1 hour ago, mr_hunt said:

i bet some would try. 

something like 2/3 of americans do not want roe v wade overturned....repugs have to tread lightly or risk energizing dem turnout in the mid-terms. 

 

Yes, but why are they against it?  Polling shows people are far more in favor of allowing abortion only through trimester 1, that's 12 weeks.  

 

I think if a compromise were to be reached where 1st trimester is ok, 2nd trimester and on is not...that a better consensus could be met.  Those who are "life begins at conception" will not change but for the majority of people, it'd be an easier pill to swallow.

19 minutes ago, Outlaw said:

Yes, but why are they against it?  Polling shows people are far more in favor of allowing abortion only through trimester 1, that's 12 weeks.  

 

 

I think if a compromise were to be reached where 1st trimester is ok, 2nd trimester and on is not...that a better consensus could be met.  Those who are "life begins at conception" will not change but for the majority of people, it'd be an easier pill to swallow.

well yeah....even those who don't want roe v wade overturned have differing opinions on the detals...but they don't want it overturned.

and there will never, ever be such a compromise...people are dug in & not budging. 

 

Women aren't willing to compromise health.

1 hour ago, NOTW said:

I think the best pro-choice argument is to keep the government out of medical decisions between a mother and doctor and appeal to the libertarian aspect of conservatism.

I think attempts to ban abortion backfire and go about it the wrong route.  There are a lot of people personally against abortion and believe it is murder, but I just don't see it ever being banned. 

I think it would probably be more effective to focus on birth control and avoiding unwanted pregnancy in the first place like the big marketing push in the 90s to avoid getting and spreading HIV.  Promote education, birth control, adoption information and resources, etc.  Try to at least reduce the amount of unwanted pregnancies, and convince people morally that it's not a clump of cells but a life, while also having compassion for women that struggle with the decision.  But it won't ever fully go away and banning it will just create unhealthy and unsafe methods or people finding a way to get it elsewhere somehow.  

Correct. Resources and education is far more effective. Reduce the chances for abortion in the first place. The fight against Roe v. Wade is a matter of politics and power. It is not seeking a solution that actually works.

1 minute ago, toolg said:

Correct. Resources and education is far more effective. Reduce the chances for abortion in the first place. The fight against Roe v. Wade is a matter of politics and power. It is not seeking a solution that actually works.

exactly. how the hell do we still have a need for abortions on such a grand scale when its so east to prevent an unwanted pregnancy ? 

either way, try to stop the need for an abortion beyond medical reasons. 

1 hour ago, NOTW said:

I think the best pro-choice argument is to keep the government out of medical decisions between a mother and doctor and appeal to the libertarian aspect of conservatism.

I think attempts to ban abortion backfire and go about it the wrong route.  There are a lot of people personally against abortion and believe it is murder, but I just don't see it ever being banned. 

I think it would probably be more effective to focus on birth control and avoiding unwanted pregnancy in the first place like the big marketing push in the 90s to avoid getting and spreading HIV.  Promote education, birth control, adoption information and resources, etc.  Try to at least reduce the amount of unwanted pregnancies, and convince people morally that it's not a clump of cells but a life, while also having compassion for women that struggle with the decision.  But it won't ever fully go away and banning it will just create unhealthy and unsafe methods or people finding a way to get it elsewhere somehow.  

This is a far too intellectual and thoughtful view for the modern "conservative" movement to wrap their heads around. 

1 minute ago, Alpha_TATEr said:

exactly. how the hell do we still have a need for abortions on such a grand scale when its so east to prevent an unwanted pregnancy ? 

Newsflash: We don't. Abortion rates are already in decline. They have been for some time. Restrictions aren't necessary. LINK

16 minutes ago, Gannan said:

This is a far too intellectual and thoughtful view for the modern "conservative" movement to wrap their heads around. 

I appreciated Obama's answer in his 2008 campaign - and this was at a town hall at Saddleback church in front of a crowd of evangelicals.  He said instead of focusing on where we disagree, let's focus on where we can agree and work on reducing unwanted pregnancies.  People are very heated on this topic and it's kind of an all or nothing approach for some, but this really makes the most sense.  Analyze data and case studies and research to find out what would be most effective to reduce unwanted pregnancy.

Also Mayor Pete handled the topic really well on a Fox news town hall when he was running and I thought at least it was a solid argument (the keep govt out of medical decisions angle) and he acknowledged people's personal and religious views on a complicated matter.

6 minutes ago, NOTW said:

I appreciated Obama's answer in his 2008 campaign - and this was at a town hall at Saddleback church in front of a crowd of evangelicals.  He said instead of focusing on where we disagree, let's focus on where we can agree and work on reducing unwanted pregnancies.  People are very heated on this topic and it's kind of an all or nothing approach for some, but this really makes the most sense.  Analyze data and case studies and research to find out what would be most effective to reduce unwanted pregnancy.

Also Mayor Pete handled the topic really well on a Fox news town hall when he was running and I thought at least it was a solid argument (the keep govt out of medical decisions angle) and he acknowledged people's personal and religious views on a complicated matter.

I think the twitter mob on both sides is driving politics, and politicians to the extremes. They all want to out crazy each other. I asked my question about felonies for crossing state lines because that's where I see it going. They will want prison terms for women who get abortions, some of the moonbats like MTG, Bobert, and Gohmert will advocate for the death penalty for getting an abortion. 

I send my kids to a catholic school, so I guess I should not have been surprised when my kids said most of their friends wanted Trump to win to "protect the unborn". My wife explained it to my daughter using similar points that you made.  We can protect the unborn without removing choice. 

1 minute ago, EaglesRocker97 said:

If he was alive today, imagine what his take on the world would have been, especially the election of Donald Trump?

He was a one of a kind comedian.

32 minutes ago, toolg said:

Newsflash: We don't. Abortion rates are already in decline. They have been for some time. Restrictions aren't necessary. LINK

who said anything about more restrictions ? 

3 minutes ago, pallidrone said:

If he was alive today, imagine what his take on the world would have been, especially the election of Donald Trump?

He was a one of a kind comedian.

 

He did things his way. I'd imagine he would've been going after both sides. He would've been openly disgusted with Trump but also disdainful of cancel culture/wokeness. His personality always resonated with me, but we need his wisdom now more than ever. RIP

13 minutes ago, Alpha_TATEr said:

who said anything about more restrictions ? 

Mississippi did. That's why we are having this discussion in the SCOTUS thread the first place.

2 minutes ago, toolg said:

Mississippi did. That's why we are having this discussion in the SCOTUS thread the first place.

i literally bolded this part of your post that i quoted. 

Resources and education is far more effective. Reduce the chances for abortion in the first place. 

2 minutes ago, Alpha_TATEr said:

i literally bolded this part of your post that i quoted. 

Resources and education is far more effective. Reduce the chances for abortion in the first place. 

You did. Who's going to tell Mississippi?

Just now, toolg said:

You did. Who's going to tell Mississippi?

it would have to be someone who speaks their language. boomhauer maybe ? 

1 hour ago, EaglesRocker97 said:

 

Except of course all the people who adopt babies, the adoption organizations including non-profits that help connect people to adoption needs, the foster and adoption care systems both public and private, the orphanages, the ministries like a missionary friend of mine worked with during his time in Africa that rescued babies who were born and then left out in the woods to die and they would rescue them and care for them in orphanages until they placed them for adoption, the long waiting list for adopting babies to the degree that people adopt babies from other countries, the private charities and donations toward food, supplies, clothing, healthcare...

but yeah other than all that, totally pro life people don't care at all about children after they're born, 100% all of them with no exceptions.  Great point.

1 hour ago, NOTW said:

 

Except of course all the people who adopt babies, the adoption organizations including non-profits that help connect people to adoption needs, the foster and adoption care systems both public and private, the orphanages, the ministries like a missionary friend of mine worked with during his time in Africa that rescued babies who were born and then left out in the woods to die and they would rescue them and care for them in orphanages until they placed them for adoption, the long waiting list for adopting babies to the degree that people adopt babies from other countries, the private charities and donations toward food, supplies, clothing, healthcare...

but yeah other than all that, totally pro life people don't care at all about children after they're born, 100% all of them with no exceptions.  Great point.

 

Seems like whataboutism to me. Most kids put up for adoption never find a settled home, so I'm not sure what point you're trying to make. Most pro-life conservatives have no interest in adopting someone else's child providing for them after they are born, but they sure show a keen interest in using the power of the state to force indigent mothers to bring unwanted pregnancies to term. Carlin is 100% right here. These people are not pro-life. They're pro-birth.

I think people blow abortion out of proportion! 😃

1 hour ago, EaglesRocker97 said:

 

Seems like whataboutism to me. Most kids put up for adoption never find a settled home, so I'm not sure what point you're trying to make. Most pro-life conservatives have no interest in adopting someone else's child providing for them after they are born, but they sure show a keen interest in using the power of the state to force indigent mothers to bring unwanted pregnancies to term. Carlin is 100% right here. These people are not pro-life. They're pro-birth.

Well, you just ignored literally everything I said, made another generalization and stuck to a tired cliche in your last sentence.  It's not whataboutism to counter the quote with facts that many pro-life people do care about babies after birth.  The notion is absurd.

Yes, there are conservatives who are against increased welfare from the government. That is a separate issue from believing that abortion is murder.  By this logic, if you're against stealing you should buy the items for the robber to take responsibility.

You can be against abortion because it's murder and think it is the responsibility of the people who had unprotected sex and got pregnant, not the responsibility of others.  But again, lots of people adopt, there are charities, etc.  You and others just like parroting that talking point.

"An ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure" - Benjamin Franklin

I concur.

38 minutes ago, NOTW said:

Well, you just ignored literally everything I said, made another generalization and stuck to a tired cliche in your last sentence.  It's not whataboutism to counter the quote with facts that many pro-life people do care about babies after birth.  The notion is absurd.

Yes, there are conservatives who are against increased welfare from the government. That is a separate issue from believing that abortion is murder.  By this logic, if you're against stealing you should buy the items for the robber to take responsibility.

You can be against abortion because it's murder and think it is the responsibility of the people who had unprotected sex and got pregnant, not the responsibility of others.  But again, lots of people adopt, there are charities, etc.  You and others just like parroting that talking point.

This is basic logic: If you are anti-abortion and also opposed to any and all social services that could ensure unwanted pregnancies don't lead to more children living in poverty and and abusive situations, then you really don't give a **** about these kids. You just care about imposing your religious doctrine on other people. It really is that simple.

 

Also, you do realize that it's not just people having unprotected sex who get pregnant, right? No birth control method is 100%

The really funny thing to me is that all these "conservatives" who romanticize the past don't realize that abortion was a fairly common and routine practice in the Early Republic.

10 minutes ago, PoconoDon said:

"An ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure" - Benjamin Franklin

I concur.

Cue the AC Green abstinence video

7 minutes ago, EaglesRocker97 said:

The really funny thing to me is that all these "conservatives" who romanticize the past don't realize that abortion was a fairly common and routine practice in the Early Republic.

This is another terrible argument.  People today that are against abortion, what does that have to do with abortion happening in the Early Republic? There is not some "gotcha" here.