Can Reps modify abortion stance?

[JoeB131]

Most people don't think a fetus is the same as a human being, even when the pregnancy is wanted.

Of course they do. Don't make the mistake of thinking your fucked up view of the world is 'normal.'

No they don't.

I've known people who've had miscarriages, and people who've had babies die in their cribs.

The latter group really do lose it. The former group are sad, but they don't go nuts like the former group.

 

[JoeB131]

abortion should be legal because women will get them regardless of what the law is.

By that reasoning there should be no laws at all about anything, you illogical turd.

Um... no, not really.

People won't tolerate murderers. They'd take them out and lynch them if the government did nothing.

That's kind of the point. We don't have 1.2 million murders in this country. We do have 1.2 million abortions. And we'd have the same amount even if they were illegal.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Murder is a legal term, not defined by one's goofy opinion. Certainly not by goofy opinions from the evangelical cultist reactionary extreme right.

 

[CrotchetyGeezer]

CG, kg does not define murder or abortion in America.

Neither do you.

That is done by the appropriate legal and medical authorities, which kg is not.

Neither are you. And, in 1930s and 1940s Nazi Germany, their definition of murder was done by their appropriate legal and medical authorities.

She, and you, by extension, are merely evangelical cultists who wish to push your form of evangelical sharia morality onto all Americans.

Yeah, Hitler would be proud of you...wouldn't he? And, the fact that you're admitting you advocate the killing of unborn children? Pretty sick...really. WTF did they ever do to you? They're innocent and have done absolutely nothing wrong to deserve death. Interesting that you'd likely appoint yourself the spokesperson for things of which can't speak for themselves, such as animals and trees but, you have a problem with folks appointing themselves the spokespeople for unborn human beings. Frankly, you're quite pathetic...aren't you?

The last election clearly shows you don't have a chance.

Not hardly. You can keep dreaming but you're making way too much out of the election than is warranted. But, the fact is, as I demonstrate in another thread about demographics, most of the demographics are trending Republican. You can keep deluding yourself into believing otherwise but, those are just the facts. Obama didn't do as well as he did in 2008 in a good number of demographic areas and, instead, lost ground. There were only a few demographic areas in which he did well and most of them only go to demonstrate that he won their votes by offering them trinkets and giving them hope that they might get more trinkets.

So is it murder when a man lawfully kills his wife under sharia law?

Was it murder when slave owners killed their slaves?

When you have laws that permit human rights violations, even though the law determines at that time you have not committed a crime, you have still committed a crime against humanity. Germany understands this, now....laws that legalize murder are bad law, and when people establish them, it's just a matter of time before the society crumbles and the people who established the bad laws are exposed as fascists and murderers.

The doctors who killed in the name of improving the race, though they were perfectly within the boundaries of the current law in doing so, were ultimately put on trial for crimes against humanity, and some of them were hanged. I wouldn't hold too dearly to the concept that "if it's legal we don't have to worry about it, it's okay". Ultimately, the world will judge the people who establish such laws and act accordingly...and they will be held accountable...as will the people who were willing to look the other way.

Boy, this comment sure shut USwings up real fast. LOL! He must be flabbergasted and at a loss for words. I love it. I thoroughly expected him to have replied to this by now but...so far, nothing. All I hear are crickets.

[/QUOTE]

 

[USwings]

Apparently I need to explain the definition of murder for you so to better represent the facts.
Murder is the unlawful killing, with malice aforethought, of another human,

Since abortion is not unlawful, it is not murder, therefor your use of the word murder makes your argument faulty.
Pointing out a flaw in your argument is not a defense of abortion.

So is it murder when a man lawfully kills his wife under sharia law?

Was it murder when slave owners killed their slaves?

When you have laws that permit human rights violations, even though the law determines at that time you have not committed a crime, you have still committed a crime against humanity. Germany understands this, now....laws that legalize murder are bad law, and when people establish them, it's just a matter of time before the society crumbles and the people who established the bad laws are exposed as fascists and murderers.

The doctors who killed in the name of improving the race, though they were perfectly within the boundaries of the current law in doing so, were ultimately put on trial for crimes against humanity, and some of them were hanged. I wouldn't hold too dearly to the concept that "if it's legal we don't have to worry about it, it's okay". Ultimately, the world will judge the people who establish such laws and act accordingly...and they will be held accountable...as will the people who were willing to look the other way.

Boy, this comment sure shut USwings up real fast. LOL! He must be flabbergasted and at a loss for words. I love it. I thoroughly expected him to have replied to this by now but...so far, nothing. All I hear are crickets.

By all means hop in your time machine, to your made up future. Make erroneous comparisons if that floats your boat. It doesn't change the facts, or reality that abortion is legal, and that President Obama will be picking the next justices for the Supreme Court. In case you don't understand, any rulings affecting abortion will be decided by the Supreme Court. The law is not going to change for the better in our lifetime. Pat yourselves on the back all you want about your delusions. Thick skulls are thick skulls, I can make it any simpler for you to understand. There's likely to be 30 million abortions in the next 20 years in the US. Nothing your talking about is going to stop them. The government is not going to stop abortions, only mothers will.

http://fr.convio.net/site/DocServer/FR1211_web_newsletter.pdf?docID=221

us

 

[JakeStarkey]

Murder is a legal definition, not controlled by the opinions of the evangelical cultists. The false analogy with Germany is evidence of weak thinking.

Indeed, America's cult leaders would be very proud of their trying to subvert the will of the majority of Americans. Cult leaders and their stooges act like Nazis in trying to make the moral majority do the will of the immoral minority. You are much like the Nazis in that respect, CG.

Anyone who thinks that 55% of the women, 66% of the single (and that vote going sky high the younger the voters) women were acting “hormonal” on election day are simply unable to recognize the obvious: American woman will not be controlled by cult values of the evangelical right.

The sharia evangelicals in this country want to tell the other 88% of the population how to live. Stupid. Mothers are in control of their bodies, not the cults.

 

[CrotchetyGeezer]

By all means hop in your time machine, to your made up future. Make erroneous comparisons if that floats your boat. It doesn't change the facts, or reality that abortion is legal,

For now.

and that President Obama will be picking the next justices for the Supreme Court.

You hope Obama will be picking the next justices for the Supreme Court. Further, such justices need to be approved by Congress.

In case you don't understand, any rulings affecting abortion will be decided by the Supreme Court.

Oops, you are incorrect. The Supreme Court does not make law, they only interpret law. Congress makes law. If Congress creates a new law respecting abortion, all the Supreme Court can do is interpret this new law, not make it, change it or otherwise modify it.

The law is not going to change for the better in our lifetime.

We'll see.

Pat yourselves on the back all you want about your delusions. Thick skulls are thick skulls, I can make it any simpler for you to understand. There's likely to be 30 million abortions in the next 20 years in the US. Nothing your talking about is going to stop them. The government is not going to stop abortions, only mothers will.

We'll see. Further, that there will be 30 million children killed over the next 20 years and you act so giddy about it and proud of your confidence that you're right? Despicable is the only word I can think of at the moment to describe such a nonchalant attitude.

 

[CrotchetyGeezer]

abortion should be legal because women will get them regardless of what the law is.

By that reasoning there should be no laws at all about anything, you illogical turd.

Um... no, not really.

People won't tolerate murderers. They'd take them out and lynch them if the government did nothing.

No they wouldn't, as they'd be accused of vigilantism and charged with murder.

That's kind of the point. We don't have 1.2 million murders in this country. We do have 1.2 million abortions. And we'd have the same amount even if they were illegal.

Well, no, actually we have 1.2 million murders in this country, under the guise of abortion. The abortion laws just make it a "legal" murder. Sort of like executing a killer, only, the unborn child never did anything wrong.

 

[JoeB131]

[
Um... no, not really.

No they wouldn't, as they'd be accused of vigilantism and charged with murder.

That's kind of the point. We don't have 1.2 million murders in this country. We do have 1.2 million abortions. And we'd have the same amount even if they were illegal.

Well, no, actually we have 1.2 million murders in this country, under the guise of abortion. The abortion laws just make it a "legal" murder. Sort of like executing a killer, only, the unborn child never did anything wrong.

My theory is what would happen if the government stopped enforcing the murder laws. Vigilantes WOULD take matters into their own hands.

The government never did enforce the abortion laws, even before Roe v. Wade. Everyone knew someone who could "take care of that sort of thing".

 

[JakeStarkey]

CG is merely mumbling, "Oh, no, you dinn't".

He does not get his opinions mean nothing in the GOP now.

 

[CrotchetyGeezer]

[
Um... no, not really.

No they wouldn't, as they'd be accused of vigilantism and charged with murder.

That's kind of the point. We don't have 1.2 million murders in this country. We do have 1.2 million abortions. And we'd have the same amount even if they were illegal.

Well, no, actually we have 1.2 million murders in this country, under the guise of abortion. The abortion laws just make it a "legal" murder. Sort of like executing a killer, only, the unborn child never did anything wrong.

My theory is what would happen if the government stopped enforcing the murder laws. Vigilantes WOULD take matters into their own hands.

If the government stopped enforcing murder laws, in many instances, the same things would likely happen to women who get abortions as would happen to someone who stabs or shoots someone.

The government never did enforce the abortion laws, even before Roe v. Wade. Everyone knew someone who could "take care of that sort of thing".

The government wouldn't have had authority to enforce the abortion laws. States made their abortion laws and were responsible for enforcing them.

 

[CrotchetyGeezer]

CG is merely mumbling, "Oh, no, you dinn't".

He does not get his opinions mean nothing in the GOP now.

Really? So you mean now all of a sudden the GOP is in favor of abortions because Obama won? Are you really this stupid as to believe this?

 

[Seawytch]

[
Um... no, not really.

No they wouldn't, as they'd be accused of vigilantism and charged with murder.

That's kind of the point. We don't have 1.2 million murders in this country. We do have 1.2 million abortions. And we'd have the same amount even if they were illegal.

Well, no, actually we have 1.2 million murders in this country, under the guise of abortion. The abortion laws just make it a "legal" murder. Sort of like executing a killer, only, the unborn child never did anything wrong.

My theory is what would happen if the government stopped enforcing the murder laws. Vigilantes WOULD take matters into their own hands.

The government never did enforce the abortion laws, even before Roe v. Wade. Everyone knew someone who could "take care of that sort of thing".

And if we did do something stupid like make abortion illegal, someone still would "take care of that sort of thing". Rich women will have doctors that do it...poor women will have coat hangars.

Keep abortion safe and legal...just make it rare.

 

[JoeB131]

[

If the government stopped enforcing murder laws, in many instances, the same things would likely happen to women who get abortions as would happen to someone who stabs or shoots someone.

I'm just going to leave this comment here on its own, to show the deep level of misogyny that infects the "Pro-Life" crowd.

 

[JoeB131]

[

The government never did enforce the abortion laws, even before Roe v. Wade. Everyone knew someone who could "take care of that sort of thing".

The government wouldn't have had authority to enforce the abortion laws. States made their abortion laws and were responsible for enforcing them.

But that's the point, they didn't enforce them.

Do you know how many women were arrested for having abortions before Roe v. Wade?

Exactly 2. 1 in 1911, one in 1922.

Arrests of abortions were a little more common, but not much. For instance, Ruth Barret, the notorious "Dr. Ruth" of Portland, Oregon, performed some 40,000 abortions between 1918 and 1968. They didn't start arresting her until the 1950's, and even then, she got very light sentences when she was convicted.

 

[CrotchetyGeezer]

[

If the government stopped enforcing murder laws, in many instances, the same things would likely happen to women who get abortions as would happen to someone who stabs or shoots someone.

I'm just going to leave this comment here on its own, to show the deep level of misogyny that infects the "Pro-Life" crowd.

Is this opposed to the deep level of misogyny and misandry what infects the pro-choice crowd?

 

[JoeB131]

[

If the government stopped enforcing murder laws, in many instances, the same things would likely happen to women who get abortions as would happen to someone who stabs or shoots someone.

I'm just going to leave this comment here on its own, to show the deep level of misogyny that infects the "Pro-Life" crowd.

Is this opposed to the deep level of misogyny and misandry what infects the pro-choice crowd?

 

[CrotchetyGeezer]

[

The government never did enforce the abortion laws, even before Roe v. Wade. Everyone knew someone who could "take care of that sort of thing".

The government wouldn't have had authority to enforce the abortion laws. States made their abortion laws and were responsible for enforcing them.

But that's the point, they didn't enforce them.

Do you know how many women were arrested for having abortions before Roe v. Wade?

Exactly 2. 1 in 1911, one in 1922.

Arrests of abortions were a little more common, but not much. For instance, Ruth Barret, the notorious "Dr. Ruth" of Portland, Oregon, performed some 40,000 abortions between 1918 and 1968. They didn't start arresting her until the 1950's, and even then, she got very light sentences when she was convicted.

So in other words you're contradicting yourself. First you say they didn't enforce them and then immediately in the next two paragraphs, you admit they in fact did. Further, in many instances, they didn't need to enforce them as the women pretty much faced their consequences by achieving their own death or irreversible and severe injury. The only reason they didn't get arrested is because they weren't caught. Had they been caught in the act, they most likely would have been arrested so trying to make a case that not many were arrested, because there was really no way of having caught them in the act, is pretty stupid.

 

[CrotchetyGeezer]

No they wouldn't, as they'd be accused of vigilantism and charged with murder.



Well, no, actually we have 1.2 million murders in this country, under the guise of abortion. The abortion laws just make it a "legal" murder. Sort of like executing a killer, only, the unborn child never did anything wrong.

My theory is what would happen if the government stopped enforcing the murder laws. Vigilantes WOULD take matters into their own hands.

The government never did enforce the abortion laws, even before Roe v. Wade. Everyone knew someone who could "take care of that sort of thing".

And if we did do something stupid like make abortion illegal, someone still would "take care of that sort of thing". Rich women will have doctors that do it...poor women will have coat hangars.

Good, let the poor women have coat hangers. They deserve a coat hanger. Then, they'll face the consequences of their actions and they'll experience some semblance of what that unborn child is going through. And, insofar as the rich women, their doctors can be arrested just as easily as any other doctor can be.

Keep abortion safe and legal...just make it rare.

Safe for whom? The dead kid?

And hey, here's a novel idea. Why don't we give that kid a chance to be adopted? And, make a law which states that as long as there is an American child that needs adopted, people can't adopt children from foreign countries like Angelina Jolie does?

 

[JoeB131]

[



The government wouldn't have had authority to enforce the abortion laws. States made their abortion laws and were responsible for enforcing them.

But that's the point, they didn't enforce them.

Do you know how many women were arrested for having abortions before Roe v. Wade?

Exactly 2. 1 in 1911, one in 1922.

Arrests of abortions were a little more common, but not much. For instance, Ruth Barret, the notorious "Dr. Ruth" of Portland, Oregon, performed some 40,000 abortions between 1918 and 1968. They didn't start arresting her until the 1950's, and even then, she got very light sentences when she was convicted.

So in other words you're contradicting yourself. First you say they didn't enforce them and then immediately in the next two paragraphs, you admit they in fact did. Further, in many instances, they didn't need to enforce them as the women pretty much faced their consequences by achieving their own death or irreversible and severe injury. The only reason they didn't get arrested is because they weren't caught. Had they been caught in the act, they most likely would have been arrested so trying to make a case that not many were arrested, because there was really no way of having caught them in the act, is pretty stupid.

Guy, go back and read what I said.

My point is that the enforcement was so lax that it became meaningless.

If someone committed 40,000 murders over a 50 year period, and they didn't arrest her until 30 years in, gave her a slap on the wrist, and she went right back to killing, that would be a pretty lax murder law.

But that is EXACTLY what happened to Ruth Barnett. (and sorry, had to correct the name spelling).

And the only reason why she came to anyone's attention was that she botched a few of her procedures and women were injured.