Abortion amendment?

[M14 Shooter]

I’ve already told you… I don’t accept that either one of these topics is an unlimited and unrestrictable absolute. I never have and never will. I believe abortion should be VERY limited, much more so than Firearms ownership; but neither should be unrestricted in my mind.

Thank you

 

[M14 Shooter]

You don't want to get into that Shooter.

I most certainly do.
Please address the question.

 

[Donald H]

I most certainly do.
Please address the question.

I've addressed the question exactly and so far I think I'm the only one who has tried.

Read carefully:

There's no short answer on curtailing a woman's right to an abortion!

There are hundreds of different situations!

If you can show that you're sincere about the topic then you'll get a detailed answer from me that can prove my point. I see no indication that you actually care!

 

[M14 Shooter]

I've addressed the question exactly and so far I think I'm the only one who has tried.
Read carefully:
There's no short answer on curtailing a woman's right to an abortion!

Ah.
So you believe -every- restriction on the exercise of a right is an infringement.
Good to know.

 

[22lcidw]

Conservatives are at least consistent in their hypocrisy – such as their ‘advocacy’ of ‘small government.’

Rightists need to understand that ‘small government’ is far much more than just reckless, irresponsible tax cuts and deregulation.

Small government is just words. Stopping the expansion of government is doable. And it may be forced on us someday.

 

[Anathema]

Thank you

My question to you is… “Do you know/understand WHY it is I believe as I do?” I ask because the WHY is just as important as the viewpoint itself.

 

[M14 Shooter]

My question to you is… “Do you know/understand WHY it is I believe as I do?”

Sure. Its not relevant at this point, but yes.

 

[Anathema]

Sure. Its not relevant at this point, but yes

It is at least as relevant as your question, and I don’t believe you do understand. If you’re so certain, why don’t you just answer the question?

 

[Care4all]

Why do you think so?
Not allowing abortions after viability force women to carry a baby to term, see...

Home | American Civil Liberties Union

The ACLU dares to create a more perfect union — beyond one person, party, or side. Our mission is to realize this promise of the United States Constitution for all and expand the reach of its guarantees.

www.aclu.org

Women & girls' rights in Latin America & the Caribbean

Explore key trends in women's rights across Latin America and the Caribbean, including gender-based violence, child marriage, female genital mutilation, sex-discriminatory laws, and barriers to nationality rights. Learn about urgent reforms needed to achieve gender equality.

www.equalitynow.org

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2022/05/31/antiabortion-laws-are-forced-birth-laws/

M14

NOT ONE WORD IN THOSE ARTICLES SPOKE about abortions after the viability of a fetus....so why link them as part of the argument we were discussing?

Roe allowed any state to ban elective abortions in the third trimester. Before Dobbs, there were 6 states, plus D.C. that had no laws banning abortion at any stage...ALL OTHER STATES, abortion via choice of the mother, is banned after viability or the third trimester...even in the other democratic and liberal leaning states, it is banned, under their state law for a woman to simply make that choice in the third trimester....it has to be for harming medical conditions to the mother caused by the baby being born or poisoning from the foetus or the baby being unviable due to a severe medical condition or deformity.... kinda thing from what I have read?

 

[Donald H]

But clearly conservatives are not advocates of small government and individual liberty.

True, but they do know that their chickens came home when they took on abortion.

And now the assclown who brought it up again thinks it can still be an election issue.

His guns and his 2A can be, but he can't see the similarity in both being about rights! LOL

 

[Donald H]

M14

NOT ONE WORD IN THOSE ARTICLES SPOKE about abortions after the viability of a fetus....so why link them as part of the argument we were discussing?

Roe allowed any state to ban elective abortions in the third trimester. Before Dobbs, there were 6 states, plus D.C. that had no laws banning abortion at any stage...ALL OTHER STATES, abortion via choice of the mother, is banned after viability or the third trimester...even in the other democratic and liberal leaning states, it is banned, under their state law for a woman to simply make that choice in the third trimester....it has to be for harming medical conditions to the mother caused by the baby being born or poisoning from the foetus or the baby being unviable due to a severe medical condition or deformity.... kinda thing from what I have read?

The thread is an opportunity for a rational discussion but he won't and can't be a part of it.

 

[M14 Shooter]

M14
NOT ONE WORD IN THOSE ARTICLES SPOKE about abortions after the viability of a fetus....so why link them as part of the argument we were discussing?

Correct. they make no distinction.
And so, in their argument the pre/post viability position of the restriction doesn't matter; post-viability restrictions on abortion, like pre-vaibility restrictions, force a woman to carry a baby to term.
Thus, the pro-choice crowd will argue that "post viability" restrictions ARE infringements on the right to an abortion.

 

[M14 Shooter]

The thread is an opportunity for a rational discussion but he won't and can't be a part of it.

Aww... reduced to lying to yourself so soon?

 

[M14 Shooter]

True, but they do know that their chickens came home when they took on abortion.
And now the assclown who brought it up again thinks it can still be an election issue.
His guns and his 2A can be, but he can't see the similarity in both being about rights! LOL

^^^^
Oblivious to the issue under discussion, and possibly willfully so.

 

[M14 Shooter]

It is at least as relevant as your question

You clearly do not understand why I asked my question.

 

[Anathema]

ou clearly do not understand why I asked my question

You asked the question because you have created a false equivalency in your mind between abortion and gun rights and you want to try to support that false equivalence through the viewpoints of others.

PS - You still haven’t answered NY question.

 

[M14 Shooter]

You asked the question because you have created a false equivalency in your mind between abortion and gun rights

How is there a false equivalency?

 

[Anathema]

How is there a false equivalency?

I already explained it in a previous post. I won’t waste my time explaining it again to someone obviously not capable of understanding it.

 

[CarsomyrPlusSix]

An amendment to safeguard the right to privacy

There is no such right

and reproductive autonomy

There is no such right.

shouldn’t be necessary.

It isn’t, because it’s disgusting to demand a “right” that violates actual human rights by legalizing violence against those you hate, as you would do, authoritarian scumbag.

 

[M14 Shooter]

I already explained it in a previous post. I won’t waste my time explaining it again to someone obviously not capable of understanding it.

Ok. Thanks.