May 18, 20223 yr 3 hours ago, EaglesRocker97 said: As I said before, abortion was a widely accepted and fairly common practice in the Early Republic. Even when Roe was decided, a majority of Republicans supported abortion rights. This anti-abortion movement is relatively new in both its popularity and its extremity. Pretty sure back in the 70's no one suspected an individual might have 5 of them. Fairly sure no one thought the government would be paying for them. Very likely no one concidered what it would do to the black population. Except Sanger. Definitely part of the program.
May 19, 20223 yr Four years ago, I took an Ancestry.com DNA test. A close match came up showing I had an unknown first cousin which was odd because my parents didn't have any siblings that had kids. Winds up he's my nephew. His mother decided to put him up for adoption instead of having an abortion. Lives relatively near us in Fla. to boot. He fit seamlessly into the family and we're all the better for it. Needless to say, all of us, especially him, are happy his mother didn't have an abortion.
May 19, 20223 yr The Washington Post ladies and gentleman. They'll be here all week. Don't forget to tip your server.
May 19, 20223 yr 10 hours ago, Procus said: This is probably why women usually get ultrasounds and not MRIs during pregnancy.
May 19, 20223 yr 17 hours ago, Ipiggles said: Well I cannot speak for everyone, but I dont care how much sex they have, but the responsible way to not get pregnant is to use one of the myriad of birth controls avail today to both sexes, and not wait till you spawn a baby in womb and then decide to terminate it's life. But hey thats just me. Uh-huh. Eliminating abortion is hands down 100% for sure an inhibitor of casual sex. Even within a marriage it will 100% for sure cause less sex in couples who do not want a baby. I really think you're on the wrong side buddy.
May 19, 20223 yr Author 10 minutes ago, dawkins4prez said: Uh-huh. Eliminating abortion is hands down 100% for sure an inhibitor of casual sex. Even within a marriage it will 100% for sure cause less sex in couples who do not want a baby. I really think you're on the wrong side buddy. The vast majority of these pro-lifers are definitely thinking "People have too much sex these days!" Really, I just wish they'd start campaigning on that kind of rhetoric. That would really make the debate loud and clear.
May 20, 20223 yr 16 hours ago, dawkins4prez said: Uh-huh. Eliminating abortion is hands down 100% for sure an inhibitor of casual sex. Even within a marriage it will 100% for sure cause less sex in couples who do not want a baby. I really think you're on the wrong side buddy. Easy buddy. Birth control is not under consideration in this latest SC opinion.
May 20, 20223 yr 4 hours ago, Procus said: Easy buddy. Birth control is not under consideration in this latest SC opinion. First of all, many of these red states DO want to limit birth control also. And 2nd, about half of women who have an abortion were using some type of birth control. So yes, absolutely you are in favor of much less sex.
May 20, 20223 yr https://www.huffpost.com/entry/republican-dc-electricity-power-fetuses_n_6286983fe4b0933e7362cab0 ......so we're using fetuses to generate electricity now....
May 20, 20223 yr 22 hours ago, dawkins4prez said: Uh-huh. Eliminating abortion is hands down 100% for sure an inhibitor of casual sex. Even within a marriage it will 100% for sure cause less sex in couples who do not want a baby. I really think you're on the wrong side buddy. Dont care - with all the available forms of 99% or greater affective types of birth control availible to EVERYONE today - using abortion as a means of birth control is completely irresponsible. (not to mention reprehensible) So whatever excuses you or anyone else may wish to use to justify the barbaric practice of abortion outside of Rape/medical emergencies, is just that, an excuse for lazy and irresponsible pathetic excuses for humans, whose parents should have used birth control so they were not spawned only to grow up to be such poor examples of the human species. 8 minutes ago, Tweek said: https://www.huffpost.com/entry/republican-dc-electricity-power-fetuses_n_6286983fe4b0933e7362cab0 ......so we're using fetuses to generate electricity now.... The Matrix was a prophecy
May 20, 20223 yr Author 7 hours ago, Procus said: Easy buddy. Birth control is not under consideration in this latest SC opinion. The right to birth control rests on the exact same legal rationale as the right to an abortion. It is absolutely on the table, and you are seeing states already considering limiting access.
May 20, 20223 yr I mean Ted Cruz once argued that ****ing should be illegal, so let's not act like this could never happen... https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2016/04/ted-cruz-texas-sex-toy-ban Quote "there is no substantive-due-process right to stimulate one’s genitals for non-medical purposes unrelated to procreation or outside of an interpersonal relationship.”
May 20, 20223 yr 44 minutes ago, EaglesRocker97 said: The right to birth control rests on the exact same legal rationale as the right to an abortion. It is absolutely on the table, and you are seeing states already considering limiting access. I am against abortion as a means of birth control, as a result of my personal opinions, I would be willing for a social program whereby the government pays for birth control. (Being socially somewhat liberal/ and fiscally conservative, this sometimes is a conflict, and I draw lines of distinction using what perspectives I have. )
May 20, 20223 yr On 5/18/2022 at 2:47 PM, EaglesRocker97 said: As I said before, abortion was a widely accepted and fairly common practice in the Early Republic. Even when Roe was decided, a majority of Republicans supported abortion rights. This anti-abortion movement is relatively new in both its popularity and its extremity. On 5/18/2022 at 3:02 PM, toolg said: Common knowledge throughout history about when life began in the womb was called "quickening" - When the mother first felt movement from the fetus, somewhere around/after 20 weeks gestation. Any pregnancy that ended prior to quickening was completely legal, no big deal, stuff happens. All kinds of remedies were prescribed to end pregnancy before quickening. Doctors did not discover conception until the late 1800s, and even then it took decades for the concept to catch on. So with abortion, you want to use standards from centuries ago instead of modern science and advancements? Interesting approach. Would you like to adopt all medical practices from the 1800s as well?
May 20, 20223 yr Just now, NOTW said: So with abortion, you want to use standards from centuries ago instead of modern science and advancements? Interesting approach. Would you like to adopt all medical practices from the 1800s as well? No. I was referring laws concerning abortion, not the medical procedure.
May 20, 20223 yr 3 minutes ago, toolg said: No. I was referring laws concerning abortion, not the medical procedure. You referenced when life begins, detecting movement and discovering conception. You didn't only discuss legality. Plus, if you're going to base logic on what the laws were like in the 1800s, try applying that to other areas and see how that works out.
May 20, 20223 yr Just now, NOTW said: You referenced when life begins, detecting movement and discovering conception. You didn't only discuss legality. Plus, if you're going to base logic on what the laws were like in the 1800s, try applying that to other areas and see how that works out. Ok then. Let's start with the 2nd Amendment.
May 20, 20223 yr 12 minutes ago, toolg said: Ok then. Let's start with the 2nd Amendment. Then do the 19th! I mean, you think that is good logic?
May 20, 20223 yr 1 minute ago, NOTW said: Then do the 19th! I mean, you think that is good logic? The 19th Amendment was ratified in the 20th century. So where do you want to draw the line? You think women's anatomy has changed all that much since 1800s, so we need to re-legislate this? I'm having a hard time trying to follow your logic.
May 20, 20223 yr 3 hours ago, Ipiggles said: Dont care - with all the available forms of 99% or greater affective types of birth control availible to EVERYONE today - using abortion as a means of birth control is completely irresponsible. (not to mention reprehensible) So whatever excuses you or anyone else may wish to use to justify the barbaric practice of abortion outside of Rape/medical emergencies, is just that, an excuse for lazy and irresponsible pathetic excuses for humans, whose parents should have used birth control so they were not spawned only to grow up to be such poor examples of the human species. The Matrix was a prophecy I agree. Abortion is not contraception. In this day and age people should use any and all protection that is available. Abortion should only be used for dire emergencies - health reasons, rape, incest... For this reason, who gets to decide when abortion is proper and allowable? Does it have to be codified in law? My stance is the mother has every right to privacy to make health decisions for herself and her family. Nobody from the law needs to be in the way.
May 20, 20223 yr Author 35 minutes ago, NOTW said: You referenced when life begins, detecting movement and discovering conception. You didn't only discuss legality. Plus, if you're going to base logic on what the laws were like in the 1800s, try applying that to other areas and see how that works out. My point was about society's view of abortion as acceptable and how we have regressed in that regard.
May 20, 20223 yr 51 minutes ago, toolg said: The 19th Amendment was ratified in the 20th century. So where do you want to draw the line? You think women's anatomy has changed all that much since 1800s, so we need to re-legislate this? I'm having a hard time trying to follow your logic. Just pointing out that your logic on abortion is based on the 1800s, whereas you probably don't apply that to other areas like civil rights, gender, or other issues. If you want to look at the evolution of views and laws around abortion and include the past but also take recent discoveries as well that's a more comprehensive approach, that would make sense. You brought up the 2nd amendment which is funny because people argue the 2nd amendment is outdated and written a long time ago when things were so different...then you're referencing abortion laws older than the 2nd amendment.
Create an account or sign in to comment