Rubio: No abortions for Zika-infected women

[Paratus]

To be 100% one or the other makes no sense.

Being born does not change the child. It cannot be a black and white issue as we have no meaningful distinction between those we choose to protect and those we do not. Each successive trimester is much more important than the previous in terms of fetal development, and viability. I find the moral question scales with age. At some point the "clump of cells" argument is absolutely correct. Then at an undetermined point later, it is no longer true.

Granted, my fixation on the heartbeat makes it very early, if not impossible to determine pregnancy and then "cleanly" abort in time. But I am perfectly comfortable with the morning after pill, and I find a compromise involves banning (Obvious exceptions for health) late term abortion, maybe second term, and allowing it in the first term. If only because that is a compromise for the current state of the nation and society at large. Essentially, we have no better answer than that even if we'd like one.

Do I consider it a bit immoral still? Maybe... but it'd be a lot less than the current state of things. And I think applying pressure to abort early is best. If we can't stop you, then please do it before the child suffers.

So to paraphrase, those two posts basically say, (after a lot of ranting), that you are fine with abortion for health reasons, and fine with early abortions. Which is almost what the law says now.

The only difference is you want to tie the cut off to the start of the fetal heart beat.

Guess that makes you a "Terry Shiavo" conservative. Doesn't matter if there's a brain it must be kept alive.

I'm always curious about this answer from the pro-incubator crowd, if abortion isn't allowed what do you have the government do with women willing to illegally get an abortion or hurt themselves to end thier pregnancy?

Prison doesn't seem to work because it's easy to lose the baby due to injuries that occur in general population. So would you expand prison hospitals where you could chain the mothers to hospital beds and hopefully find enough medical personnel willing to do medical treatments against thier patients will?

How would that work if we could all live in pro-life utopia?

 

[Zstream]

So to paraphrase, those two posts basically say, (after a lot of ranting), that you are fine with abortion for health reasons, and fine with early abortions. Which is almost what the law says now.

The only difference is you want to tie the cut off to the start of the fetal heart beat.

Guess that makes you a "Terry Shiavo" conservative. Doesn't matter if there's a brain it must be kept alive.

I'm always curious about this answer from the pro-incubator crowd, if abortion isn't allowed what do you have the government do with women willing to illegally get an abortion or hurt themselves to end thier pregnancy?

Prison doesn't seem to work because it's easy to lose the baby due to injuries that occur in general population. So would you expand prison hospitals where you could chain the mothers to hospital beds and hopefully find enough medical personnel willing to do medical treatments against thier patients will?

How would that work if we could all live in pro-life utopia?

What's the point of prison? The moral incompetence of a person willing to have an abortion will not change after prison. The stress enough and knowing your destroyed a life should be enough pain, why add insult to injury?

 

[SheHateMe]

Just drop your unwanted babies off at Rubio's home then.

 

[theeedude]

Compassionate conservatism for ya.

 

[master_shake_]

marco who?

seriously who gives a flying fuck what a runner up in the retard pageant says?

 

[theeedude]

He's a Senator and Senate candidate, so he decides, and will continue to decide if he wins, who gets on to SCOTUS and rules on abortion.

 

[some_guy]

I was curious how foxnews "fair and balanced" would report this.

http://www.foxnews.com/search-results/search?q=rubio zika&ss=fn&start=0

Couldn't find anything on it.

Perhaps it would have ruffled too many feathers of their viewers and/or just considered a mistake to speak on this.

 

[Atreus21]

What the hell are you babbling about?

What the hell are YOU babbling about?

The comment you appear to be replying to is one linked to an article that shows we're on the cusp of having a vaccine for Zika, yet the Republicans decided to leave on their break without funding measures in the US to combat this virus, and the author of the article is calling on the pro-life crowd to actually put their money where their mouth is. There has already been one birth to a baby in the US who suffered birth defects due to zika - the baby died shortly after birth. It's even been suggested that the Republicans intentionally didn't fund measures to combat zika for two reasons:
1. To oppose Obama on an issue
2. To make the problem worse so they can blame Obama

There is only 1 other possible reason they haven't funded the fight against Zika: complete incompetence.

Further, stopping the virus would likely prevent abortions - there are people out there who would happily have the baby, but if it's found to have birth defects due to zika, would likely abort the baby.

Whatever comment I was responding to, funding for Zika prevention isn't the issue. The issue is whether we should be able to kill those with birth defects, and the answer is no. We shouldn't.

If republicans were silly or stupid or whatever for not funding Zika research, then they were stupid, silly, or whatever. Not the point.

 

[Atreus21]

As I've aged I've become more friendly to the pro-life agenda and honestly its very kind for willing parents to take a life long and more commitment to care. This even goes into care after they die. Its hard not to admire that love & commitment.
This does not mean I'm not pro-choice. A baby born so ill that they have a short painful existence isn't right either. Do you want to be kept alive unable to move and attached to various machines indefinitely? When is keeping you alive more about family comfort than your comfort? These are difficult questions that I'm not going to answer for somebody else.

Several things trouble me about this argument.

First, it applies as much to born humans as unborn ones.

Second, we have no right to predict anything about a person's quality of life for purposes of deciding whether their life is worth living. People defy the odds all the time. Abortion is wrong because another party makes a prediction about someone's quality of life, and then may kill that person if their assessment of it fails to reach some arbitrary standard.

Third, even if we could know these things with God-like accuracy and foresight, would you accept restrictions on abortion to women who have perfectly healthy pregnancies and babies?

Arrogance is a good word to define the attitude that abortion supporters display. They truly seem to believe that (1) they know what kind of life you will lead and (2) that they have the right to kill you to save you from it. Perhaps prejudice is a better word for it.

 

[glenn1]

So to paraphrase, those two posts basically say, (after a lot of ranting), that you are fine with abortion for health reasons, and fine with early abortions. Which is almost what the law says now.

The only difference is you want to tie the cut off to the start of the fetal heart beat.

Guess that makes you a "Terry Shiavo" conservative. Doesn't matter if there's a brain it must be kept alive.

I'm always curious about this answer from the pro-incubator crowd, if abortion isn't allowed what do you have the government do with women willing to illegally get an abortion or hurt themselves to end thier pregnancy?

Prison doesn't seem to work because it's easy to lose the baby due to injuries that occur in general population. So would you expand prison hospitals where you could chain the mothers to hospital beds and hopefully find enough medical personnel willing to do medical treatments against thier patients will?

How would that work if we could all live in pro-life utopia?

Since when is willingness to obey a law ever accepted as a reason by its proponents to reconsider a law? Gun control folks don't accept the argument that "people will get them anyway even if they're illegal," why should pro-lifers?

 

[Paratus]

Since when is willingness to obey a law ever accepted as a reason by its proponents to reconsider a law? Gun control folks don't accept the argument that "people will get them anyway even if they're illegal," why should pro-lifers?

For the sake of the argument my question wasn't about whether to enforce, it was what would enforcement look like.

If a parent is threatening their childs life then CPS will take the child. That's not possible with a pregnant woman without taking the woman.

So do you threaten them with a murder charge if they attempt to harm their fetus? Do you lock them up?

If you lock them up how do you keep a determined person from hurting their fetus?

Forced medical care? If so where do you find doctors willing to perform medical procedures against their patients will?

A lot of questions for pro-lifers.

 

[JSt0rm]

we should bring back smothering so we dont have to talk about abortion anymore.

 

[glenn1]

For the sake of the argument my question wasn't about whether to enforce, it was what would enforcement look like.

If a parent is threatening their childs life then CPS will take the child. That's not possible with a pregnant woman without taking the woman.

So do you threaten them with a murder charge if they attempt to harm their fetus? Do you lock them up?

If you lock them up how do you keep a determined person from hurting their fetus?

Forced medical care? If so where do you find doctors willing to perform medical procedures against their patients will?

A lot of questions for pro-lifers.

Again, I think the response will be similar to what gun control folks would say - it's not intended to be a perfect solution and if someone *really* wants a gun/abortion they could get one. But that's not the point, it will still greatly cut down on the number of guns/abortions because most people tend to be law-abiding. And as for the enforcement it's pretty much always been targeted at the provider and not the woman. Sure, just like with drugs there will be some low-level enforcement and punishment but it's really aimed at the suppliers.

As for "doctors willing to perform medical procedures," well abortion doctors seem to not have an issue providing procedures that would certainly be against the will of the fetus but to benefit the selfish desires of the woman. Flipping that script to provide procedures the woman would object to in order to serve the selfish desires of a fetus seems to be a non-issue.

 

[glenn1]

we should bring back smothering so we dont have to talk about abortion anymore.

At least women wouldn't have the plausible deniability of the death they're causing if they did need to smother them. As it stands now they get to have the moral detachment of someone doing it for them.

 

[Paratus]

Again, I think the response will be similar to what gun control folks would say - it's not intended to be a perfect solution and if someone *really* wants a gun/abortion they could get one. But that's not the point, it will still greatly cut down on the number of guns/abortions because most people tend to be law-abiding. And as for the enforcement it's pretty much always been targeted at the provider and not the woman. Sure, just like with drugs there will be some low-level enforcement and punishment but it's really aimed at the suppliers.

As for "doctors willing to perform medical procedures," well abortion doctors seem to not have an issue providing procedures that would certainly be against the will of the fetus but to benefit the selfish desires of the woman. Flipping that script to provide procedures the woman would object to in order to serve the selfish desires of a fetus seems to be a non-issue.

It's interesting how you want to avoid the implications of making abortion illegal on women who don't want to remain pregnant. Then again forcing woman to be incubators is a nasty business.

If we were to ban guns, someone violating that law maybe throw in jail. They won't have a doctor surgically remove their trigger fingers. No, abortion is no more or less selfish than owning a gun.

When you were a fetus those were your wishes? Strange, I wasn't aware I had any wishes while I was in the womb. You must be very special to remember back before you had any neurons.

 

[JSt0rm]

At least women wouldn't have the plausible deniability of the death they're causing if they did need to smother them. As it stands now they get to have the moral detachment of someone doing it for them.

I don't think they see it how you think they see it. A lot of the time the choice is one of the hardest they could ever make. And I'm sure there is regret afterwords for some even if they knew for the life they wanted to live they needed to do it.

 

[WhipperSnapper]

I have an even better idea for Rubio. If religious people are going to start dictating what people can and cannot do with their own bodies, then perhaps we should end all tax exemptions for religious institutions. Why are these places tax exempt when their adherents advocate that the government ram their religion down people's throats (or rather, up women's vaginas)?

 

[HomerJS]

At least women wouldn't have the plausible deniability of the death they're causing if they did need to smother them. As it stands now they get to have the moral detachment of someone doing it for them.

Republican wet dream three-fer

Refuse to fund fighting Zika
Force women to bring Zika fetuses to term
Refuse to provide money for women for raising Zika babies

 

[JSt0rm]

I have an even better idea for Rubio. If religious people are going to start dictating what people can and cannot do with their own bodies, then perhaps we should end all tax exemptions for religious institutions. Why are these places tax exempt when their adherents advocate that the government ram their religion down people's throats (or rather, up women's vaginas)?

We need to do this. These are businesses. Nothing else.

 

[Moonbeam]

Women who abort are just like Salem Witches and must be burned at the stake for exalting the power of women over the those of men. The feminine is the devil. Only the authoritarian conservative mind can stave off this evil. Laws of fire must be passed to stomp out such deviation. Those without the iron will of self discipline must be crushed. The means are justified by the ends. I am the hand of God and his righteous wrath. I will beat you Mommy, like Daddy did. I'll teach you what it felt like when you didn't save me from him.

 

[interchange]

Women who abort are just like Salem Witches and must be burned at the stake for exalting the power of women over the those of men. The feminine is the devil. Only the authoritarian conservative mind can stave off this evil. Laws of fire must be passed to stomp out such deviation. Those without the iron will of self discipline must be crushed. The means are justified by the ends. I am the hand of God and his righteous wrath. I will beat you Mommy, like Daddy did. I'll teach you what it felt like when you didn't save me from him.

I do not agree that sometimes a cigar is just a cigar.
But I do think that sometimes a cigar ought to be seen as just a cigar.

 

[Moonbeam]

I do not agree that sometimes a cigar is just a cigar.
But I do think that sometimes a cigar ought to be seen as just a cigar.

Not sure I understand this but what I see in this 'no abortions for women with Zika virus thingi' is a form of ideologically driven insanity so deep that it manifests as hatred of women. I also believe that any attempt to enforce such a ban on women amounts to violently acting out. I also believe that violently acting out is the one thing that anybody animated by a sense of justice would stop.

 

[some_guy]

When the zika **** hits the fans, pro-birth politicians may open up some grey area for abortions.

I would not be surprised if Rubio changes his opinion with hundreds or maybe even thousands of zika effected births.

 

[Fanatical Meat]

Is it time to start using DDT in parts of Florida yet?

Not the WWE guy.

 

[disappoint]

Not sure I understand this but what I see in this 'no abortions for women with Zika virus thingi' is a form of ideologically driven insanity so deep that it manifests as hatred of women. I also believe that any attempt to enforce such a ban on women amounts to violently acting out. I also believe that violently acting out is the one thing that anybody animated by a sense of justice would stop.

I doubt Rubio or most of the people that subscribe to his proverbial newsletter intended to hate women. Remember Hanlon's Razor: "Never attribute to malice what can be adequately explained by stupidity."