GOP betrays innocent fetuses on Roe v. Wade anniversary

[Paratus]

Let's look at a different way: if my gramma thought he was a burden, should she have been able to kill him?

Just because he had MS, of course not. But what if he was hypothetically brain dead. Would it be ok for her to end support then?

I'd say yes because there is no person to kill at that point. There are some parallels there with abortion.


(I'm also not trying to be flippant or insulting to your family. Had a relative with a terminal illness take matters into his own hands a number of years ago. I understand it's a sensitive topic. Just trying to find some common ground)

 

[dank69]

Lol, called it. The abortion issue is the only thing you guys are discussing instead of the tax issue. Bread and circuses.

 

[Tombstone1881]

IMO, since a man is not capable of having a baby, NO MAN has the right to dictate the reproductive rights of a woman.

For that reason alone, I will always stand behind and support any woman for HER right to choose whether she wants to abort a fetus/zygote or to bring a baby to term.

I don't really have an opinion either way on the subject of abortion, but that doesn't matter. My feelings, or any other MAN's feelings, are totally irrelevant. The choice should be the woman's and the woman's alone. I will always vote against any legislation that tries to take that right away from her.

 

[CitizenKain]

This brings up a point I'd like to know.. as we all know, those on the left just love to classify Republicans / conservatives as racist.. if they really were as racist as claimed, why are they so against something that has resulted in the death of millions of black and hispanic babies since 1973?

I keep hearing about how those who are opposed to "Obamacare" (Republicans) are racist, because they are against something that will help out poor minorities, that stopping "Obamacare" will result in the death of those same poor minorities. Using that kind of logic, if Republicans were as racist as claimed, shouldn't they be for more abortion and not against it?

Because you are making a false equivalency.

 

[rudeguy]

Just because he had MS, of course not. But what if he was hypothetically brain dead. Would it be ok for her to end support then?

I'd say yes because there is no person to kill at that point. There are some parallels there with abortion.


(I'm also not trying to be flippant or insulting to your family. Had a relative with a terminal illness take matters into his own hands a number of years ago. I understand it's a sensitive topic. Just trying to find some common ground)

That's actually what ended up happening.

 

[Jhhnn]

Lol, called it. The abortion issue is the only thing you guys are discussing instead of the tax issue. Bread and circuses.

Fox didn't actually go into it. Huffpo does-

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2015/01/22/republicans-tax-abortion_n_6523714.html?1421942308

Big brother coercion against small business & women's rights is perfectly acceptable when you're on a misbegotten authoritarian crusade. 42 years into it, they're still hell-bent on controlling women.

 

[Vic]

Because the SCOTUS says it does in their decision Roe v Wade.

Contrary to what you usually see, RvW was largely about balancing the rights of the mother and those of the fetus.

The SCOTUS drew the line at "viability". I.e., once the point of viability is reached the mother does not have a 'right' to an abortion.

Fern

Very few people on either side of the abortion debate seem to understand the legal basis of Roe v Wade.

Women are also protected by the right to due process.

 

[Vic]

Lol, called it. The abortion issue is the only thing you guys are discussing instead of the tax issue. Bread and circuses.

That bill is going to be vetoed anyway. The whole thing is just political grandstanding.

 

[Moonbeam]

The effort to abolish abortion by conservatives will end the day science finds a way to transfer an embryo to the father and have him bring it to term. That way all those who feel that the woman should suffer the consequences of her choices will be able to step in and save the fetus from extermination. The moment men can bear children abortions will be free.

 

[ivwshane]

Lol, called it. The abortion issue is the only thing you guys are discussing instead of the tax issue. Bread and circuses.

Hey now! When the GOP has been complaining about jobs, taxes, jobs, government overreach jobs, wealth gap for years, you know their first primary focus for this new congress with a republican majority in both houses, will be legislation that will address those issues!

What says you care about the middle class and American values more than an abortion ban bill that further restricts women's rights and raises taxes on small businesses?

This bill might have been still born but don't worry I'm sure the next piece of legislation will address the republican concerns they have been complaining about for years!

/s

It'll be fun watching people like Matt who have constantly complained that the democrat congress in 2009 didn't do anything to help the middle class, start complaining about this republican congress who promised to help the middle class.

Lol! Who am I kidding? We won't hear a fucking peep from them!

 

[ivwshane]

The effort to abolish abortion by conservatives will end the day science finds a way to transfer an embryo to the father and have him bring it to term. That way all those who feel that the woman should suffer the consequences of her choices will be able to step in and save the fetus from extermination. The moment men can bear children abortions will be free.

And abortion machines on every corner!

 

[DrDoug]

As much as the GOP likes to portray themselves as pro life, they aren't. At best they are pro birth. Once that child is born they don't give a shit about it.

"Welcome to the world child! What? Your parents can't afford food or medical care? Sure sucks to be you!"

 

[rudeguy]

As much as the GOP likes to portray themselves as pro life, they aren't. At best they are pro birth. Once that child is born they don't give a shit about it.

"Welcome to the world child! What? Your parents can't afford food or medical care? Sure sucks to be you!"

Why are you having kids if you can't provide for them?

Why are you having unprotected sex if you don't want kids?

Oh right...you'd rather murder a baby than wear a condom.

 

[dank69]

That bill is going to be vetoed anyway. The whole thing is just political grandstanding.

Of course it will be vetoed, if it even gets past the Senate, which I doubt it will. The point however, is that if we want to be informed voters, all we have to go on to judge our representatives is their actions. Here we have the GOP action of attempting to raise taxes and the Dems blocking that tax increase, but every conservative will still call liberals the ones who tax and spend and call the GOP the party of the middle class.

 

[Newell Steamer]

http://www.washingtonpost.com/opini...11e4-b146-577832eafcb4_story.html?tid=rssfeed

In a week when President Obama used his State of the Union address to issue a progressive manifesto of bread-and-butter policy proposals, GOP leaders responded by taking up the “Pain-Capable Unborn Child Protection Act” — a bill that would ban abortions after 20 weeks of pregnancy. But a vote on the legislation had to be canceled after female GOP House members reportedly balked over the way an exception for pregnancies resulting from rape was limited.

The whole thing was, in sum, your basic 360-degree fiasco.

Oh,.. but, there is more!

http://thinkprogress.org/health/2015/01/22/3614317/renee-ellmers-abortion-gop/

Conservatives aren’t very happy with Rep. Renee Ellmers this week. Over the course of just a few days, the Republican congresswoman from North Carolina has become an unlikely symbol for Republicans’ brewing divisions over abortion policy.

Ellmers is being accused of betraying her party — several articles published on the right-wing Red State accuse her of being “worse than a Democrat” and “two-faced” — for thwarting a proposed 20-week abortion ban that was scheduled to come up for a vote this week. On Thursday afternoon, anti-abortion activists Jill Stanek and Patrick Mahoney held a protest outside of Ellmers’ office, urging activists to stand against “Congressman Ellmers’ blockage of a bill to protect babies destined for death by abortion.”

Wait, wait, wait,... waaaaaait.

The Republicans about faced themselves. Then, the Righthadists cry butthurt, because one of their pipe carrying own 'betrayed' them as well.

Oh, GOP, you are the party that just keeps on giving.

 

[DrDoug]

Why are you having kids if you can't provide for them?

Why are you for forcing them to have kids if they can't provide for them? Why are you even passing judgment on them and their situations? Judge not and all of that...

Why are you having unprotected sex if you don't want kids?

Who says the unprotected sex is consensual? What about prevention methods that failed? Again, why are you passing judgment on them? Can they stick their noses into your life and tell you what to do too?

Oh right...you'd rather murder a baby than wear a condom.

A simple minded retort from a simple mind. Again with that judgment bullshit. Don't you have enough shit going on in your life that you don't need to stick your nose into the business of others? If a woman decides to have an abortion then that is her and her physician's problem to deal with, not mine. For some reason I have a problem with inserting myself into the business of others.

I see that you don't.

 

[rudeguy]

Why are you for forcing them to have kids if they can't provide for them? Why are you even passing judgment on them and their situations? Judge not and all of that...



Who says the unprotected sex is consensual? What about prevention methods that failed? Again, why are you passing judgment on them? Can they stick their noses into your life and tell you what to do too?



A simple minded retort from a simple mind. Again with that judgment bullshit. Don't you have enough shit going on in your life that you don't need to stick your nose into the business of others? If a woman decides to have an abortion then that is her and her physician's problem to deal with, not mine. For some reason I have a problem with inserting myself into the business of others.

I see that you don't.

OK fine. Lets have abortions resulting from rape or condom failure be legal. All others can be made illegal. What % of abortions do you think would still happen?

 

[Vic]

OK fine. Lets have abortions resulting from rape or condom failure be legal. All others can be made illegal. What % of abortions do you think would still happen?

You're missing the point of what he said, and of the abortion debate in general. The government is Constitutionally prohibited from denying liberty without due process. In other words, the government has no legal authority to force a woman to carry a fetus to term.

The issue is even more complex than that. The rights to life and liberty are based upon the right of self-ownership, that each individual owns their own person, and the right to self-ownership is the basis of all private property ownership in our capitalist culture.
http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Labor_theory_of_property

 

[dank69]

OK fine. Lets have abortions resulting from rape or condom failure be legal. All others can be made illegal. What % of abortions do you think would still happen?

How do you prove condom failure? We gotta save all our used condoms from now on?

 

[DrDoug]

OK fine. Lets have abortions resulting from rape or condom failure be legal. All others can be made illegal. What % of abortions do you think would still happen?

So now some abortions are ok with you and some aren't? Are we going to have pregnancy investigations to determine how they occurred to see if they are allowed to have an abortion? Regarding the number of abortions performed, is an acceptable number of them something that I have a right to dictate?

In a perfect world there would be no need for abortions but the problem with that is that we don't live in a perfect world. Not only that, but with the right doing everything they can to restrict access to effective birth control, the right is actually pushing for circumstances that increase the likelihood of unwanted pregnancies. Hell, they even have winger pharmacists who refuse to dispense birth control! On top of that you have other wingers who label most every birth control method (eg: morning after pill) as an abortifacient (protip: it's not an abortifacient if there is nothing to abort!).

Want to reduce the number of abortions? Make access to birth control easy. Do that and watch the number of them fall dramatically.

 

[rudeguy]

How do you prove condom failure? We gotta save all our used condoms from now on?

Don't be dumb.

Sex tapes are to be mandatory. Uploaded to "secure" iCloud accounts :sneaky:

 

[rudeguy]

So now some abortions are ok with you and some aren't? Are we going to have pregnancy investigations to determine how they occurred to see if they are allowed to have an abortion? Regarding the number of abortions performed, is an acceptable number of them something that I have a right to dictate?

In a perfect world there would be no need for abortions but the problem with that is that we don't live in a perfect world. Not only that, but with the right doing everything they can to restrict access to effective birth control, the right is actually pushing for circumstances that increase the likelihood of unwanted pregnancies. Hell, they even have winger pharmacists who refuse to dispense birth control! On top of that you have other wingers who label most every birth control method (eg: morning after pill) as an abortifacient (protip: it's not an abortifacient if there is nothing to abort!).

Want to reduce the number of abortions? Make access to birth control easy. Do that and watch the number of them fall dramatically.

Access to birth control isn't easy now?

Come on man...you can do better than that.

 

[DrDoug]

Access to birth control isn't easy now?

Come on man...you can do better than that.

If you think it's easy now then you aren't paying attention. That's not my problem, it's yours.

 

[bshole]

OK fine. Lets have abortions resulting from rape or condom failure be legal. All others can be made illegal. What % of abortions do you think would still happen?

Perhaps a ban on vaginal sex until marriage would work, only anal or oral sex is accepable. Start by teaching them this in the schools. If high schoolers are only having anal and oral, it would be step in the right direction...... right?

 

[rudeguy]

If you think it's easy now then you aren't paying attention. That's not my problem, it's yours.

What exactly is so hard about it?

I can go to any store and buy condoms. I can go to about 11 different government places and get them for free.