choose between one life or the other above.

 

Sorry it makes you uncomfortable.  Seriously.

 

Dancing around what it is, is pure political gymnastics.  discussing it as if it is a trip to get a manicure is pretty damn outrageous, IMHO.

Edited May 19, 2019 by slorch

[Asithappens 974]

Just now, slorch said:

It is murder.

 

Great.

Yet another poster who doesn't know the definition of murder.

[Guest]

1 minute ago, Asithappens said:

Great.

Yet another poster who doesn't know the definition of murder.

Political semantics, and you know it.

[suddenly shaggy 929]

2 minutes ago, Asithappens said:

Great.

Yet another poster who doesn't know the definition of murder.

[VRHorn 718]

Nope - as the right-wing thought leader Rush Limbaugh used to say, words mean things.

[ChuckNorrisActionJeans 2655]

3 minutes ago, slorch said:

It is murder.  and I addressed the topic of having to choose between one life or the other above.

 

Sorry it makes you uncomfortable.  Seriously.

 

Dancing around what it is, is pure political gymnastics.

Considering that tons of people disagree and there are legitimate reasons for that disagreement, the individual carrying the yet-to-be viable fetus gets to decide. In a sane world.

[jimmyjazz 45513]

9 minutes ago, slorch said:

Political semantics, and you know it.

You should be ashamed of yourself, but you don't know it.

[Continental Op 3934]

21 minutes ago, slorch said:

discussing it as if it is a trip to get a manicure is pretty damn outrageous, IMHO.

I'll take "Strawman Arguments" for $1000, Alex. 

[M12BH 544]

39 minutes ago, slorch said:

Political semantics, and you know it.

I'm sure everyone in the legal system, not to mention anyone who has ever had to sit on a capital murder jury, will be glad to hear that the notion of defining "murder" is just political semantics.

 

But seriously - if you think the State should have a vested interest in forcing a woman to donate her time, money and bodily functions & fluids to preserve the life of an innocent unborn baby, but you don't think the State should have a vested interest in forcing anyone else to donate their time, money and bodily functions & fluids to preserve the life of an innocent born baby,  then you are the worst, most virulent sort of hypocrite and you should not be able to decide anything for anyone else, ever.

What are y'all waiting for?  Go donate parts of your livers.  People are dying for want of them.  And yours will grow back.  

 

  41 minutes ago, slorch said:

B

 

[TexArcher 37455]

5 hours ago, slorch said:

IMHO, the diciest decisions would be where one or both of the mother and child have a high likelihood of death and a choice has to be made in attempt to save one or the other.  That would be the only time when I could support an abortion.  i'm sure someone will find fault in that too... because it's such a clear cut, easy decision, right?

 

I support your decision on this, when it comes to a pregnancy that you're involved in.

What I don't support is anyone's right to make that choice for everyone else.

This is an intensely personal thing, maybe more than any other decision a woman or a couple can go through.  It is simply not the government's job to be involved in it.

"But it's a baby, an innocent human being," many will cry.

I say that until it can survive outside of the mother's body, no, it is not.  It's a collection of cells with the potential to become a person.  And so are the sperm and egg cells, but no one seems to care when I fire off a practice round in the shower.  You know why?  Because they're my swimmers and I can do whatever I want with them.

The same goes for the fertilized egg inside the woman's body.  I don't care if it's a zygote or a 3 month old fetus with a detectable heartbeat.  As long as it's physically dependent on the mother, it's HERS.  It's literally inside of her.

Edited May 19, 2019 by TexArcher

[jimmyjazz 45513]

1 hour ago, TexArcher said:

The same goes for the fertilized egg inside the woman's body.  I don't care if it's a zygote or a 3 month old fetus with a detectable heartbeat.  As long as it's physically dependent on the mother, it's HERS.  It's literally inside of her.

I'm going to again refer to the standard opinion espoused by EVANGELICALS prior to Roe VS Wade:  life did not begin until birth.

What makes current evangelicals so fucking right all of a sudden?  Read the Bible, pro-lifers.  Show me where it says abortion is evil.  Hint:  it doesn't.  It contains all kinds of Old Testament references to ripping fetuses out of wombs, etc., and then Jesus prophesied the end times with the statement "woe to pregnant women and those who are nursing".  Sounds pretty at odds with the current evangelical take.

God breathed life into the body of Adam.  The very essence of "life" is breath, according to the Bible.  "And the Lord God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life, and man became a living soul."  Seems pretty clear-cut to me.

[Asithappens 974]

2 hours ago, slorch said:

Political semantics, and you know it.

So not just semantics, but political semantics.

You're really reaching for this one. 

Not all killings are murder. It's amazing that you don't seem to get this.

[NowThis 931]

would be fun if Bama legalized pot, so the prison population would be replaced from potheads/dealers to doctors. 

[tantric superman 4667]

8 hours ago, slorch said:

I don't believe in those exceptions either, for the exact line of reasoning you describe.  The circumstances of the pregnancy do not remove the innocence of the unborn.

IMHO, the diciest decisions would be where one or both of the mother and child have a high likelihood of death and a choice has to be made in attempt to save one or the other.  That would be the only time when I could support an abortion.  i'm sure someone will find fault in that too... because it's such a clear cut, easy decision, right?

 

Why don't you leave the dicey decision to the mom and her doctor, chief?   You sound like more of a pull yourself up by your bootstraps guy than a dicey decision guy.

[ChuckNorrisActionJeans 2655]

[ChuckNorrisActionJeans 2655]

The Fetus Fetish, I call it. 

It's absolutely irrational in relation to the concern for born folks.

[TexArcher 37455]

So let's say a 13-year-old girl in an Alabama trailer park gets raped and impregnated by her step-dad.  Her step-dad is on welfare and her mom works at Wal-Mart for slightly above minimum wage.  It's all they can do to feed three people already.

You "Compassionate Conservatives" think that this very-unwanted-fertilized-egg is so precious that it must be born.  God's will or something, I'm sure.

Okay, so you support the mandatory $15/hr minimum wage to help these folks, right?  And surely you're okay with this precious child being born at a free hospital, since this family obviously doesn't have health insurance.  And of course it's another mouth on welfare.

Try to see the bigger picture here.  By forcing every pregnant woman who doesn't want the baby to have the baby, you're gonna put a lot of economic strain on the healthcare system, the welfare system, the public education system, and so on.

So do you still want the moral high ground if it makes your taxes go up?

Isn't it a problem for so-called fiscal conservatives who oppose government handouts to create a massive need for government handouts?

 

Edited May 20, 2019 by TexArcher

[Pancho 44358]

On 5/17/2019 at 5:14 PM, workswithseed said:

Am I racist if I don't agree with BLM?

No but you aren’t “pro-life” if you don’t agree with them 

[workswithseed 2033]

3 hours ago, jimmyjazz said:

I'm going to again refer to the standard opinion espoused by EVANGELICALS prior to Roe VS Wade:  life did not begin until birth.

What makes current evangelicals so fucking right all of a sudden?  Read the Bible, pro-lifers.  Show me where it says abortion is evil.  Hint:  it doesn't.  It contains all kinds of Old Testament references to ripping fetuses out of wombs, etc., and then Jesus prophesied the end times with the statement "woe to pregnant women and those who are nursing".  Sounds pretty at odds with the current evangelical take.

God breathed life into the body of Adam.  The very essence of "life" is breath, according to the Bible.  "And the Lord God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life, and man became a living soul."  Seems pretty clear-cut to me.

Jeremiah 1:5

"Before I formed you in the womb I knew you, before you were born I set you apart; I appointed you as a prophet to the nations."

This seems to beg to differ. The chicken was before the egg. Adam and Eve were not born from man unlike us.

49 minutes ago, Pancho Negro said:

No but you aren’t “pro-life” if you don’t agree with them 

What's their stance on abortion? Seriously though do you think that I want them to die cause I don't agree with them? Not everything they say is wrong, but sometimes they go too far.

[Zombie 284]

What's their stance on abortion? Seriously though do you think that I want them to die cause I don't agree with them? Not everything they say is wrong, but sometimes they go too far.

Right? Not wanting to be murdered by racist cops. That's way too far and entitled! Some might even describe it as uppity. I mean, the police wouldn't have shot if the POC did nothing wrong. Right workswithweed?

[jimmyjazz 45513]

7 hours ago, workswithseed said:

Jeremiah 1:5

"Before I formed you in the womb I knew you, before you were born I set you apart; I appointed you as a prophet to the nations."

This seems to beg to differ. The chicken was before the egg. Adam and Eve were not born from man unlike us.

That verse doesn't counter my point whatsoever.  Furthermore, Adam was a fully formed adult man in every physical way and yet he was not a human until God breathed life into him.  An infant doesn't breathe until it is out of the womb.

Don't take my word for it -- study Southern Baptist teachings on the subject pre-RvW.  They clearly felt that life began at birth.  So again, I ask -- what changed?  It wasn't the scripture.  It was a power grab.

[fattyflattie 4636]

https://m.worldstarhiphop.com/apple/video.php?v=wshh3N98B8u12NRhm5cl

I’m not wading into this shit show, but y’all are slipping. 

[Cheeseweasel 26437]

55 minutes ago, jimmyjazz said:

Don't take my word for it -- study Southern Baptist teachings on the subject pre-RvW.  They clearly felt that life began at birth.  So again, I ask -- what changed?  It wasn't the scripture.  It was a power grab.

I'm even more cynical than you. This was a bunch of hick legislators pandering to the lowest element of their constituency because they know full well it will get them reelected. That's all they give a shit about.

[Huckleberry 32685]

15 hours ago, slorch said:

It is murder.  and I addressed the topic of having to choose between one life or the other above.

 

Sorry it makes you uncomfortable.  Seriously.

 

Dancing around what it is, is pure political gymnastics.  discussing it as if it is a trip to get a manicure is pretty damn outrageous, IMHO.

Is removing the embryo/fetus from the womb without willful termination murder? Do you think the State should have the power and right to force a woman to be its incubator?

Are you mad at God for all the unborn children He kills every year via miscarriage? If you believe that life begins at conception then you believe that 30-50% of human lives end in utero.

Edited May 20, 2019 by Huckleberry

[Pam Cummings 9553]

15 hours ago, slorch said:

It is murder.  and I addressed the topic of having to choose between one life or the other above.

 

Sorry it makes you uncomfortable.  Seriously.

 

Dancing around what it is, is pure political gymnastics.  discussing it as if it is a trip to get a manicure is pretty damn outrageous, IMHO.

Where did you get your PhD in biology?

 

Oh, you don't have one? Then i don't give a fuck about if you "think" abortion is murder. Quit trying to use your religious bullshit to tell other people what to do.

 

And, i don't know, maybe try not being a massive fucking hypocrite and actually give a damn about real children. You know, ones who have actually been born and are now living.

[High Plains Drifter 10970]

Somebody correct me if I'm wrong, but up until modern technology, weren't abortions common until "the quickening," which is when the fetus is first felt moving by the mother? Usually occurs around 20 weeks I believe?

Which would be right around the middle of the second trimester.

[jimmyjazz 45513]

I still want to know why Alabama abortion opponents think it's OK to destroy fertilized eggs in the lab.  That's hypocrisy on steroids.

[High Plains Drifter 10970]

17 minutes ago, High Plains Drifter said:

Somebody correct me if I'm wrong, but up until modern technology, weren't abortions common until "the quickening," which is when the fetus is first felt moving by the mother? Usually occurs around 20 weeks I believe?

Which would be right around the middle of the second trimester.

Also, the word "quick" originally meant "alive", so a fetus was not considered alive until it could be felt moving by the mother.

[M12BH 544]

36 minutes ago, jimmyjazz said:

I still want to know why Alabama abortion opponents think it's OK to destroy fertilized eggs in the lab.  That's hypocrisy on steroids.

I'd love to see this law challenged via the "Castle Doctrine".  You know, the one that says you can shoot and kill someone trespassing on your property if you fear bodily harm.  Unless you are going to say women's bodies are not their own property, what's the diff?  

[WhatTheBuck 28700]

1 hour ago, jimmyjazz said:

I still want to know why Alabama abortion opponents think it's OK to destroy fertilized eggs in the lab.  That's hypocrisy on steroids.

Yeah, that's a new one. I hadn't heard that rationalization before. But hey, that means they can't be opposed to using them for stem cell research anymore, right? Because that was a big no-no during the Bush/Cheney years. 

[Guest]

3 hours ago, Pam Cummings said:

Where did you get your PhD in biology?

 

Oh, you don't have one? Then i don't give a fuck about if you "think" abortion is murder. Quit trying to use your religious bullshit to tell other people what to do.

 

And, i don't know, maybe try not being a massive fucking hypocrite and actually give a damn about real children. You know, ones who have actually been born and are now living.

So tell me again when life begins? I’ll hang up and listen

 

 I also do not care what other people do. That has nothing to do with my religion. It has everything to do with believing that’s when life begins. And nobody can disprove that, regardless of their degree.  

Edited May 20, 2019 by slorch

[Cheeseweasel 26437]

1 minute ago, slorch said:

So tell me again when life begins? I’ll hang up and listen

21.

[Pancho 44358]

12 hours ago, workswithseed said:

Jeremiah 1:5

"Before I formed you in the womb I knew you, before you were born I set you apart; I appointed you as a prophet to the nations."

This seems to beg to differ. The chicken was before the egg. Adam and Eve were not born from man unlike us.

What's their stance on abortion? Seriously though do you think that I want them to die cause I don't agree with them? Not everything they say is wrong, but sometimes they go too far.

Then you don’t know what they are fighting for.  So you’re not “pro life” like you claim.  

[jimmyjazz 45513]

11 minutes ago, slorch said:

So tell me again when life begins? I’ll hang up and listen

Apparently you aren't reading the thread.  That's a shock.

[TexArcher 37455]

11 minutes ago, slorch said:

I also do not care what other people do. That has nothing to do with my religion. It has everything to do with believing that’s when life begins. And nobody can disprove that, regardless of their degree.  

No one can disprove it because it's an unfalsifiable claim, aka an opinion.  And you're entitled to it.  You're just not entitled to legislate that everyone else has to act in accordance with your opinion.

[M12BH 544]

21 minutes ago, slorch said:

So tell me again when life begins? I’ll hang up and listen

 

.  

For argument's sake let's say you're right, and "life" begins at conception.  You still have not explained why a woman should be forced to contain and support that life inside her body if she did not want it put there and/or does not want it to remain there, when neither you nor anyone else are forced to support an equally innocent life that would otherwise terminate if you withhold the same resources.  

Tell me what would happen if you suddenly found a trespasser in your home and you felt threatened.  Costing you money.  Eating your food.  Living in your spare bedroom.  Making you throw up for three months and affecting your health, possibly permanently.

Tell me why you hold dominion over a perfectly good liver that will regenerate if part of it is removed when innocent people are dying because they don't have one.  Why should you not be forced to save innocent lives with your money, resources and body parts?  

Now I'll hang up and listen. But I won't hold my breath.  Because you have a fetus fetish.  Innocent fetuses must be saved at all costs, as long as those costs fall on others.  Born people, especially if the costs fall on you, not so much.