Bill Maher basically admits abortion is murder, and tells us why we need to embrace it anyway.

[Foxfyre]

You clearly do not understand that abortion debate is fundamentally about RIGHTS.

Rights of the parents to have reproductive freedom and have children when they are ready to VS interests of the child and the state to restict those rights.

You clearly are part of the tunnel vision mentality that dictates what a person must think and believe in order to be acceptable and that only allows one point of view to be expressed.

 

[AntonToo]

You clearly are part of the tunnel vision mentality that dictates what a person must think and believe in order to be acceptable and that only allows one point of view to be expressed.

Cool story bruh, come back when you can actually reply to what you quote.

 

[Foxfyre]

Except it's not a viable unique life before 22 weeks.

It is entirely a unique life as all the dna is present that will produce the child and adult that the person will/could become. It is not a viable life without intensive care from an adult for 22 or more weeks after birth either.

 

[JoeB131]

A lot of polls say the 10-15 week bans on birth control abortions are just fine.

Actually in NY an CA even a viable fetus can be aborted at the last second as long as you can convince one doctor the woman's health is at some undefined level of risk.

They are perfectly free to apply that standard to their own bodies.

Do you really think there's a woman out there who goes through 9 months of pregnancy and then decides to abort?

 

[martybegan]

It does sound like you do agree that abortion should be legal up certain point of pregnancy.

I'm a realist. 10-15 weeks covers rape (which covers incest, you don't need to list both), and exceptions for the life of the mother or fetal non-viability covers things nicely.

My main problem with Roe was as a strict constructionist.

 

[Foxfyre]

Cool story bruh, come back when you can actually reply to what you quote.

I will reply to what was written when you do.

 

[martybegan]

They are perfectly free to apply that standard to their own bodies.

Do you really think there's a woman out there who goes through 9 months of pregnancy and then decides to abort?

Then why write the law to cover that situation?

Who's being the extremist now?

 

[JoeB131]

It is entirely a unique life as all the dna is present that will produce the child and adult that the person will/could become. It is not a viable life without intensive care from an adult for 22 or more weeks after birth either.

Exccept no one is COMPELLED to take care of it after birth. A woman after birth can say, "I'm done!" and hand it off to the state. Heck, they even have drop boxes at fire stations if they decide to do that.

What you want to do is compel a woman to have a baby whether she wants to or not.

 

[AntonToo]

It is not a viable life without intensive care from parents for 22 or more weeks after birth either.

...maybe if those parents work at the NICU.

 

[Foxfyre]

Exccept no one is COMPELLED to take care of it after birth. A woman after birth can say, "I'm done!" and hand it off to the state. Heck, they even have drop boxes at fire stations if they decide to do that.

What you want to do is compel a woman to have a baby whether she wants to or not.

Somebody is compelled to take care of a newborn or it is murder.

 

[JoeB131]

I'm a realist. 10-15 weeks covers rape (which covers incest, you don't need to list both), and exceptions for the life of the mother or fetal non-viability covers things nicely.

My main problem with Roe was as a strict constructionist.

A realist would realize that a woman who doesn't want to be pregnant will find a way to not be pregnant.

The Constitution is not a suicide pact.

 

[JoeB131]

Somebody is compelled to take care of a newborn or it is murder.

Actually, no, not really. A woman can walk away from her baby. SOMEONE ELSE will take care of it, to be sure, but no one is compelled to take care of it against their will, that's the thing.

Not to worry, though, your Republican Friends are working very hard to get rid of SNAP, WIC and other programs to help babies in NON-FETUS form.

 

[martybegan]

A realist would realize that a woman who doesn't want to be pregnant will find a way to not be pregnant.

The Constitution is not a suicide pact.

A realist would realize someone who wants to murder someone will find a way to murder them. Bad logic is bad logic.

And bad reference #2.

Care to go for the strike out?

 

[Foxfyre]

Actually, no, not really. A woman can walk away from her baby. SOMEONE ELSE will take care of it, to be sure, but no one is compelled to take care of it against their will, that's the thing.

Not to worry, though, your Republican Friends are working very hard to get rid of SNAP, WIC and other programs to help babies in NON-FETUS form.

Non sequitur and very idiotically twisted on your part. But that's what I've come to expect from your posts. Have a nice day.

'It Was Horrible': Michigan Mother Found Guilty of Starving 'Emaciated' Newborn Baby to Death

Shantavia Hayden was convicted of murder and child abuse for starving her newborn son to death in October 2020.

lawandcrime.com

 

[JoeB131]

A realist would realize someone who wants to murder someone will find a way to murder them. Bad logic is bad logic.

Except that you have universal agreement that murder is wrong. Police will arrest, prosecutors will prosecute, juries will convict.

You don't have that with abortion laws. Even before Roe, they were rarely prosecuted. (And often only because the abortionist screwed up and maimed the patient.)

I've said, put me on an abortion jury, I'll vote to acquit, I don't care if you have video of the provider throwing Globby the Fetus across the room and yelling "Three points" when he hits the medical waste container.

And bad reference #2.

Nope, it's a fine reference. The constitution is a fine document despite its MANY flaws, but it shouldn't be a substitute for common fucking sense.

 

[JoeB131]

Non sequitur and very idiotically twisted on your part. But that's what I've come to expect from your posts. Have a nice day.

The point is, no one compelled that woman to take care of the child after birth, she chose to and did it badly.

I am interested to hear how you plan to enforce your puritanism without massively violating the rights of the women these fetuses are inside.

 

[martybegan]

Except that you have universal agreement that murder is wrong. Police will arrest, prosecutors will prosecute, juries will convict.

You don't have that with abortion laws. Even before Roe, they were rarely prosecuted. (And often only because the abortionist screwed up and maimed the patient.)

I've said, put me on an abortion jury, I'll vote to acquit, I don't care if you have video of the provider throwing Globby the Fetus across the room and yelling "Three points" when he hits the medical waste container.


Nope, it's a fine reference. The constitution is a fine document despite its MANY flaws, but it shouldn't be a substitute for common fucking sense.

You have enough people thinking it is wrong to make it an issue, despite your desire for it not to be.

That's because as we have already figured out you are a functional psychopath.

If there are flaws they can be handled by the amendment process.

 

[JoeB131]

You have enough people thinking it is wrong to make it an issue, despite your desire for it not to be.

Not enough to enforce a law, though, that's the point. You will stop zero abortions, you'll just make them more of a pain in the ass to get.

That's because as we have already figured out you are a functional psychopath.

Or someone who is just a realist.

How often were women convicted of having abortions before Roe v. Wade? You think you can get a conviction after Dobbs?

If there are flaws they can be handled by the amendment process.

Um, they tried that with the whole fiasco of the 18th and 21st Amendments... which is why you don't use the constitution to try to impose morality.

 

[martybegan]

Not enough to enforce a law, though, that's the point. You will stop zero abortions, you'll just make them more of a pain in the ass to get.



Or someone who is just a realist.

How often were women convicted of having abortions before Roe v. Wade? You think you can get a conviction after Dobbs?


Um, they tried that with the whole fiasco of the 18th and 21st Amendments... which is why you don't use the constitution to try to impose morality.

Oh you will stop plenty, and a 10-15 week limit will make people make up their mind quicker.

Don't convict the women, convict the doctors. problem solved.

And they used the process properly.

 

[JoeB131]

Oh you will stop plenty, and a 10-15 week limit will make people make up their mind quicker.

Actually, it won't stop any. They'll go to other states, they'll find doctors who will happily lie.

Don't convict the women, convict the doctors. problem solved.

Isn't that kind of a copout? If you really think abortion is murder, then you should be going after the women, not the doctors. Just like you go after the Mafia Don, not the hit man.