1 edit
@averagejoe1 saidWithin one month, i.e., before they’ve had one overdue menstrual cycle, most pregnant women won’t even know they’re pregnant. Are you unaware of this, or is it your intention to ban abortions in effect while seeming to allow them under conditions no one can meet in practice? Or are you prepared to accept abortions within one month at any time after conception?
USA should let the law allow abortion within 1 month of discovering pregnancy, and that would do it.
@kevcvs57 saidI understand the evangelical stance, against their beliefs and all that goes with that. But how can you get away from the constitution, and the ruling of Scotus.? That is where I am coming from, regardless of your reasons to allow Willy nilly abortions. So you’ll need to go after it in a different way. I know that is what you are all writing about, I guess there’s no real good answer to it all. The Virginia governor was allowing a baby to be killed after it was born if the mother decided at that time to do it. I would think you have a hard time drawing a line. So yes, a pretty bad mass of snakes with this one.
“ USA should let the law allow an abortion within 1 month of discovering pregnancy, and that would do it.”
So what the vast majority of women were doing before the Republican SCOTUS struck down Roe v Wade then 🤷🏻♂️
This is about more than abortion rights Joe, ultra right wing Republican lawmakers are tripping over themselves to come with the most hateful ways they can t ...[text shortened]... you get Biden may show signs of being a bit befuddled at times but Trump is very very mentally ill.
Again, the Scotus ruling was a correct one.
@averagejoe1 saidIt is not hard to draw a line at all, and Roe drew a morally tenable one which was also practicable. If a fetus is viable outside the womb, including in an incubator, a pregnancy should not be aborted, unless carrying the pregnancy to term would endanger the woman. If a fetus is not viable outside the womb, aborting the pregnancy isn’t killing anything which would have been alive anyway.
I understand the evangelical stance, against their beliefs and all that goes with that. But how can you get away from the constitution, and the ruling of Scotus.? That is where I am coming from, regardless of your reasons to allow Willy nilly abortions. So you’ll need to go after it in a different way. I know that is what you are all writing about, I guess there’s no real ...[text shortened]... So yes, a pretty bad mass of snakes with this one.
Again, the Scotus ruling was a correct one.
@moonbus saidWell, I don’t know cycles. So, make it a ‘reasonable time’ for discovery, maybe 7 wks and 3 days, I am simply suggesting a reasonable concept, I am not a doctor. Now, does it sound a reasonable concept to you?
Within one month, i.e., before they’ve had one overdue menstrual cycle, most pregnant women won’t even know they’re pregnant. Are you unaware of this, or is it your intention to ban abortions in effect while seeming to allow them under conditions no one can meet in practice? Or are you prepared to accept abortions within one month at any time after conception?
@averagejoe1 said"A reasonable time after discovery" leaves it open for semi-literate or very immature people (like say, a 9-yr old who was raped by her brother) to claim they didn't 'discover' they were pregnant any time up to when labor sets in.
Well, I don’t know cycles. So, make it a ‘reasonable time’ for discovery, maybe 7 wks and 3 days, I am simply suggesting a reasonable concept, I am not a doctor. Now, does it sound a reasonable concept to you?
@averagejoe1 saidNo SCOTUS decided that it’s the role of the individual states to decide on family planning issues and availability but now one of the same evangelicals sitting on the Texas federal bench is attempting to ban an abortion pill on a nationwide basis. This is what they’ve been doing all along, holding secret cabal type meetings to thrash out their strategies for taking away the personal choices of all those whose choices they disagree with. You’re rapidly becoming an extremist theocracy.
I understand the evangelical stance, against their beliefs and all that goes with that. But how can you get away from the constitution, and the ruling of Scotus.? That is where I am coming from, regardless of your reasons to allow Willy nilly abortions. So you’ll need to go after it in a different way. I know that is what you are all writing about, I guess there’s no real ...[text shortened]... So yes, a pretty bad mass of snakes with this one.
Again, the Scotus ruling was a correct one.
@averagejoe1 saidIt seems reasonable to me that before legislating on women's reproductive options, one should find out how their bodies work, like, for instance, menstrual cycles and how they 'discover' they're pregnant. Women have been doing that for a few hundred thousand years, after all, without pregnancy-test-strips from pharmacies.
Well, I don’t know cycles. So, make it a ‘reasonable time’ for discovery, maybe 7 wks and 3 days, I am simply suggesting a reasonable concept, I am not a doctor. Now, does it sound a reasonable concept to you?
@suzianne saidwhat part of "A FEDERAL JUDGE" did you miss?
'It was all a lie.' Only a four-letter word can stop anti-abortion extremists now.
Dale Butland
Opinion article in The Columbus Dispatch
Tue, April 11, 2023 at 7:46 AM CDT
When the Supreme Court overturned the Roe v. Wade decision less than a year ago, Republicans were quick to assert that the decision did not outlaw abortion but merely returned that issue to the sta ...[text shortened]... Dale Butland was Press Secretary and Ohio Chief of Staff to the late U.S. Senator John Glenn.
@vivify saidYou don't have to have an abortion if it's a choice.
Have you had any conversations with conservative women who may not agree with that? Obviously as a guy it would be weird for me to say it to her.
What points would you use for a conservative woman about abortion if you could talk face-to-face?
@moonbus saidI would think we are discussing basic abortion, not the whole-other-issue of a child of incest or rape.
"A reasonable time after discovery" leaves it open for semi-literate or very immature people (like say, a 9-yr old who was raped by her brother) to claim they didn't 'discover' they were pregnant any time up to when labor sets in.
@kevcvs57 saidFamily planning? Are you suggesting that "The State". (Marauder loves that phrase, warm and fuzzy...) be involved in the planning of a married couple when building their family?
No SCOTUS decided that it’s the role of the individual states to decide on family planning issues and availability but now one of the same evangelicals sitting on the Texas federal bench is attempting to ban an abortion pill on a nationwide basis. This is what they’ve been doing all along, holding secret cabal type meetings to thrash out their strategies for taking away the ...[text shortened]... oices of all those whose choices they disagree with. You’re rapidly becoming an extremist theocracy.
You are wrong. And do you know that your tax money pays for family planning, some factory called Planned Parenthood or some such. The name suggests the the 'parent' 'plans', but you fellas are saying that the government plans????????????????????
You see how confusing you libs are!
I wish Sonhouse would weigh in.....................
@mott-the-hoople saidoh so you would be ok with a federal judge in california listening to 2 witnesses the instituting a nation-wide ban on ar-15?
what part of "A FEDERAL JUDGE" did you miss?
@averagejoe1 saidHey idiot child, family planning has, and should have nothing to do with the state, it’s what people do when they decide how many kids they want or can support. Stop the dodging, a republican trump appointed judge in Texas is trying to control the lives and choices of every woman in the US based on his evangelical god delusion, it’s no different to the Taliban or any other fundamentalist religious sect. The bad news is they are republican law makers
Family planning? Are you suggesting that "The State". (Marauder loves that phrase, warm and fuzzy...) be involved in the planning of a married couple when building their family?
You are wrong. And do you know that your tax money pays for family planning, some factory called Planned Parenthood or some such. The name suggests the the 'parent' 'plans', but you fellas ...[text shortened]... ?????
You see how confusing you libs are!
I wish Sonhouse would weigh in.....................