What's new
US Message Board 🦅 Political Discussion Forum

Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

AOC's ‘forced pregnancy' nonsense

TNHarley

Diamond Member
Joined
Sep 27, 2012
Messages
84,644
Reaction score
41,407
Points
2,290
Even if we were to go by your definition, it doesn't matter. Just because the pre-born baby doesn't breathe the same way you and I breathe doesn't mean the pre-born baby isn't a human being.

There are different stages of human life, and each stage is different than other stages. A pre-born baby is not supposed to be able to do the things that a teenager can do. A newborn is not supposed to be able to do things that an adult can do. Each stage is different but there's a human being in every stage. What you're not grasping is that our humanity is not defined by viability or other arbitrary milestones. We are human beings from Day One, just in different stages of life.
it doesnt breath at all, actually.
 

Peace

Diamond Member
Joined
Sep 15, 2020
Messages
17,259
Reaction score
13,076
Points
2,288
Birth control isnt 100%. Some states are going to ban some contraceptives.
Saying IUDs are a murder weapon is the stupidest fucking thing I have ever heard of.
Forced gestation is tyranny.
I think abortion is horrendous... but shit happens. People need to understand that.
I say allow one abortion and then tie the woman tubes…

As for birth control, well women should learn to wait until marriage…

If a woman was raped, well ya know it is her fault for being attractive….

As you finish that just know I support a woman right to abortion up to sixteen weeks, and support all forms of Birth Control including the morning after pill.

I believe a woman who isn’t ready to be a mother ( like that ten year old in Ohio ) then she should have the option in the first sixteen weeks and after that it need to be reviewed for special circumstances…
 

eagle1462010

Diamond Member
Joined
May 17, 2013
Messages
62,268
Reaction score
28,166
Points
2,290
It is NOT an individual. Thats what im arguing. Not distinct.
YOU changed the discussion because you had nothing else.
Very dishonest tactic, sir :talktothehand:
Most of this country would disagree with you on this. Primarily in the 3rd Trimester. And still most in the 2nd. Even the Justices on Roe V Wade disagree with you as they pulled the viability issue out of their ass as they had no authority to do so...........Set it at 28 weeks...........now Down to 21 weeks based on when the baby can live outside the womb.

If you don't abort the baby then it most certainly is a INDIVIDUAL if you don't murder him or her.

You have already stated you are for abortion til birth even though you consider late term Barbarism.......because you agreed with me............What is your major malfunction and what compromise would you offer to this country if given the chance?
 

TNHarley

Diamond Member
Joined
Sep 27, 2012
Messages
84,644
Reaction score
41,407
Points
2,290
Most of this country would disagree with you on this. Primarily in the 3rd Trimester. And still most in the 2nd. Even the Justices on Roe V Wade disagree with you as they pulled the viability issue out of their ass as they had no authority to do so...........Set it at 28 weeks...........now Down to 21 weeks based on when the baby can live outside the womb.

If you don't abort the baby then it most certainly is a INDIVIDUAL if you don't murder him or her.

You have already stated you are for abortion til birth even though you consider late term Barbarism.......because you agreed with me............What is your major malfunction and what compromise would you offer to this country if given the chance?
I think 2nd trimester abortion is horrible too.
Look, im just simply against the govt forcing gestation on people. I dont have any wiggle room on that. The govt has no right to do that shit to people.
 

eagle1462010

Diamond Member
Joined
May 17, 2013
Messages
62,268
Reaction score
28,166
Points
2,290
Its not talking about wiping its ass buttercup. Its referring to human bodily functions. Like breathing. :rolleyes:
Would you all stop with that stupid argument "what if they are on life support" Do you people fucking THINK?
The cord provides the oxygen til they are out. So they get oxygen to sustain life in the womb.........even as you deny it is a life.

In the Phillipines they love Balute...........Fermented egg............and it is indeed a FERMENTED HALF GROWN CHIC in the shell........How they can eat it is beyond me. But you use a fresh egg and go SEE...........IT'S NOT A CHICKEN.

Get you some of this.

iu
 

eagle1462010

Diamond Member
Joined
May 17, 2013
Messages
62,268
Reaction score
28,166
Points
2,290
I think 2nd trimester abortion is horrible too.
Look, im just simply against the govt forcing gestation on people. I dont have any wiggle room on that. The govt has no right to do that shit to people.
We have a right as a society to protect life. That question is when life begins. We are here because 2 sides want to use this as a Wedge. It could easily be ended with a compromise. They have no intention of doing that.

Most people in this country would be ok with around 15 weeks and then NO. Allow abortion in cases of rape and incest. And late term only for the health of the mother or if the baby is badly deformed or virtually no chance of living.

But that isn't gonna happen with these pricks in Congress. Because of this we now have the swing in the opposite direction. Because these fuckers don't care about the will of the people or to do their dang jobs.
 

TNHarley

Diamond Member
Joined
Sep 27, 2012
Messages
84,644
Reaction score
41,407
Points
2,290

hadit

Diamond Member
Joined
Jul 1, 2013
Messages
37,423
Reaction score
12,904
Points
1,550
The bottom line remains, when a woman is pregnant there is a living human growing inside her. Biology mandates that to be true. Whether you can in good conscience destroy that human life is a different subject, but please stop pretending there's something other than a human growing in there.
 

eagle1462010

Diamond Member
Joined
May 17, 2013
Messages
62,268
Reaction score
28,166
Points
2,290
I find this horribly inconsistent.
Why? It was Rape and a crime? You are dancing here on this one.

Most would agree this should be allowed but in some states they aren't. This will cause more Chaos. And the left will use the hell out of it.

As they allow late term already and consider a late term baby medical waste if aborted.............THAT IS SICK.

That is what has brought us here.
 

TNHarley

Diamond Member
Joined
Sep 27, 2012
Messages
84,644
Reaction score
41,407
Points
2,290
Why? It was Rape and a crime? You are dancing here on this one.

Most would agree this should be allowed but in some states they aren't. This will cause more Chaos. And the left will use the hell out of it.

As they allow late term already and consider a late term baby medical waste if aborted.............THAT IS SICK.

That is what has brought us here.
I dont think so. If you say the fetus is "life", why does rape make the baby not "life?" Or is it just 3/5s? Lol.. had to.
They use aborted parts for medical research.
 

eagle1462010

Diamond Member
Joined
May 17, 2013
Messages
62,268
Reaction score
28,166
Points
2,290
I dont think so. If you say the fetus is "life", why does rape make the baby not "life?" Or is it just 3/5s? Lol.. had to.
They use aborted parts for medical research.
I never specified when life begins. I've stated that the compromise needed is in the 2nd Trimester. And that most of America would agree to that in my opinion.

That is called my best opinion on a compromise that might actually work.

In regards to a fetus..........If allowed to grow in the mothers body and it's healthy it most certainly WILL BE A LIFE in about 9 months.

When does life BEGIN.........what is your solution to this other than keep it the same and allow Barbarism? The new ruling hasn't stopped Abortion at all........They travel and can still get it.

So now it's attack the Red states trying to force the views of blue states on them.............who are BARBARIC.
 

TNHarley

Diamond Member
Joined
Sep 27, 2012
Messages
84,644
Reaction score
41,407
Points
2,290
I never specified when life begins. I've stated that the compromise needed is in the 2nd Trimester. And that most of America would agree to that in my opinion.

That is called my best opinion on a compromise that might actually work.

In regards to a fetus..........If allowed to grow in the mothers body and it's healthy it most certainly WILL BE A LIFE in about 9 months.

When does life BEGIN.........what is your solution to this other than keep it the same and allow Barbarism? The new ruling hasn't stopped Abortion at all........They travel and can still get it.

So now it's attack the Red states trying to force the views of blue states on them.............who are BARBARIC.
While no compromise will come from me, I think what you posted is fair.
 

TNHarley

Diamond Member
Joined
Sep 27, 2012
Messages
84,644
Reaction score
41,407
Points
2,290
Which is what we need to end this. How do we do this with the assholes in office now?
Wont happen. Probably wont happen with the next, either. We become more polarized every day.
 

eagle1462010

Diamond Member
Joined
May 17, 2013
Messages
62,268
Reaction score
28,166
Points
2,290
Wont happen. Probably wont happen with the next, either. We become more polarized every day.
Well then each state will have to deal with it over time then. A return to most of the power to the states is needed anyway. Might as well start it here.
 

TNHarley

Diamond Member
Joined
Sep 27, 2012
Messages
84,644
Reaction score
41,407
Points
2,290

Calypso Jones

Diamond Member
Joined
Jul 11, 2020
Messages
13,892
Reaction score
16,401
Points
2,288
Yes it was a manufactured story . I said so from the beginning..the timing, the coincidence was just too convenient.

THIS is why nobody believes a damn word out of the left.
 

beautress

Always Faithful
Joined
Sep 28, 2018
Messages
25,565
Reaction score
17,221
Points
1,445
Location
Walker County, TX
For reasons that will become obvious, I will intersperse my commentary on the author's article and related matters as I review the author's sometimes hilariously satirical observations in the order they're presented.

Opinion by Katelynn Richardson​
“Forced pregnancy is a crime against humanity,” Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY) wrote on Twitter on Sunday.​

As many in the comments were quick to agree, yes, rape is a crime. Seeing through Ocasio-Cortez’s ridiculous statement, commenters noted that the killing of innocent unborn children is also a crime.​

Interjection: :auiqs.jpg:oh, well, Alexandria Ol' Crazy-Eyes-Cortez is not the sharpest tool in the shed.

“Forced pregnancy,” like the equally absurd phrase “pro-forced birth,” is another way to suggest those who desire to protect unborn life have malicious intent. Yet, in the majority of situations leading to abortion, there are ways to avoid pregnancy, as some abortion advocates apparently just discovered. Women who oppose the Dobbs decision have kindled a renewed passion for one time-tested method of preventing pregnancy: abstinence. The word was even trending on Twitter on Saturday.​

“Because SCOTUS overturned Roe V. Wade, we cannot take the risk of an unintended pregnancy, therefore, we will not have sex with any man–including our husbands–unless we are trying to become pregnant,” a #SexStrike pledge circulating on Twitter says:​

Interjection: hence, the time-tested method that supposedly doesn't work. Zoom Right over their heads! :auiqs.jpg:

The hilarious attempt to outwit conservatives by adopting conservative ethics aside, other narratives that cast pregnancy in a negative light are far more disturbing. Media headlines grappling with the overturn of Roe v. Wade emphasize the health consequences of pregnancy, leaving many women sincerely frightened that their lives are in danger without abortion.​
Those deriding abortion bans falsely claim treatments necessary to save the mother, such as in cases of ectopic pregnancies and miscarriages, will be prohibited. In doing so, they ignore the definition of an abortion: the intentional killing of an innocent human life. Ectopic pregnancies, which occur when an embryo implants outside the uterus where it cannot survive, can truly be fatal to the mother. The goal in treating them is not taking a life. It is to save the life of the mother when there is no way to save the baby. It’s not an abortion, and it’s not prohibited.​

Interjection: here I must disagree with the author who is unwittingly conflating killing and murder. Actually, a very early chemical termination of a pregnancy, whether it be normal or ectopic, is an abortion entailing the killing of a developing human life in the zygotic stage of gestation. The developing life is being killed. It cannot come to term and would kill the mother if not terminated and dissolved. In this instance, abortion is a legitimate medical procedure. Of course, the ultimate takeaway here is that such medical abortions would not be prohibited, but we should not use euphemistic terms to describe what they are as if what they are necessarily something nefarious. Intentionally killing a human life that cannot come to term in the first place is simply not the same thing as intentionally killing a human life that can for the sake of some expediency. The former is an ethical medical abortion; the latter is not.

Treatment for women who have experienced miscarriages is likewise not in jeopardy, even when treatments use similar techniques as abortions, like a dilation and suction procedure or medication. Treating a pregnancy loss is, again, far different from inducing an abortion. Even in cases in which the pregnancy poses a threat, it does not necessitate abortion. Leading OB/GYNs acknowledge that separating the mother and fetus can be done without intentionally seeking to kill the child.​

Interjection: Indeed! And this goes to the arguably biggest lie of the proabortion agenda, regarding the supposedly vaguely defined exceptions in abortion prohibitions relative to the life of the mother and the supposed confusion over proper medical care. See my refutation here:


To be fair to Coyote, yes, there are immediately and hopelessly fatal and crippling congenital diseases that unborn babies can have, but these too are very rare. Moreover, they are known, and there's absolutely no reason prohibitions cannot make definitive exceptions accordingly.

“Certainly we're not about forcing women to be pregnant,” Dr. Christina Francis, board member of the American Association of Pro-Life Obstetricians and Gynecologists, said in an NPR interview. “But, you know, once they are pregnant and there's another human life at stake there, then our job as physicians is to provide excellent care to both of those patients.”​
Supposed health threats extend beyond these difficult scenarios to include inconveniences to the mother. Horrifyingly, some categorize “fetal anomalies” — the risk of a baby having a genetic condition — as an emotional health risk to the mother. CNN commentator Ana Navarro-Cardenas cited this reason on-air Friday, using her own brother with special needs as an example.​
Another article in Scientific American lists changes to the woman’s body as a potential risk to continuing pregnancy.​
“All of an expecting mother’s organs and bodily systems are put to a nine-month endurance test. The work of the heart and lungs increases by 30 to 50 percent (or even more in a twin pregnancy!), the kidneys filter more blood, the immune system adjusts, metabolic demands increase substantially, and there are myriad other changes,” the article says.​
Yes, changes occur to the body during pregnancy. That’s part of the deal. But it’s not a justification for taking the life of the child.​
Not only are these arguments tragic, they’re flat-out wrong. A review of 11 studies showed higher risks of death among women who received abortions. In the relentless pursuit of abortion, activists are painting pregnancy as a burden, rather than a gift that brings life. It’s wrong, and particularly harmful to women who have endured the pain of losing a pregnancy through no fault of their own.​
Also see: Justice Sotomayor is Wrong: Women Are Not Fourteen Times More Likely to Die from Pregnancy
Sex strike means divorce. I ask Ms. AOC how divorce benefits American families. :rolleyes-41:
 

miketx

Diamond Member
Joined
Dec 25, 2015
Messages
112,128
Reaction score
60,198
Points
2,645
For reasons that will become obvious, I will intersperse my commentary on the author's article and related matters as I review the author's sometimes hilariously satirical observations in the order they're presented.

Opinion by Katelynn Richardson​
“Forced pregnancy is a crime against humanity,” Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY) wrote on Twitter on Sunday.​

As many in the comments were quick to agree, yes, rape is a crime. Seeing through Ocasio-Cortez’s ridiculous statement, commenters noted that the killing of innocent unborn children is also a crime.​

Interjection: :auiqs.jpg:oh, well, Alexandria Ol' Crazy-Eyes-Cortez is not the sharpest tool in the shed.

“Forced pregnancy,” like the equally absurd phrase “pro-forced birth,” is another way to suggest those who desire to protect unborn life have malicious intent. Yet, in the majority of situations leading to abortion, there are ways to avoid pregnancy, as some abortion advocates apparently just discovered. Women who oppose the Dobbs decision have kindled a renewed passion for one time-tested method of preventing pregnancy: abstinence. The word was even trending on Twitter on Saturday.​

“Because SCOTUS overturned Roe V. Wade, we cannot take the risk of an unintended pregnancy, therefore, we will not have sex with any man–including our husbands–unless we are trying to become pregnant,” a #SexStrike pledge circulating on Twitter says:​

Interjection: hence, the time-tested method that supposedly doesn't work. Zoom Right over their heads! :auiqs.jpg:

The hilarious attempt to outwit conservatives by adopting conservative ethics aside, other narratives that cast pregnancy in a negative light are far more disturbing. Media headlines grappling with the overturn of Roe v. Wade emphasize the health consequences of pregnancy, leaving many women sincerely frightened that their lives are in danger without abortion.​
Those deriding abortion bans falsely claim treatments necessary to save the mother, such as in cases of ectopic pregnancies and miscarriages, will be prohibited. In doing so, they ignore the definition of an abortion: the intentional killing of an innocent human life. Ectopic pregnancies, which occur when an embryo implants outside the uterus where it cannot survive, can truly be fatal to the mother. The goal in treating them is not taking a life. It is to save the life of the mother when there is no way to save the baby. It’s not an abortion, and it’s not prohibited.​

Interjection: here I must disagree with the author who is unwittingly conflating killing and murder. Actually, a very early chemical termination of a pregnancy, whether it be normal or ectopic, is an abortion entailing the killing of a developing human life in the zygotic stage of gestation. The developing life is being killed. It cannot come to term and would kill the mother if not terminated and dissolved. In this instance, abortion is a legitimate medical procedure. Of course, the ultimate takeaway here is that such medical abortions would not be prohibited, but we should not use euphemistic terms to describe what they are as if what they are necessarily something nefarious. Intentionally killing a human life that cannot come to term in the first place is simply not the same thing as intentionally killing a human life that can for the sake of some expediency. The former is an ethical medical abortion; the latter is not.

Treatment for women who have experienced miscarriages is likewise not in jeopardy, even when treatments use similar techniques as abortions, like a dilation and suction procedure or medication. Treating a pregnancy loss is, again, far different from inducing an abortion. Even in cases in which the pregnancy poses a threat, it does not necessitate abortion. Leading OB/GYNs acknowledge that separating the mother and fetus can be done without intentionally seeking to kill the child.​

Interjection: Indeed! And this goes to the arguably biggest lie of the proabortion agenda, regarding the supposedly vaguely defined exceptions in abortion prohibitions relative to the life of the mother and the supposed confusion over proper medical care. See my refutation here:


To be fair to Coyote, yes, there are immediately and hopelessly fatal and crippling congenital diseases that unborn babies can have, but these too are very rare. Moreover, they are known, and there's absolutely no reason prohibitions cannot make definitive exceptions accordingly.

“Certainly we're not about forcing women to be pregnant,” Dr. Christina Francis, board member of the American Association of Pro-Life Obstetricians and Gynecologists, said in an NPR interview. “But, you know, once they are pregnant and there's another human life at stake there, then our job as physicians is to provide excellent care to both of those patients.”​
Supposed health threats extend beyond these difficult scenarios to include inconveniences to the mother. Horrifyingly, some categorize “fetal anomalies” — the risk of a baby having a genetic condition — as an emotional health risk to the mother. CNN commentator Ana Navarro-Cardenas cited this reason on-air Friday, using her own brother with special needs as an example.​
Another article in Scientific American lists changes to the woman’s body as a potential risk to continuing pregnancy.​
“All of an expecting mother’s organs and bodily systems are put to a nine-month endurance test. The work of the heart and lungs increases by 30 to 50 percent (or even more in a twin pregnancy!), the kidneys filter more blood, the immune system adjusts, metabolic demands increase substantially, and there are myriad other changes,” the article says.​
Yes, changes occur to the body during pregnancy. That’s part of the deal. But it’s not a justification for taking the life of the child.​
Not only are these arguments tragic, they’re flat-out wrong. A review of 11 studies showed higher risks of death among women who received abortions. In the relentless pursuit of abortion, activists are painting pregnancy as a burden, rather than a gift that brings life. It’s wrong, and particularly harmful to women who have endured the pain of losing a pregnancy through no fault of their own.​
Also see: Justice Sotomayor is Wrong: Women Are Not Fourteen Times More Likely to Die from Pregnancy
She's definitely scum but in this case it should be up to the raped mother to decide what to do with the child. Carry to term and put up for adoption or abort. Of course there must be a police report...
 

Grumblenuts

Gold Member
Joined
Oct 16, 2017
Messages
11,133
Reaction score
3,387
Points
210
we need to end this. How do we do this
Simples. Don't like abortion? Don't have one. Very easy choice for those possessing Y chromosomes. One need only keep their snooty nose and peeping eyes out of everyone else's very difficult, private decisions unless the pregnant adult directly requests their input. Liberty (given within Golden Rule guided reason or "to the tip of one's nose," whichever applies best):
noun

1. the state of being free within society from oppressive restrictions imposed by authority on one's way of life, behavior, or political views.​
"compulsory retirement would interfere with individual liberty"



2. the power or scope to act as one pleases.​
"individuals should enjoy the liberty to pursue their own interests and preferences"
 
Last edited:

💲 Amazon Deals 💲

Forum List

Top