Liberals On Abortion

[alang1216]

NorthKoreaChic doesn't want to live in a free society. Maybe she should move back to you know where.

She pretends she’s in NY. I don’t believe it for a second

There's a big Russian area in Brooklyn called Little Odessa.

 

[Cecilie1200]

[I'm a lefty that agrees with much of what you say. However, you should save some of your anger for the Right-to-Lifers that claim there is no 'tissue', only baby.

One cannot have a rational argument about where the aforesaid line of Tissue/Baby demarkation should be drawn because they don't recognize a set of chromosomes as being any different from an adult human being.

Link or lie?


Oh...wait....you always lie.


Carry on.

Did you have a brain freeze? What did I write that you would you like a link for?

Do you deny that some Right-to-Lifers that claim that a 'person' begins at conception?

I'm pretty sure ALL pro-lifers understand that a separate human organism begins at conception, since that's what every Embryology textbook in the world says. 'Person', on the other hand, is the sort of imprecise, feelings-based language used by 'tards like you who ditched high school biology to smoke weed behind the gym.

It'd be nice, however, if you could show us some scientific basis for this "tissue/baby demarkation [sic]" that you invented to try to pretend you had an argument.

 

[JoeB131]

Since you hate the US so much, can I crowdfund you one way ticket back home to NK?

What did North Korea ever do to you?

 

[PoliticalChic]

10. “Although many liberals and radicals accepted legalized abortion, there are signs of uneasiness about it. Perhaps such uneasiness is a sign that many on, the Left are ready to take another look at the abortion issue. In the hope of contributing toward a new perspective, I offer the following points:


First, it is out of character for the Left to neglect the weak and helpless.
The traditional mark of the Left has been its protection of the underdog, the weak, and the poor. The unborn child is the most helpless form of humanity, even more in need of protection than the poor tenant farmer or the mental patient or the boat people on the high seas.

The basic instinct of the Left is to aid those who cannot aid themselves -- and that instinct is absolutely sound. It is what keeps the human proposition going.”
From The Progressive magazine. Abortion: The Left has betrayed the sanctity of life



Sounds like the sort of Liberal one can respect.
Not too many of 'em around anymore.

 

[Cecilie1200]

Did you write this?

" Right-to-Lifers that claim there is no 'tissue', only baby."

I did. Do you really need a link to prove that some Right-to-Lifers claim that 'personhood' begins at conception?

Anything to make you happy:

“Personhood” laws seek to classify fertilized eggs, zygotes, embryos, and fetuses as “persons,” and to grant them full legal protection under the U.S. Constitution, including the right to life from the moment of conception.

Yeah, um, that's not the same as "there's no tissue, only baby". Dumbass. Once again, pro-lifers understand that "tissue" and "baby" are not mutually exclusive terms used to denote total opposites . . . something they covered in primary school, and which you CLEARLY need to go find an 8th grader to explain to you.

 

[JoeB131]

apparently you don’t know how an abortion is performed. Typically someone performs it. This person is not the mother. That person goes to prison for murder.

Okay, how many people were convicted of performing abortions prior to Roe v. Wade? Not a lot. I promise you, I ever find myself on a jury where someone is on trial for performing one, I'm voting to acquit, I don't give a shit if they got film of him pulling the fetus out by the legs and smashing it against the table. A lot of people feel the same way.

That assumes a cop will even bother to investigate to start with.

 

[Cecilie1200]

I mean real Liberals, those with integrity and a reputable view of the world, not the mind numbed variety that adhere to the Democrats no matter how insane their current agenda is.




1.Perhaps you’ve noticed that today the strongest Liberals/Democrats are those with the least ability to analyze what they are supporting. As a result, just as Orwell predicted in 1984, they can’t keep straight whether they are at war with Eastasia, or Eurasia. They need not keep track, they simply agree that the enemy at the moment is whoever the leadership says it is.
And today it is the unborn.

Hence, the Liberals were against gay marriage before they were for it. They opposed socialism before they were for it. And they opposed nuclear weapons for Iran before they were in favor of it.
So, no big deal to want to exterminate the defenseless.....

They are clueless to 180° turns by the party. Morons simply march lock-step via the party’s orders.





I came across an interesting real-Liberal essay opposing abortion, and it is instructive to peruse.


2.“Abortion: The Left has betrayed the sanctity of life From The Progressive magazine. Abortion: The Left has betrayed the sanctity of life
Consistency demands concern for the unborn

The abortion issue, more than most, illustrates the occasional tendency of the Left to become so enthusiastic over what is called a "reform" that it forgets to think the issue through. It is ironic that so many on the Left have done on abortion what the conservatives and Cold War liberals did on Vietnam: They marched off in the wrong direction, to fight the wrong war, against the wrong people.

3. Some of us … are now active in the right-to-life movement. We do not enjoy opposing our old friends on the abortion issue, but we feel that we have no choice. We are moved by what pro-life feminists call the "consistency thing" -- the belief that respect for human life demands opposition to abortion, capital punishment, euthanasia, and war. We don't think we have either the luxury or the right to choose some types of killing and say that they are all right, while others are not. A human life is a human life; and if equality means anything, it means that society may not value some human lives over others.




4. Until the last decade, people on the Left and Right generally agreed on one rule: We all protected the young. This was not merely agreement on an ethical question: It was also an expression of instinct, so deep and ancient that it scarcely required explanation. Protection of the young included protection of the unborn, for abortion was forbidden by state laws throughout the United States. Those laws reflected an ethical consensus, not based solely on religious tradition but also on scientific evidence that human life begins at conception. The prohibition of abortion in the ancient Hippocratic Oath is well known.

5. …it is important to ask why the Left in the United States generally accepted legalized abortion. One factor was the popular civil libertarian rationale for freedom of choice in abortion. Many feminists presented it as a right of women to control their own bodies. When the objection was raised that abortion ruins another person's body, they respond that a) it is not a body, just a "blob of protoplasm" (thereby displaying ignorance of biology); or b) it is not really a "person" until it is born.

When it was suggested that this is a wholly arbitrary decision, unsupported by any biology evidence, they said, "Well, that's your point of view. This is a matter of individual conscience, and in a pluralistic society people must be free to follow their consciences."




Thinking Liberals, largely an oxymoron today, continue embracing rectitude over party loyalty.

Yet the American people support keeping Roe V Wade the law of the land by 67%

Yet that only happens when the pollster deliberately obscures or misrepresents what reversing Roe v. Wade would mean.

It's very telling that the only "victories" you can claim require you to lie your asses off.

 

[rightwinger]

Their not trying to ban abortions, just after the heart starts to beat. You still have two months to kill you baby.

It's not a baby until after it's born.

You should be able to terminate a fetus at any time as long as you and your doctor think it's prudent.

It is more than interesting that Democrats use the same policy for infanticide that they did for slavery:

a. If the person was in Mississippi, he was a slave; in Connecticut, the very same person would be free

b. baby in the birth canal can be slaughtered in the most brutal manner; a few centimeters later, and, as the Democrat Governor of Virginia states, it could be decided by the mother.




American's most prodigious serial killer, Kermit Gosnell, is in jail for life.....but what he is guilty of is now permitted by the Democrats of New York.

More lies and mistruths

 

[SAYIT]

Add to that the fact that if they get what they want and the Supreme Court over rules Roe V Wade it sends the issue back to the states. There will always be at least one state that keeps abortion legal and safe. That state is mine...

BOOM!!! And isn't that the best and most constitutional way to deal with most if not all domestic issues? Shouldn't state laws serve the needs and reflect the values of their citizens rather than one-size-fits-all WashDC edicts? What works for NY should not be imposed upon New Mexico just because they both start with "New."
People will live where the laws, society, and lifestyle best suit them without big, greasy, central gov't interference.

You make a good point but it may not be appropriate in all cases, we could still have Jim Crow in the South for example.

It ain't perfect and state laws would still have to pass US Constitutional muster but our federal gov't and federal courts need to tread far more lightly about imposing their will on all states.

 

[alang1216]

One: It is "wrong" to kill babies. Even Leftists mainly agree with this.

Two: There is nothing wrong with removing "tissue" from the body of the person who wants it removed.

Three: At some point in time between ejaculation and live birth, the product of that copulation ceases being "tissue" and becomes a legal person, for Constitutional purposes.

Four: The position staked out by Justice Blackmun in Roe v. Wade (1973) was that the conversion from Tissue to Baby occurred at the time when the baby became arguably viable: that is, able to survive outside the womb. This was based on his reading of the medical science at the time of the decision. There have been new developments in neonatal care, and one could argue that viability now occurs prior to six months, but that is not relevant to this discussion.

Most of the people howling that they NEVER want Roe v. Wade overturned - that it is a "Super Precedent" - completely reject Justice Blackmun's line of demarkation, and insist that the Tissue/Baby line is drawn AT BIRTH. So they really don't want Roe v. Wade to be the law of the land; they want their own twisted version of RvW to prevail.

Five: Roe v. Wade is completely made-up law, based on a completely made-up Constitutional "right": the Right of Privacy. It is nowhere in the Constitution, and it is, legally speaking, an abomination, because it defies definition. A "right" that is based on a Constitutional Amendment that protects us from eavesdropping and unreasonable searches is trotted out to overturn sodomy laws? To void thousands of years of marriage laws? And then to prevent States from prohibiting abortions which, parenthetically, are forbidden by the Oath of Hippocrates? Good God, is there any better example of a Supreme Court run amok?

In a rational world (where no Leftists reside), one could have a rational argument about where the aforesaid line of Tissue/Baby demarkation should be drawn. At one extreme, there is a tenable argument that once the DNA of the person is established (i.e., at conception), it is a baby. At the other extreme, one could argue for the moment when that baby takes its first breath outside the womb. All sorts of considerations could be brought to bear, but two things are manifest: The Line should be between those two figurative goal posts, and the line should be drawn, not by a court of life-appointed jurists, but by the Peoples' representatives in either Congress or the State Legislatures.

Six: A couple of developments have raised this issue to a higher profile than usual: The conservative shift in the USSC (possibly shifting even a little bit further if the infamous RBG does the Right Thing in a timely manner), and the passage of a couple of state laws that, in effect draw the Tissue/Baby line much earlier than States have dared to draw it since the publication of RvW.

But the Left refuses to have this rational discussion. It insists that the WOMAN (don't you dare call her a "mother") has an absolute right to "remove the tissue" up to and even after the moment of live birth, according to her absolute discretion. Further, THEY DENY THE OPPOSING SIDE EVEN THE RIGHT TO RAISE POINTS IN SUPPORT OF THEIR POSITION. If they take any position other than the Leftist position, they are horrible bigots, misogynists, haters, deniers, and whatever other absurd insults they can gin up.

And note that in this, as in every other "discussion," they present no arguments on their own behalf. It is merely, "If you disagree with us, you are a [choose your ad hominem insult]!"

Leftists are scum.

I'm a lefty that agrees with much of what you say. However, you should save some of your anger for the Right-to-Lifers that claim there is no 'tissue', only baby.

One cannot have a rational argument about where the aforesaid line of Tissue/Baby demarkation should be drawn because they don't recognize a set of chromosomes as being any different from an adult human being.

Actually, the reason you can't have a rational argument is that you're babbling utter nonsense and thinking that sprinkling it with "scientific" words - which you badly misuse - will somehow make it intelligent.

Pro-lifers don't "claim there is no tissue, only baby". Unlike you, most pro-lifers actually understand what the word "tissue" means in a biological sense, and don't believe that using a different word will somehow automatically mean a different, and mutually exclusive, thing.

"Tissue/Baby demarkation [sic]"? Yeah, pseudo-scientific phrases like this which you invented on the fly are exactly what's standing between you and a rational argument. This literally means nothing.

Likewise, no pro-lifer has ever said "A set of chromosomes is the same as an adult human being", because again, pro-lifers aren't as dirt-ignorant as you are to believe that there's just a set of chromosomes floating around somewhere all by themselves. You're so desperate to denigrate and dismiss unborn children as nothing more than a glob of phlegm you hawked up on the sidewalk that you're incoherent.

First the "Tissue/Baby demarkation" phrase comes from DGS49 and it is a rational description, one he took from Justice Blackmun. If you don't like it take it up with them.

My "set of chromosomes is the same as an adult human being" statement is a rephrasing of statements I've heard many pro-lifers say. They usually phrase it as a fertilized egg is a 'person' because it's DNA is unique. Same difference.

 

[Taz]

Since you hate the US so much, can I crowdfund you one way ticket back home to NK?

What did North Korea ever do to you?

It spawned that America hating bitch NKChic.

 

[alang1216]

I'm pretty sure ALL pro-lifers understand that a separate human organism begins at conception, since that's what every Embryology textbook in the world says. 'Person', on the other hand, is the sort of imprecise, feelings-based language used by 'tards like you who ditched high school biology to smoke weed behind the gym.

It'd be nice, however, if you could show us some scientific basis for this "tissue/baby demarkation [sic]" that you invented to try to pretend you had an argument.

I'm pretty sure ALL pro-choicers understand that there is a fundamental difference between a single cell, really just a blueprint for a human being, and a fully-developed human being. That cell is capable of no more than any other cell on the planet whereas that fully-developed human is capable of things no other species on the planet is capable of.

 

[gipper]

apparently you don’t know how an abortion is performed. Typically someone performs it. This person is not the mother. That person goes to prison for murder.

Okay, how many people were convicted of performing abortions prior to Roe v. Wade? Not a lot. I promise you, I ever find myself on a jury where someone is on trial for performing one, I'm voting to acquit, I don't give a shit if they got film of him pulling the fetus out by the legs and smashing it against the table. A lot of people feel the same way.

That assumes a cop will even bother to investigate to start with.

Not many abortions were performed before Roe silly. So that likely means once abortion is illegal, few will happen.

Your line of thinking goes like this...since a few women will seek abortions even if it were illegal, we might as well keep it legal.

WTF!

 

[jknowgood]

Too bad you weren't aborted.

You have no more point to make so you resort to petty insults. Your concession is duly noted.

Actually everyone of you running around celebrating the more babies murdered the better. Should've been aborted themselves. You don't deserve to enjoy a life.

Nobody is celebrating that kind of thing, you're delusional.

Explain lighting up the new world trade center, celebrating the passing of infanticide.

Explain wtf you're talking about first.

W hen new York passed abortion up to birth. They celebrated by lighting up the new world trade center in pink. You really don't know what your party represents, do you?

 

[jknowgood]

Once it's heart starts beating, it's a living being. You cannot argue with that.

Sure I can.. there's just no point in arguing with religious nuts trying to please their imaginary sky man.

A fetus isn't viable until 22 weeks.

Which can be killed.

 

[Cecilie1200]

Oh, boy, another round of Number-pointed Crazy from the Mail Order Bride From Hell.

Okay, one more time. You guys get your ban on abortion, how are you going to enforce it?

Are you going to lock up women for getting abortions? Because honestly, I don't see anything less than that as being a deterrent, now that we have DIY abortion pills.

Add to that the fact that if they get what they want and the Supreme Court over rules Roe V Wade it sends the issue back to the states.

There will always be at least one state that keeps abortion legal and safe.

That state is mine.

The people of my state voted on it in the early 90s. The ballot initiative issue was whether to keep abortion safe and legal in my state no matter what any judge or congress does. The initiative passed with a good margin. I voted with the majority.

There are organizations in America that we women started and fund privately. We have organizations that do nothing but fund abortions. They also provide funds for transportation and lodging. We women have done this quietly. We stopped depending on our society to support reproductive freedom so we have taken matters in our own hands and have been doing it for decades. I personally have been donating to those organizations since the 80s.

So all a person has to do is travel to another state to get their legal abortion.

Then there's the Ireland solution. Coastal states can have medical ships that go out to international waters to perform perfectly legal abortions.

These far right wing radical extremists might be able to make abortion illegal in their states but they can't do that to all the states and women won't stop having abortions.

Abortion cruise?

Abortion was illegal in Ireland for a very long time.

During that time women died needlessly. Even women who were there on vacation from other nations.

The women in Ireland took matters in their own hands. They started a medical ship that took women out to international waters to have totally legal abortions. It went on for decades.

The far right wing radical extremists can pass all the anti women and anti reproductive freedom laws they want. It will never stop abortion.

All they're doing is causing women to die needlessly and ruining countless lives.

"Abortion in Ireland is regulated by the Health (Regulation of Termination of Pregnancy) Act 2018. Abortion is permitted during the first twelve weeks of pregnancy, and later in cases where the pregnant woman's life or health is at risk, or in the cases of a fatal foetal abnormality. Abortion services commenced on 1 January 2019 following its legalisation by the aforementioned Act, which became law on 20 December 2018. This law followed a constitutional amendment approved by a referendum in May 2018. This replaced the Eighth Amendment, which had given the life of the unborn foetus the same value as that of its mother, with a clause permitting the Oireachtas (parliament) to legislate for the termination of pregnancies.[1][2][3] The constitutional amendment was signed into law on 18 September 2018.[4]"
Abortion in the Republic of Ireland - Wikipedia


The new Irish investigation…died of sepsis not due to pregnancy….Ireland changed the law to allow abortion based on misreading the facts.

"The death of Savita Halappanavar led to protests in 2012 calling for changes to Ireland's abortion laws and a highly public investigation by the Health Service Executive. After a miscarriage had been diagnosed, she was denied an abortion because the foetus's heart was still beating.[47][48][49] She developed sepsis and died. The HSE enquiry found that her death was a result of inadequate assessment and monitoring and a failure to adhere to established clinical guidelines, and made several recommendations, including legislative and constitutional change.[50]"
Ibid.


There was no need for a change in the law.

Pro-aborts advancing their agenda through dishonesty. Wait, let me find my shocked face and put it on.

 

[BlindBoo]

But the Left refuses to have this rational discussion. It insists that the WOMAN (don't you dare call her a "mother") has an absolute right to "remove the tissue" up to and even after the moment of live birth, according to her absolute discretion. Further, THEY DENY THE OPPOSING SIDE EVEN THE RIGHT TO RAISE POINTS IN SUPPORT OF THEIR POSITION. If they take any position other than the Leftist position, they are horrible bigots, misogynists, haters, deniers, and whatever other absurd insults they can gin up.

And note that in this, as in every other "discussion," they present no arguments on their own behalf. It is merely, "If you disagree with us, you are a [choose your ad hominem insult]!"

Leftists are scum.

Anti-choice SJWers do not want compromise or a discussion of the facts. They want to use alternative facts, like your accusation of supporting infanticide.

43 states prohibit some abortions after a certain point in pregnancy.

• 24 states ban abortion between 13 and 24 weeks LMP.
  • 2 states ban abortion at 20 weeks LMP (18 weeks postfertilization in state law).
  • 17 states ban abortion at 22 weeks LMP (20 weeks postfertilization in state law) on the unscientific grounds that a fetus can feel pain at that point.
  • 5 states ban abortion at 24 weeks LMP.
• 18 states impose a ban at viability.
• 1 state imposes a ban in the third trimester (25 weeks LMP onward)

State Bans on Abortion Throughout Pregnancy

 

[gipper]

You have no more point to make so you resort to petty insults. Your concession is duly noted.

Actually everyone of you running around celebrating the more babies murdered the better. Should've been aborted themselves. You don't deserve to enjoy a life.

Nobody is celebrating that kind of thing, you're delusional.

Explain lighting up the new world trade center, celebrating the passing of infanticide.

Explain wtf you're talking about first.

W hen new York passed abortion up to birth. They celebrated by lighting up the new world trade center in pink. You really don't know what your party represents, do you?

Celebrating mass murder, yet Americans think themselves better than the Nazis.

 

[Cecilie1200]

Add to that the fact that if they get what they want and the Supreme Court over rules Roe V Wade it sends the issue back to the states. There will always be at least one state that keeps abortion legal and safe. That state is mine...

BOOM!!! And isn't that the best and most constitutional way to deal with most if not all domestic issues? Shouldn't state laws serve the needs and reflect the values of their citizens rather than one-size-fits-all WashDC edicts? What works for NY should not be imposed upon New Mexico just because they both start with "New."
People will live where the laws, society, and lifestyle best suit them without big, greasy, central gov't interference.

You make a good point but it may not be appropriate in all cases, we could still have Jim Crow in the South for example.

Would it shock you to know that rational people - people besides you, then - actually REACT to things happening around them, rather than blindly and stubbornly continuing on their way in total oblivion to the world and other people and facts?

I get that you want to believe the childishly simplistic tropes from 3rd grade - apparently the last time you sat in an actual classroom and listened - that "North = non-racist angels" and "South = evil racists forever", and only the benevolent federal government forcing people to do the right thing is responsible for all good things which have ever happened. The real world is a bit different.

 

[gipper]

But the Left refuses to have this rational discussion. It insists that the WOMAN (don't you dare call her a "mother") has an absolute right to "remove the tissue" up to and even after the moment of live birth, according to her absolute discretion. Further, THEY DENY THE OPPOSING SIDE EVEN THE RIGHT TO RAISE POINTS IN SUPPORT OF THEIR POSITION. If they take any position other than the Leftist position, they are horrible bigots, misogynists, haters, deniers, and whatever other absurd insults they can gin up.

And note that in this, as in every other "discussion," they present no arguments on their own behalf. It is merely, "If you disagree with us, you are a [choose your ad hominem insult]!"

Leftists are scum.

Anti-choice SJWers do not want compromise or a discussion of the facts. They want to use alternative facts, like your accusation of supporting infanticide.

43 states prohibit some abortions after a certain point in pregnancy.

• 24 states ban abortion between 13 and 24 weeks LMP.
  • 2 states ban abortion at 20 weeks LMP (18 weeks postfertilization in state law).
  • 17 states ban abortion at 22 weeks LMP (20 weeks postfertilization in state law) on the unscientific grounds that a fetus can feel pain at that point.
  • 5 states ban abortion at 24 weeks LMP.
• 18 states impose a ban at viability.
• 1 state imposes a ban in the third trimester (25 weeks LMP onward)

State Bans on Abortion Throughout Pregnancy

Abortion is legalized murder. It is far past the time it was outlawed.

Life, liberty and pursuit of happiness for all.

Stop the killing.