Concerning the abortion issue !

[beagle9]

It should be that if a rape or incest case were to take place, then aborting a baby would not be nessesary, because no baby should have time to form when reported by the victim immediately after the act takes place against them.

The emergency room would then offer the victim the "morning after pill" as a way to ensure there is no pregnancy from such an evil act.

Simple stuff really.

If a baby forms in the womb, then the baby becomes a protected life who is of course with the same rights to live (as is granted by God, and his or her fellow human beings), just as any human life has that same right to live, therefore we all should be protecting a fellow human beings life in the womb, just as it is outside the womb under these heavens and stars in which we all live and thrive together in.

It should be that if a rape or incest case were to take place, then aborting a baby would not be nessesary, because no baby should have time to form when reported by the victim immediately after the act takes place against them.

The emergency room would then offer the victim the "morning after pill" as a way to ensure there is no pregnancy from such an evil act.

What happens when the victim is raped by a family member or other authority figure who prevents a timely trip to the emergency room? Is she required to give birth to her assailant's child?

Well in that case, it means that the family member may be using fear as a weapon against her in order to get her to conceal the crime. If the victim has been put into such a situation, and later breaks free of the bondage (except now with a baby in her womb), then because that baby is a human being No she should not be allowed to abort a human being nor should she want to at this point.

It's not the childs fault for what took place, and if the child is developing as a healthy baby or even with complications, then she should have the proper support she needs in order to carry the baby to term.

Afterwards she can make the choice either to keep the baby in which is part her also or to put the baby immediately up for adoption. Her choice, but to have the human life terminated is not, and should not be her choice, because it is a human being/life.

The relative of course is then imprisoned for everything that resulted from such a hurendous act of betrayal and evilness.

Afterwards she can make the choice either to keep the baby in which is part her also or to put the baby immediately up for adoption. Her choice, but to have the human life terminated is not, and should not be her choice, because it is a human being/life.

When do you believe "life" begins in the human reproductive cycle?

https://www.researchgate.net/figure...W-Embryology-Human-Development_fig2_310573511

With my limited knowledge I'm not sure, however we all know that it's not a life yet (even though a potential for the fertilization of an egg), if it winds up at the bottom of a rubber/profilactic after sex, where as it can't then fertilize the egg if weren't allowed to enter that area.

Once the egg is fertilized though, and the process begins, shouldn't their still have to be a valid reason in order to abort the process ?? Hmmm, now what those reasons should be, uhh is really according to what the good Lord up above guides us in our knowledge to then come to an agreement upon or to learn, and to understand in his ways concerning such things, and to agree on what suits all that are involved in a moral and righteous way.

With my limited knowledge I'm not sure, however we all know that it's not a life yet (even though a potential for the fertilization of an egg), if it winds up at the bottom of a rubber/profilactic after sex, where as it can't then fertilize the egg if weren't allowed to enter that area.

I have no qualifications to decide when "life" begins, but I see the benefit in fetal heartbeat legislation that attempts to make that definition consistent with how we currently legally define "death."

My biggest concern with 6-8 week statutes is how many women will then be forced to obtain their abortions on the black market as in the days before Roe v Wade became established law?

A woman seeking to end a child's life on the black market is no different than a woman who would throw her child in a dumpster. It's criminal, and she should be prosecuted for the acts.

 

[beagle9]

60 million Americans since Roe b. Wade, and you're worried about people who died 400 years ago. Trust me, the Indians killed as many settlers as were killed. If you don't believe that, just read about Custer's last stand. No Indian would've been killed if their tribe hadn't killed their country's guests first.

The dominate civilization will always prevail. We have been fighting since the beginning.

We are human beings. My kind of human being does not kill human beings at all. Women who have their unborn human beings have them mercilessly killed. Nobody stops them. Now we have to listen to them on political shows barking out inanities to people who do not kill human beings at all. I reserve the right to call killers of unborn human beings killers. It's the truth, and it's nothing but the truth. If they want to get mad and hurl feces or get mad and cry themselves to sleep for killing their unborn, I am not in charge of the things that they do, I am only in charge of me. And inside me is seeing the wrongful killing of human life, and the tally right now is 60 million unborn human beings dead on account of killer whale moms.

I didn't know you felt that way about God who flooded the planet killing unborn children.

God doesn't kill, he just shuffles souls around when he needs to. Fear not a man whom can take your life for the first death upon this earth, but fear he who has the keys to heaven and hell, and can take your life for the second death.

You think you are being cute with your little attacks, but you are only entertaining yourself. No one is as dumb as you hope for them to be. Now grow up already.

Shouldn't you be shaking an icon as you scare me?

Go find somewhere else to play, grown people are discussing things here.

 

[beagle9]

It should be that if a rape or incest case were to take place, then aborting a baby would not be nessesary, because no baby should have time to form when reported by the victim immediately after the act takes place against them.

The emergency room would then offer the victim the "morning after pill" as a way to ensure there is no pregnancy from such an evil act.

Simple stuff really.

If a baby forms in the womb, then the baby becomes a protected life who is of course with the same rights to live (as is granted by God, and his or her fellow human beings), just as any human life has that same right to live, therefore we all should be protecting a fellow human beings life in the womb, just as it is outside the womb under these heavens and stars in which we all live and thrive together in.

You live in a nation that killed people to take their land yet you worry about the unborn..

60 million Americans since Roe b. Wade, and you're worried about people who died 400 years ago. Trust me, the Indians killed as many settlers as were killed. If you don't believe that, just read about Custer's last stand. No Indian would've been killed if their tribe hadn't killed their country's guests first.

Might want to do some research on Custer's last stand. The way you describe it is completely wrong.

Were Custer and all but one of his men killed or not?

Custer was killed because he was an idiot general, and Sitting Bull got the Sioux nations to unite for that battle, because they were being pushed off of their land. Like I said, read up on it, because your reasons for Custer getting killed are wrong. I'm from Montana, and have actually been to Little Big Horn battlefield several times, because western history was fascinating to me when I was a teen.

The twisted liberalized version of history was possibly your specialty after gathering historical information maybe ??

 

[georgephillip]

What happens when the victim is raped by a family member or other authority figure who prevents a timely trip to the emergency room? Is she required to give birth to her assailant's child?

Well in that case, it means that the family member may be using fear as a weapon against her in order to get her to conceal the crime. If the victim has been put into such a situation, and later breaks free of the bondage (except now with a baby in her womb), then because that baby is a human being No she should not be allowed to abort a human being nor should she want to at this point.

It's not the childs fault for what took place, and if the child is developing as a healthy baby or even with complications, then she should have the proper support she needs in order to carry the baby to term.

Afterwards she can make the choice either to keep the baby in which is part her also or to put the baby immediately up for adoption. Her choice, but to have the human life terminated is not, and should not be her choice, because it is a human being/life.

The relative of course is then imprisoned for everything that resulted from such a hurendous act of betrayal and evilness.

Afterwards she can make the choice either to keep the baby in which is part her also or to put the baby immediately up for adoption. Her choice, but to have the human life terminated is not, and should not be her choice, because it is a human being/life.

When do you believe "life" begins in the human reproductive cycle?

https://www.researchgate.net/figure...W-Embryology-Human-Development_fig2_310573511

With my limited knowledge I'm not sure, however we all know that it's not a life yet (even though a potential for the fertilization of an egg), if it winds up at the bottom of a rubber/profilactic after sex, where as it can't then fertilize the egg if weren't allowed to enter that area.

Once the egg is fertilized though, and the process begins, shouldn't their still have to be a valid reason in order to abort the process ?? Hmmm, now what those reasons should be, uhh is really according to what the good Lord up above guides us in our knowledge to then come to an agreement upon or to learn, and to understand in his ways concerning such things, and to agree on what suits all that are involved in a moral and righteous way.

With my limited knowledge I'm not sure, however we all know that it's not a life yet (even though a potential for the fertilization of an egg), if it winds up at the bottom of a rubber/profilactic after sex, where as it can't then fertilize the egg if weren't allowed to enter that area.

I have no qualifications to decide when "life" begins, but I see the benefit in fetal heartbeat legislation that attempts to make that definition consistent with how we currently legally define "death."

My biggest concern with 6-8 week statutes is how many women will then be forced to obtain their abortions on the black market as in the days before Roe v Wade became established law?

A woman seeking to end a child's life on the black market is no different than a woman who would throw her child in a dumpster. It's criminal, and she should be prosecuted for the acts.

woman seeking to end a child's life on the black market is no different than a woman who would throw her child in a dumpster. It's criminal, and she should be prosecuted for the acts.

If Roe v Wade is overturned, would that increase or decrease the total number of abortions performed nationwide? I suspect the threat of prosecution won't deter many women from ending an unwanted pregnancy.

 

[beautress]

It should be that if a rape or incest case were to take place, then aborting a baby would not be nessesary, because no baby should have time to form when reported by the victim immediately after the act takes place against them.

The emergency room would then offer the victim the "morning after pill" as a way to ensure there is no pregnancy from such an evil act.

Simple stuff really.

If a baby forms in the womb, then the baby becomes a protected life who is of course with the same rights to live (as is granted by God, and his or her fellow human beings), just as any human life has that same right to live, therefore we all should be protecting a fellow human beings life in the womb, just as it is outside the womb under these heavens and stars in which we all live and thrive together in.

You live in a nation that killed people to take their land yet you worry about the unborn..

60 million Americans since Roe b. Wade, and you're worried about people who died 400 years ago. Trust me, the Indians killed as many settlers as were killed. If you don't believe that, just read about Custer's last stand. No Indian would've been killed if their tribe hadn't killed their country's guests first.

And who invited the guest?
I don't worry about anyone dying because I have control over anything in my house and that is it, I do not control the world..

I was only discussing history sir, nothing more. And I think you knew that as well.

 

[beautress]

It should be that if a rape or incest case were to take place, then aborting a baby would not be nessesary, because no baby should have time to form when reported by the victim immediately after the act takes place against them.

The emergency room would then offer the victim the "morning after pill" as a way to ensure there is no pregnancy from such an evil act.

Simple stuff really.

If a baby forms in the womb, then the baby becomes a protected life who is of course with the same rights to live (as is granted by God, and his or her fellow human beings), just as any human life has that same right to live, therefore we all should be protecting a fellow human beings life in the womb, just as it is outside the womb under these heavens and stars in which we all live and thrive together in.

You live in a nation that killed people to take their land yet you worry about the unborn..

Talk about apples and oranges

I will, it's called hypocrisy..And you people are pro-war so don't tell me how you want to be pro-life.

So being the anti-war saint that you are, you took it easy while the rest of this nation decided to support ending the practice of taking jets by force, turning them onto American landmarks and the Pentagon? Hope you enjoyed sitting on your hands while the rest of us supported our state's troops with all our might and abilities. La ti da.

 

[beautress]

It should be that if a rape or incest case were to take place, then aborting a baby would not be nessesary, because no baby should have time to form when reported by the victim immediately after the act takes place against them.

The emergency room would then offer the victim the "morning after pill" as a way to ensure there is no pregnancy from such an evil act.

Simple stuff really.

If a baby forms in the womb, then the baby becomes a protected life who is of course with the same rights to live (as is granted by God, and his or her fellow human beings), just as any human life has that same right to live, therefore we all should be protecting a fellow human beings life in the womb, just as it is outside the womb under these heavens and stars in which we all live and thrive together in.

You live in a nation that killed people to take their land yet you worry about the unborn..

Talk about apples and oranges

I will, it's called hypocrisy..And you people are pro-war so don't tell me how you want to be pro-life.

What hypocrisy is sir, is to criticize those who ensured no evil regime would ever again support anti-American fighters to ruin this nation. And right here and now you are flogging anybody who supported our troops. Keep it up, and you'll be given a free ticket out of this nation and I hope you leave and never come back to be enjoying the fruit of comfort many of our soldiers who died seeing to it this would never happen to us again, and many are still in wheelchairs and getting physical therapy from their heinous wounds from closing down Al-Qaeda wherever our people found the sons of bitches.

 

[beagle9]

Well in that case, it means that the family member may be using fear as a weapon against her in order to get her to conceal the crime. If the victim has been put into such a situation, and later breaks free of the bondage (except now with a baby in her womb), then because that baby is a human being No she should not be allowed to abort a human being nor should she want to at this point.

It's not the childs fault for what took place, and if the child is developing as a healthy baby or even with complications, then she should have the proper support she needs in order to carry the baby to term.

Afterwards she can make the choice either to keep the baby in which is part her also or to put the baby immediately up for adoption. Her choice, but to have the human life terminated is not, and should not be her choice, because it is a human being/life.

The relative of course is then imprisoned for everything that resulted from such a hurendous act of betrayal and evilness.

Afterwards she can make the choice either to keep the baby in which is part her also or to put the baby immediately up for adoption. Her choice, but to have the human life terminated is not, and should not be her choice, because it is a human being/life.

When do you believe "life" begins in the human reproductive cycle?

https://www.researchgate.net/figure...W-Embryology-Human-Development_fig2_310573511

With my limited knowledge I'm not sure, however we all know that it's not a life yet (even though a potential for the fertilization of an egg), if it winds up at the bottom of a rubber/profilactic after sex, where as it can't then fertilize the egg if weren't allowed to enter that area.

Once the egg is fertilized though, and the process begins, shouldn't their still have to be a valid reason in order to abort the process ?? Hmmm, now what those reasons should be, uhh is really according to what the good Lord up above guides us in our knowledge to then come to an agreement upon or to learn, and to understand in his ways concerning such things, and to agree on what suits all that are involved in a moral and righteous way.

With my limited knowledge I'm not sure, however we all know that it's not a life yet (even though a potential for the fertilization of an egg), if it winds up at the bottom of a rubber/profilactic after sex, where as it can't then fertilize the egg if weren't allowed to enter that area.

I have no qualifications to decide when "life" begins, but I see the benefit in fetal heartbeat legislation that attempts to make that definition consistent with how we currently legally define "death."

My biggest concern with 6-8 week statutes is how many women will then be forced to obtain their abortions on the black market as in the days before Roe v Wade became established law?

A woman seeking to end a child's life on the black market is no different than a woman who would throw her child in a dumpster. It's criminal, and she should be prosecuted for the acts.

woman seeking to end a child's life on the black market is no different than a woman who would throw her child in a dumpster. It's criminal, and she should be prosecuted for the acts.

If Roe v Wade is overturned, would that increase or decrease the total number of abortions performed nationwide? I suspect the threat of prosecution won't deter many women from ending an unwanted pregnancy.

Well just as it is with women leaving children in locked cars with the windows up, the same type of prosecution should be administered unto those seeking an abortion unlawfully.

Yes, it is always hard to except change whether it be one way or another, but after prosections are stepped up in showing the seriousness of the law, you would see a sharp decline in women taking the law lightly, and seeking out ways to violate the law. What we have is several generation's now, who have been taught not to be responsible citizens in life, and that life has no real meaning anymore. What a disaster.

 

[georgephillip]

When do you believe "life" begins in the human reproductive cycle?

https://www.researchgate.net/figure...W-Embryology-Human-Development_fig2_310573511

With my limited knowledge I'm not sure, however we all know that it's not a life yet (even though a potential for the fertilization of an egg), if it winds up at the bottom of a rubber/profilactic after sex, where as it can't then fertilize the egg if weren't allowed to enter that area.

Once the egg is fertilized though, and the process begins, shouldn't their still have to be a valid reason in order to abort the process ?? Hmmm, now what those reasons should be, uhh is really according to what the good Lord up above guides us in our knowledge to then come to an agreement upon or to learn, and to understand in his ways concerning such things, and to agree on what suits all that are involved in a moral and righteous way.

With my limited knowledge I'm not sure, however we all know that it's not a life yet (even though a potential for the fertilization of an egg), if it winds up at the bottom of a rubber/profilactic after sex, where as it can't then fertilize the egg if weren't allowed to enter that area.

I have no qualifications to decide when "life" begins, but I see the benefit in fetal heartbeat legislation that attempts to make that definition consistent with how we currently legally define "death."

My biggest concern with 6-8 week statutes is how many women will then be forced to obtain their abortions on the black market as in the days before Roe v Wade became established law?

A woman seeking to end a child's life on the black market is no different than a woman who would throw her child in a dumpster. It's criminal, and she should be prosecuted for the acts.

woman seeking to end a child's life on the black market is no different than a woman who would throw her child in a dumpster. It's criminal, and she should be prosecuted for the acts.

If Roe v Wade is overturned, would that increase or decrease the total number of abortions performed nationwide? I suspect the threat of prosecution won't deter many women from ending an unwanted pregnancy.

Well just as it is with women leaving children in locked cars with the windows up, the same type of prosecution should be administered unto those seeking an abortion unlawfully.

Yes, it is always hard to except change whether it be one way or another, but after prosections are stepped up in showing the seriousness of the law, you would see a sharp decline in women taking the law lightly, and seeking out ways to violate the law. What we have is several generation's now, who have been taught not to be responsible citizens in life, and that life has no real meaning anymore. What a disaster.

Yes, it is always hard to except change whether it be one way or another, but after prosections are stepped up in showing the seriousness of the law, you would see a sharp decline in women taking the law lightly, and seeking out ways to violate the law

Nation wide, there seems little support for a repeal of Woe v Wade:

NBC News Exit Poll: Two-thirds of voters favor keeping Roe v. Wade as is

If a majority of US voters refuse to roll back the abortion clock to pre-1973, how far are conservatives willing to go inflict their version of morality on those who disagree?

 

[PredFan]

Don't worry Liberals, we aren't coming after your abortions. We just want common sense abortion control.

 

[PredFan]

With my limited knowledge I'm not sure, however we all know that it's not a life yet (even though a potential for the fertilization of an egg), if it winds up at the bottom of a rubber/profilactic after sex, where as it can't then fertilize the egg if weren't allowed to enter that area.

Once the egg is fertilized though, and the process begins, shouldn't their still have to be a valid reason in order to abort the process ?? Hmmm, now what those reasons should be, uhh is really according to what the good Lord up above guides us in our knowledge to then come to an agreement upon or to learn, and to understand in his ways concerning such things, and to agree on what suits all that are involved in a moral and righteous way.

With my limited knowledge I'm not sure, however we all know that it's not a life yet (even though a potential for the fertilization of an egg), if it winds up at the bottom of a rubber/profilactic after sex, where as it can't then fertilize the egg if weren't allowed to enter that area.

I have no qualifications to decide when "life" begins, but I see the benefit in fetal heartbeat legislation that attempts to make that definition consistent with how we currently legally define "death."

My biggest concern with 6-8 week statutes is how many women will then be forced to obtain their abortions on the black market as in the days before Roe v Wade became established law?

A woman seeking to end a child's life on the black market is no different than a woman who would throw her child in a dumpster. It's criminal, and she should be prosecuted for the acts.

woman seeking to end a child's life on the black market is no different than a woman who would throw her child in a dumpster. It's criminal, and she should be prosecuted for the acts.

If Roe v Wade is overturned, would that increase or decrease the total number of abortions performed nationwide? I suspect the threat of prosecution won't deter many women from ending an unwanted pregnancy.

Well just as it is with women leaving children in locked cars with the windows up, the same type of prosecution should be administered unto those seeking an abortion unlawfully.

Yes, it is always hard to except change whether it be one way or another, but after prosections are stepped up in showing the seriousness of the law, you would see a sharp decline in women taking the law lightly, and seeking out ways to violate the law. What we have is several generation's now, who have been taught not to be responsible citizens in life, and that life has no real meaning anymore. What a disaster.

Yes, it is always hard to except change whether it be one way or another, but after prosections are stepped up in showing the seriousness of the law, you would see a sharp decline in women taking the law lightly, and seeking out ways to violate the law

Nation wide, there seems little support for a repeal of Woe v Wade:

NBC News Exit Poll: Two-thirds of voters favor keeping Roe v. Wade as is

If a majority of US voters refuse to roll back the abortion clock to pre-1973, how far are conservatives willing to go inflict their version of morality on those who disagree?

Lol, NBC.

And Trump has no path to victory.

 

[georgephillip]

I have no qualifications to decide when "life" begins, but I see the benefit in fetal heartbeat legislation that attempts to make that definition consistent with how we currently legally define "death."

My biggest concern with 6-8 week statutes is how many women will then be forced to obtain their abortions on the black market as in the days before Roe v Wade became established law?

A woman seeking to end a child's life on the black market is no different than a woman who would throw her child in a dumpster. It's criminal, and she should be prosecuted for the acts.

woman seeking to end a child's life on the black market is no different than a woman who would throw her child in a dumpster. It's criminal, and she should be prosecuted for the acts.

If Roe v Wade is overturned, would that increase or decrease the total number of abortions performed nationwide? I suspect the threat of prosecution won't deter many women from ending an unwanted pregnancy.

Well just as it is with women leaving children in locked cars with the windows up, the same type of prosecution should be administered unto those seeking an abortion unlawfully.

Yes, it is always hard to except change whether it be one way or another, but after prosections are stepped up in showing the seriousness of the law, you would see a sharp decline in women taking the law lightly, and seeking out ways to violate the law. What we have is several generation's now, who have been taught not to be responsible citizens in life, and that life has no real meaning anymore. What a disaster.

Yes, it is always hard to except change whether it be one way or another, but after prosections are stepped up in showing the seriousness of the law, you would see a sharp decline in women taking the law lightly, and seeking out ways to violate the law

Nation wide, there seems little support for a repeal of Woe v Wade:

NBC News Exit Poll: Two-thirds of voters favor keeping Roe v. Wade as is

If a majority of US voters refuse to roll back the abortion clock to pre-1973, how far are conservatives willing to go inflict their version of morality on those who disagree?

Lol, NBC.

And Trump has no path to victory.

Lol, NBC.

And Trump has no path to victory.

Why don't you find a poll showing a majority of Americans support the repeal of Roe v Wade (Maybe Trump can help)

Trump in 1999: ‘I am Very Pro-Choice’

 

[flack]

With my limited knowledge I'm not sure, however we all know that it's not a life yet (even though a potential for the fertilization of an egg), if it winds up at the bottom of a rubber/profilactic after sex, where as it can't then fertilize the egg if weren't allowed to enter that area.

Once the egg is fertilized though, and the process begins, shouldn't their still have to be a valid reason in order to abort the process ?? Hmmm, now what those reasons should be, uhh is really according to what the good Lord up above guides us in our knowledge to then come to an agreement upon or to learn, and to understand in his ways concerning such things, and to agree on what suits all that are involved in a moral and righteous way.

With my limited knowledge I'm not sure, however we all know that it's not a life yet (even though a potential for the fertilization of an egg), if it winds up at the bottom of a rubber/profilactic after sex, where as it can't then fertilize the egg if weren't allowed to enter that area.

I have no qualifications to decide when "life" begins, but I see the benefit in fetal heartbeat legislation that attempts to make that definition consistent with how we currently legally define "death."

My biggest concern with 6-8 week statutes is how many women will then be forced to obtain their abortions on the black market as in the days before Roe v Wade became established law?

A woman seeking to end a child's life on the black market is no different than a woman who would throw her child in a dumpster. It's criminal, and she should be prosecuted for the acts.

woman seeking to end a child's life on the black market is no different than a woman who would throw her child in a dumpster. It's criminal, and she should be prosecuted for the acts.

If Roe v Wade is overturned, would that increase or decrease the total number of abortions performed nationwide? I suspect the threat of prosecution won't deter many women from ending an unwanted pregnancy.

Well just as it is with women leaving children in locked cars with the windows up, the same type of prosecution should be administered unto those seeking an abortion unlawfully.

Yes, it is always hard to except change whether it be one way or another, but after prosections are stepped up in showing the seriousness of the law, you would see a sharp decline in women taking the law lightly, and seeking out ways to violate the law. What we have is several generation's now, who have been taught not to be responsible citizens in life, and that life has no real meaning anymore. What a disaster.

Yes, it is always hard to except change whether it be one way or another, but after prosections are stepped up in showing the seriousness of the law, you would see a sharp decline in women taking the law lightly, and seeking out ways to violate the law

Nation wide, there seems little support for a repeal of Woe v Wade:

NBC News Exit Poll: Two-thirds of voters favor keeping Roe v. Wade as is

If a majority of US voters refuse to roll back the abortion clock to pre-1973, how far are conservatives willing to go inflict their version of morality on those who disagree?

Good thing we don't do majority rule in this country. We are a country of laws not a democracy aka mob rules.

 

[georgephillip]

I have no qualifications to decide when "life" begins, but I see the benefit in fetal heartbeat legislation that attempts to make that definition consistent with how we currently legally define "death."

My biggest concern with 6-8 week statutes is how many women will then be forced to obtain their abortions on the black market as in the days before Roe v Wade became established law?

A woman seeking to end a child's life on the black market is no different than a woman who would throw her child in a dumpster. It's criminal, and she should be prosecuted for the acts.

woman seeking to end a child's life on the black market is no different than a woman who would throw her child in a dumpster. It's criminal, and she should be prosecuted for the acts.

If Roe v Wade is overturned, would that increase or decrease the total number of abortions performed nationwide? I suspect the threat of prosecution won't deter many women from ending an unwanted pregnancy.

Well just as it is with women leaving children in locked cars with the windows up, the same type of prosecution should be administered unto those seeking an abortion unlawfully.

Yes, it is always hard to except change whether it be one way or another, but after prosections are stepped up in showing the seriousness of the law, you would see a sharp decline in women taking the law lightly, and seeking out ways to violate the law. What we have is several generation's now, who have been taught not to be responsible citizens in life, and that life has no real meaning anymore. What a disaster.

Yes, it is always hard to except change whether it be one way or another, but after prosections are stepped up in showing the seriousness of the law, you would see a sharp decline in women taking the law lightly, and seeking out ways to violate the law

Nation wide, there seems little support for a repeal of Woe v Wade:

NBC News Exit Poll: Two-thirds of voters favor keeping Roe v. Wade as is

If a majority of US voters refuse to roll back the abortion clock to pre-1973, how far are conservatives willing to go inflict their version of morality on those who disagree?

Good thing we don't do majority rule in this country. We are a country of laws not a democracy aka mob rules.

Good thing we don't do majority rule in this country. We are a country of laws not a democracy aka mob rules

Laws like this...?

Roe v. Wade - Wikipedia

"Roe v. Wade, 410 U.S. 113 (1973),[1] was a landmark decisionof the U.S. Supreme Court in which the Court ruled that the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution provides a fundamental 'right to privacy' that protects a pregnant woman's liberty to choose whether or not to have an abortion."

 

[Fang]

I think Republicans need to be careful on this one. Banning abortions after a rape is going to far. Are we really going to make a 14 year old girl who was raped have a baby? Her life if now altered forever after an already life-altering horrific event that she had no control over.

On the other hand aborting a perfectly healthy baby after 20 weeks (20 as an example) is nothing short of murder.

Obviously there is no "happy" medium on this subject. But both sides need to find a resolution in the middle.

 

[SassyIrishLass]

With my limited knowledge I'm not sure, however we all know that it's not a life yet (even though a potential for the fertilization of an egg), if it winds up at the bottom of a rubber/profilactic after sex, where as it can't then fertilize the egg if weren't allowed to enter that area.

Once the egg is fertilized though, and the process begins, shouldn't their still have to be a valid reason in order to abort the process ?? Hmmm, now what those reasons should be, uhh is really according to what the good Lord up above guides us in our knowledge to then come to an agreement upon or to learn, and to understand in his ways concerning such things, and to agree on what suits all that are involved in a moral and righteous way.

With my limited knowledge I'm not sure, however we all know that it's not a life yet (even though a potential for the fertilization of an egg), if it winds up at the bottom of a rubber/profilactic after sex, where as it can't then fertilize the egg if weren't allowed to enter that area.

I have no qualifications to decide when "life" begins, but I see the benefit in fetal heartbeat legislation that attempts to make that definition consistent with how we currently legally define "death."

My biggest concern with 6-8 week statutes is how many women will then be forced to obtain their abortions on the black market as in the days before Roe v Wade became established law?

A woman seeking to end a child's life on the black market is no different than a woman who would throw her child in a dumpster. It's criminal, and she should be prosecuted for the acts.

woman seeking to end a child's life on the black market is no different than a woman who would throw her child in a dumpster. It's criminal, and she should be prosecuted for the acts.

If Roe v Wade is overturned, would that increase or decrease the total number of abortions performed nationwide? I suspect the threat of prosecution won't deter many women from ending an unwanted pregnancy.

Well just as it is with women leaving children in locked cars with the windows up, the same type of prosecution should be administered unto those seeking an abortion unlawfully.

Yes, it is always hard to except change whether it be one way or another, but after prosections are stepped up in showing the seriousness of the law, you would see a sharp decline in women taking the law lightly, and seeking out ways to violate the law. What we have is several generation's now, who have been taught not to be responsible citizens in life, and that life has no real meaning anymore. What a disaster.

Yes, it is always hard to except change whether it be one way or another, but after prosections are stepped up in showing the seriousness of the law, you would see a sharp decline in women taking the law lightly, and seeking out ways to violate the law

Nation wide, there seems little support for a repeal of Woe v Wade:

NBC News Exit Poll: Two-thirds of voters favor keeping Roe v. Wade as is

If a majority of US voters refuse to roll back the abortion clock to pre-1973, how far are conservatives willing to go inflict their version of morality on those who disagree?

Your stupid polls assured you thr bitch would easily beat Trump

 

[georgephillip]

I have no qualifications to decide when "life" begins, but I see the benefit in fetal heartbeat legislation that attempts to make that definition consistent with how we currently legally define "death."

My biggest concern with 6-8 week statutes is how many women will then be forced to obtain their abortions on the black market as in the days before Roe v Wade became established law?

A woman seeking to end a child's life on the black market is no different than a woman who would throw her child in a dumpster. It's criminal, and she should be prosecuted for the acts.

woman seeking to end a child's life on the black market is no different than a woman who would throw her child in a dumpster. It's criminal, and she should be prosecuted for the acts.

If Roe v Wade is overturned, would that increase or decrease the total number of abortions performed nationwide? I suspect the threat of prosecution won't deter many women from ending an unwanted pregnancy.

Well just as it is with women leaving children in locked cars with the windows up, the same type of prosecution should be administered unto those seeking an abortion unlawfully.

Yes, it is always hard to except change whether it be one way or another, but after prosections are stepped up in showing the seriousness of the law, you would see a sharp decline in women taking the law lightly, and seeking out ways to violate the law. What we have is several generation's now, who have been taught not to be responsible citizens in life, and that life has no real meaning anymore. What a disaster.

Yes, it is always hard to except change whether it be one way or another, but after prosections are stepped up in showing the seriousness of the law, you would see a sharp decline in women taking the law lightly, and seeking out ways to violate the law

Nation wide, there seems little support for a repeal of Woe v Wade:

NBC News Exit Poll: Two-thirds of voters favor keeping Roe v. Wade as is

If a majority of US voters refuse to roll back the abortion clock to pre-1973, how far are conservatives willing to go inflict their version of morality on those who disagree?

Your stupid polls assured you thr bitch would easily beat Trump

Your stupid polls assured you thr bitch would easily beat Trump

What do your polls show?

Fox News Poll: Biden, Sanders top Democratic preference

 

[August West]

I have no qualifications to decide when "life" begins, but I see the benefit in fetal heartbeat legislation that attempts to make that definition consistent with how we currently legally define "death."

My biggest concern with 6-8 week statutes is how many women will then be forced to obtain their abortions on the black market as in the days before Roe v Wade became established law?

A woman seeking to end a child's life on the black market is no different than a woman who would throw her child in a dumpster. It's criminal, and she should be prosecuted for the acts.

woman seeking to end a child's life on the black market is no different than a woman who would throw her child in a dumpster. It's criminal, and she should be prosecuted for the acts.

If Roe v Wade is overturned, would that increase or decrease the total number of abortions performed nationwide? I suspect the threat of prosecution won't deter many women from ending an unwanted pregnancy.

Well just as it is with women leaving children in locked cars with the windows up, the same type of prosecution should be administered unto those seeking an abortion unlawfully.

Yes, it is always hard to except change whether it be one way or another, but after prosections are stepped up in showing the seriousness of the law, you would see a sharp decline in women taking the law lightly, and seeking out ways to violate the law. What we have is several generation's now, who have been taught not to be responsible citizens in life, and that life has no real meaning anymore. What a disaster.

Yes, it is always hard to except change whether it be one way or another, but after prosections are stepped up in showing the seriousness of the law, you would see a sharp decline in women taking the law lightly, and seeking out ways to violate the law

Nation wide, there seems little support for a repeal of Woe v Wade:

NBC News Exit Poll: Two-thirds of voters favor keeping Roe v. Wade as is

If a majority of US voters refuse to roll back the abortion clock to pre-1973, how far are conservatives willing to go inflict their version of morality on those who disagree?

Your stupid polls assured you thr bitch would easily beat Trump

The stupid polls said she would get more votes and she did.

 

[SassyIrishLass]

A woman seeking to end a child's life on the black market is no different than a woman who would throw her child in a dumpster. It's criminal, and she should be prosecuted for the acts.

woman seeking to end a child's life on the black market is no different than a woman who would throw her child in a dumpster. It's criminal, and she should be prosecuted for the acts.

If Roe v Wade is overturned, would that increase or decrease the total number of abortions performed nationwide? I suspect the threat of prosecution won't deter many women from ending an unwanted pregnancy.

Well just as it is with women leaving children in locked cars with the windows up, the same type of prosecution should be administered unto those seeking an abortion unlawfully.

Yes, it is always hard to except change whether it be one way or another, but after prosections are stepped up in showing the seriousness of the law, you would see a sharp decline in women taking the law lightly, and seeking out ways to violate the law. What we have is several generation's now, who have been taught not to be responsible citizens in life, and that life has no real meaning anymore. What a disaster.

Yes, it is always hard to except change whether it be one way or another, but after prosections are stepped up in showing the seriousness of the law, you would see a sharp decline in women taking the law lightly, and seeking out ways to violate the law

Nation wide, there seems little support for a repeal of Woe v Wade:

NBC News Exit Poll: Two-thirds of voters favor keeping Roe v. Wade as is

If a majority of US voters refuse to roll back the abortion clock to pre-1973, how far are conservatives willing to go inflict their version of morality on those who disagree?

Your stupid polls assured you thr bitch would easily beat Trump

Your stupid polls assured you thr bitch would easily beat Trump

What do your polls show?

Fox News Poll: Biden, Sanders top Democratic preference

You not only hate Jews you hate babies too you sad little man

 

[flack]

A woman seeking to end a child's life on the black market is no different than a woman who would throw her child in a dumpster. It's criminal, and she should be prosecuted for the acts.

woman seeking to end a child's life on the black market is no different than a woman who would throw her child in a dumpster. It's criminal, and she should be prosecuted for the acts.

If Roe v Wade is overturned, would that increase or decrease the total number of abortions performed nationwide? I suspect the threat of prosecution won't deter many women from ending an unwanted pregnancy.

Well just as it is with women leaving children in locked cars with the windows up, the same type of prosecution should be administered unto those seeking an abortion unlawfully.

Yes, it is always hard to except change whether it be one way or another, but after prosections are stepped up in showing the seriousness of the law, you would see a sharp decline in women taking the law lightly, and seeking out ways to violate the law. What we have is several generation's now, who have been taught not to be responsible citizens in life, and that life has no real meaning anymore. What a disaster.

Yes, it is always hard to except change whether it be one way or another, but after prosections are stepped up in showing the seriousness of the law, you would see a sharp decline in women taking the law lightly, and seeking out ways to violate the law

Nation wide, there seems little support for a repeal of Woe v Wade:

NBC News Exit Poll: Two-thirds of voters favor keeping Roe v. Wade as is

If a majority of US voters refuse to roll back the abortion clock to pre-1973, how far are conservatives willing to go inflict their version of morality on those who disagree?

Good thing we don't do majority rule in this country. We are a country of laws not a democracy aka mob rules.

Good thing we don't do majority rule in this country. We are a country of laws not a democracy aka mob rules

Laws like this...?

Roe v. Wade - Wikipedia

"Roe v. Wade, 410 U.S. 113 (1973),[1] was a landmark decisionof the U.S. Supreme Court in which the Court ruled that the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution provides a fundamental 'right to privacy' that protects a pregnant woman's liberty to choose whether or not to have an abortion."

Not a law. A ruling. Legislating from the bench. Libtards only way of getting their ideology passed.