Democrats vote down late term abortion restrictions in D.C.

[CrazedScotsman]

Soon, it will be legal to have an abortion of a child up to two years old. The reason it will stop at the age of two is because it is around that time that a child becomes aware of his/her own life. There are some on the left who are all for this and they do want it. The left are the biggest racist I have ever seen. They know that the majority of the women who get abortions are African American, so the left tries to make it as easy as possible to get one.

And it's all in the name of "Women's Rights" or "A Woman's Right To Choose", and you lefties who scream and shout the loudest are the biggest racist.

 

[Moonglow]

The frightening fact is that if we don't get some of these knee-jerk proponents of industrialized murder to call a murder a murder, we'll soon be fighting for the lives of children whose parents accept the rationalization for infanticide now being pushed by the "ultra-evolved" among us.

The Rotting Fruit of Pro "Choice" Labors

LIke these women?

Religion

Women who obtain abortions represent every religious affiliation. 13% of abortion patients describe themselves as born-again or Evangelical Christians4; while 22% of U.S. women are Catholic,7 27% of abortion patients say they are Catholics.1

National Abortion Federation: Women Who Have Abortions

 

[Moonglow]

Soon, it will be legal to have an abortion of a child up to two years old. The reason it will stop at the age of two is because it is around that time that a child becomes aware of his/her own life. There are some on the left who are all for this and they do want it. The left are the biggest racist I have ever seen. They know that the majority of the women who get abortions are African American, so the left tries to make it as easy as possible to get one.

And it's all in the name of "Women's Rights" or "A Woman's Right To Choose", and you lefties who scream and shout the loudest are the biggest racist.

and soon you will have a penis you can call your own.

 

[IGetItAlready]

Democrats want Abortion at any stage of pregnancy...Sick

House lawmakers vote down bill on DC abortion restrictions


House lawmakers Tuesday voted down a bill that would ban abortions in the District of Columbia after 20 weeks of pregnancy

The bill, which would have sharply curtailed a policy that currently allows abortions in almost every circumstance, failed in a 220-154 vote. Seventeen Democrats joined 203 Republicans to support it, but because it was considered under special rules requiring a 2/3 vote for passage, the bill won't proceed to the Democratic-controlled Senate, where it was unlikely come up for a vote.

The bill, authored by Rep. Trent Franks, R-Ariz., was based on the disputed claim that fetuses can feel pain at a gestational age of 20 weeks or older.

House lawmakers vote down bill on DC abortion restrictions | Fox News

I remember when Congress passed legislation banning partial-birth abortion only to have Clinton veto it.





While I'm here, rather than starting another abortion circle-jerk thread, I have a question for ya'll:

What, exactly, WOULD it take to overturn Roe v Wade?

I mean, we all know that the all powerful SCOTUS doesn't have an appeals process.

So, now what?

Start a whole new case?
We just witnessed how unpredictable the SCOTUS is....between the ACA and Citizens United cases.

What guarantee do we have of a "favorable" ruling?

This is the type of issue that has the potential to literally rip our society in two. We're dangerously close now to allowing abortion anytime prior to birth and as implied here: The Rotting Fruit of Pro Choice Labor, we're just scratching the surface.

 

[tjvh]

Nice set you have, wanting to treat women like brood mares where they are forced to give birth.

You idiots seem to think childbirth is a walk in the park. It isn't.

Forced? What's wrong with both men and women using contraceptives to ensure idiots like you don't have to be inconvenienced. Personal responsibility... You might try it sometime.

Why don't the religious right and the repubs get out of our lives and let us live with our own decisions and let God settle the score?
I thought you repubs were braggarts on freedom,liberty and less intrusive government.

Politics is one thing idiot... Sitting idly by while you idiots kill out of convenience is quite another. What exactly is so hard about using contraceptives to ensure you aren't "forced" to kill the unborn? Can you numbskulls EVER take responsibility for the choices you make? No... Of course not.

 

[Mr.Nick]

Democrats want Abortion at any stage of pregnancy...Sick

House lawmakers vote down bill on DC abortion restrictions


House lawmakers Tuesday voted down a bill that would ban abortions in the District of Columbia after 20 weeks of pregnancy

The bill, which would have sharply curtailed a policy that currently allows abortions in almost every circumstance, failed in a 220-154 vote. Seventeen Democrats joined 203 Republicans to support it, but because it was considered under special rules requiring a 2/3 vote for passage, the bill won't proceed to the Democratic-controlled Senate, where it was unlikely come up for a vote.

The bill, authored by Rep. Trent Franks, R-Ariz., was based on the disputed claim that fetuses can feel pain at a gestational age of 20 weeks or older.

House lawmakers vote down bill on DC abortion restrictions | Fox News

I remember when Congress passed legislation banning partial-birth abortion only to have Clinton veto it.





While I'm here, rather than starting another abortion circle-jerk thread, I have a question for ya'll:

What, exactly, WOULD it take to overturn Roe v Wade?

I mean, we all know that the all powerful SCOTUS doesn't have an appeals process.

So, now what?

Start a whole new case?
We just witnessed how unpredictable the SCOTUS is....between the ACA and Citizens United cases.

What guarantee do we have of a "favorable" ruling?

What would it take? are fetuses not entitled to the same liberties US citizens are???

They certainly are...

This has absolutely nothing to do will my religion and everything to do with the Constitution....

A fetus has the right to live...

 

[IGetItAlready]

Democrats want Abortion at any stage of pregnancy...Sick



House lawmakers vote down bill on DC abortion restrictions | Fox News

I remember when Congress passed legislation banning partial-birth abortion only to have Clinton veto it.





While I'm here, rather than starting another abortion circle-jerk thread, I have a question for ya'll:

What, exactly, WOULD it take to overturn Roe v Wade?

I mean, we all know that the all powerful SCOTUS doesn't have an appeals process.

So, now what?

Start a whole new case?
We just witnessed how unpredictable the SCOTUS is....between the ACA and Citizens United cases.

What guarantee do we have of a "favorable" ruling?

This is the type of issue that has the potential to literally rip our society in two. We're dangerously close now to allowing abortion anytime prior to birth and as implied here: The Rotting Fruit of Pro Choice Labor, we're just scratching the surface.

Here's a taste: "I do not deny that if one accepts abortion on the grounds provided in Chapter 6, the case for killing other human beings, in certain circumstances, is strong. As I shall try to show in this chapter, however, this is not something to be regarded with horror, and the use of the Nazi analogy is utterly misleading. On the contrary, once we abandon those doctrines about the sanctity of human life that - as we saw in Chapter 4 - collapse as soon as they are questioned, it is the refusal to accept killing that, in some cases, is horrific."

-Princeton Professor Peter Singer- Bioethicist and cheerleader for industrialized murder at all stages of life.

 

[hortysir]

Democrats want Abortion at any stage of pregnancy...Sick



House lawmakers vote down bill on DC abortion restrictions | Fox News

I remember when Congress passed legislation banning partial-birth abortion only to have Clinton veto it.





While I'm here, rather than starting another abortion circle-jerk thread, I have a question for ya'll:

What, exactly, WOULD it take to overturn Roe v Wade?

I mean, we all know that the all powerful SCOTUS doesn't have an appeals process.

So, now what?

Start a whole new case?
We just witnessed how unpredictable the SCOTUS is....between the ACA and Citizens United cases.

What guarantee do we have of a "favorable" ruling?

It depends on what your definition of a favorable ruling is.

Overturning Roe v Wade, as I first asked

 

[hortysir]

Democrats want Abortion at any stage of pregnancy...Sick



House lawmakers vote down bill on DC abortion restrictions | Fox News

I remember when Congress passed legislation banning partial-birth abortion only to have Clinton veto it.





While I'm here, rather than starting another abortion circle-jerk thread, I have a question for ya'll:

What, exactly, WOULD it take to overturn Roe v Wade?

I mean, we all know that the all powerful SCOTUS doesn't have an appeals process.

So, now what?

Start a whole new case?
We just witnessed how unpredictable the SCOTUS is....between the ACA and Citizens United cases.

What guarantee do we have of a "favorable" ruling?

This is the type of issue that has the potential to literally rip our society in two. We're dangerously close now to allowing abortion anytime prior to birth and as implied here: The Rotting Fruit of Pro Choice Labor, we're just scratching the surface.

And one or two generations later, someone will want to overturn the overturn.........

SOunds like pissing in the wind, to me, s'all

 

[Mr.Nick]

I remember when Congress passed legislation banning partial-birth abortion only to have Clinton veto it.





While I'm here, rather than starting another abortion circle-jerk thread, I have a question for ya'll:

What, exactly, WOULD it take to overturn Roe v Wade?

I mean, we all know that the all powerful SCOTUS doesn't have an appeals process.

So, now what?

Start a whole new case?
We just witnessed how unpredictable the SCOTUS is....between the ACA and Citizens United cases.

What guarantee do we have of a "favorable" ruling?

This is the type of issue that has the potential to literally rip our society in two. We're dangerously close now to allowing abortion anytime prior to birth and as implied here: The Rotting Fruit of Pro Choice Labor, we're just scratching the surface.

Here's a taste: "I do not deny that if one accepts abortion on the grounds provided in Chapter 6, the case for killing other human beings, in certain circumstances, is strong. As I shall try to show in this chapter, however, this is not something to be regarded with horror, and the use of the Nazi analogy is utterly misleading. On the contrary, once we abandon those doctrines about the sanctity of human life that - as we saw in Chapter 4 - collapse as soon as they are questioned, it is the refusal to accept killing that, in some cases, is horrific."

-Princeton Professor Peter Singer- Bioethicist and cheerleader for industrialized murder at all stages of life.

Well it was Margaret Stanger - the racist - the eugenics propagandist that created all this crazy abortion bullshit....

Now progressives embrace her fucked up ways via Planned Parenthood, then call everyone who oppose them Nazi's when Stanger was a Nazi....

Progressives take hypocrisy to a new level...

Now they're killing babies.....

 

[Jroc]

I remember when Congress passed legislation banning partial-birth abortion only to have Clinton veto it.





While I'm here, rather than starting another abortion circle-jerk thread, I have a question for ya'll:

What, exactly, WOULD it take to overturn Roe v Wade?

I mean, we all know that the all powerful SCOTUS doesn't have an appeals process.

So, now what?

Start a whole new case?
We just witnessed how unpredictable the SCOTUS is....between the ACA and Citizens United cases.

What guarantee do we have of a "favorable" ruling?

It depends on what your definition of a favorable ruling is.

Overturning Roe v Wade, as I first asked

Conservative judges appointed by a conservative president can do that

Certainly the Constitution does not require discrimination on the basis of sex,” Scalia said. “The only issue is whether it prohibits it. It doesn’t. Nobody ever thought that that’s what it meant. Nobody ever voted for that.”

“If indeed the current society has come to different views, that’s fine. You do not need the Constitution to reflect the wishes of the current society,” he said. “If the current society wants to outlaw discrimination by sex, hey we have things called legislatures, and they enact things called laws. You don’t need a constitution to keep things up-to-date. All you need is a legislature and a ballot box.”

Scalia is considered to be one of the four justices most likely to support overturning Roe if a case reached the high court. Justice Clarence Thomas has also publicly expressed his desire to overturn the 1973 decision.

Chief Justice John Roberts and Justice Samuel Alito have already issued one abortion opinion overturning a previous Supreme Court decision allowing partial-birth abortions and overturning a partial-birth abortion ban claiming it required a health exception. Their decision to reverse and affirm Congress’ findings that abortion is never necessary to protect women’s health is seen as an indication they may be willing to overturn Roe as well.

Together, the four comprise a minority of four justices compared with the pro-abortion majority for Roe, which includes Justice Anthony Kennedy, who has gone along with limits on abortion but has not shown any indication he would side with those favoring overturning Roe

Supreme Court Justice Scalia: Roe v. Wade Not in Constitution | LifeNews.com

 

[tjvh]

I remember when Congress passed legislation banning partial-birth abortion only to have Clinton veto it.





While I'm here, rather than starting another abortion circle-jerk thread, I have a question for ya'll:

What, exactly, WOULD it take to overturn Roe v Wade?

I mean, we all know that the all powerful SCOTUS doesn't have an appeals process.

So, now what?

Start a whole new case?
We just witnessed how unpredictable the SCOTUS is....between the ACA and Citizens United cases.

What guarantee do we have of a "favorable" ruling?

It depends on what your definition of a favorable ruling is.

Overturning Roe v Wade, as I first asked

I just meant how the other side perceives it. If Obama gets reelected rational people are going to be at a severe disadvantage, as he will certainly repopulate a portion of the SCOTUS with people who will place their ideologies above rational interpretation of the Law.

 

[IGetItAlready]

And one or two generations later, someone will want to overturn the overturn.........

SOunds like pissing in the wind, to me, s'all

I get it hortysir, and I agree that there are all kinds of quacks out there with all kinds of crazy theories and doctrines they're pushing. But you take a highly esteemed, ivy league "educator" like this guy and have him feed his bullshit to the right crowd of "ultra intellectual" progressives and they'll be gnawing through each others asses to be the next in line to support the latest, highly evolved philosophy. Then let these new priests speak to their masses and boom, the inexplicable becomes common sense and the debate is over.

We've seen it before.

 

[g5000]

Well, if you are a woman you actually have much more credibility than any man on the issue. Seriously, why do men even get to tell women what they can and cannot do with their body?

This is not about the woman's body or her vagina. It is about this body:

That is who you are okay with murdering. With a 50 percent chance you are killing a female. With a vagina.










.

 

[Papageorgio]

Sorry, if it is feeling pain, then it crosses a line, you can call it a fetus but it is now a life.

Justify all you need but it is a life and you are killing it.

There is no consensus on when it feels pain, though.

Then it is in the best interest of all to side on safety. So whatever the earliest that they say the baby feels pain, then it should not be allowed, we have a responsibility.

 

[hortysir]

Well, if you are a woman you actually have much more credibility than any man on the issue. Seriously, why do men even get to tell women what they can and cannot do with their body?

This is not about the woman's body or her vagina. It is about this body:

And there is a 50 percent chance it is a female. With a vagina.

I get that it's the woman's body.

Weird thing happens, tho.

Let's say the baby-daddy doesn't want a kid.
He gets to give baby-mama cash for 18 years+ if she "chooses" to keep it.

Dad has no say?

 

[IGetItAlready]

Well, if you are a woman you actually have much more credibility than any man on the issue. Seriously, why do men even get to tell women what they can and cannot do with their body?

This is not about the woman's body or her vagina. It is about this body:

That is who you are okay with murdering. With a 50 percent chance you are killing a female. With a vagina.










.

That is REALLY hard to look at...

 

[JDzBrain]

Abortion isn't murder. Get your facts right.

Correct! It IS however...HOMICIDE! The question our lawmakers HAVE to address is, just exactly WHEN is it a wrongful death homicide!

Partial birth abortions are banned in the US...

...although I would have exceptions in the case of the baby being severely deformed, not likely to life a decent life etc.

Uh...NO it is NOT!

And I'd like to see you walk into a bar down in Australia and tell the descendants of England's unwanted and exiles that YOU would have aborted them!

Have you asked these fetuses if they feel pain, or do you just assume they do?

Ok, do you ever dream? And WHEN you dream, is it of flying or the days events or some boogy man? Cause here is the thing. At about 20 weeks fetus DREAM!!!

That's right, complete with REM sleep, involuntary muscle movements...the whole nine yards. Google it or CLICK HERE!


Now we can't ask them just exactly WHAT they dream, but we can damn well guess that since we ALL dream about things that are both within and outside of our personal experience...that the fetus...BABY is too!

They are dreaming about the heartburn they have from the chili momma ate or the bang they felt when a car backfired and scared her or some racial memory of flying, falling, drowning or being chased by wolves...JUST LIKE YOU!

Death row inmates feel pain when they are injected. I am opposed to the death penalty for numerous reasons, and this is one of them.

Kill the innocent, save the maniacal murderers...

Except when they aren't guilty.

Except that fetus are ALWAYS not guilty!!!!!!!

You are WRONG...COMPLETELY wrong!

I remember when Congress passed legislation banning partial-birth abortion only to have Clinton veto it.

While I'm here, rather than starting another abortion circle-jerk thread, I have a question for ya'll:

What, exactly, WOULD it take to overturn Roe v Wade?

I mean, we all know that the all powerful SCOTUS doesn't have an appeals process.

So, now what?

Start a whole new case?
We just witnessed how unpredictable the SCOTUS is....between the ACA and Citizens United cases.

What guarantee do we have of a "favorable" ruling?

Actually Sir, that's one reason it's so important that we kick that MARXIST out of the White House before he gets to name 2 more justices. The next justices MUST be strict constructionist if this country is going to survive as a free republic.

And YES...it can be done. Probably NOT by overturning Roe v Wade though. Although that IS one way it could happen. There IS a legal challenge to it which has been avoided by libs so far. Just going to take the right circumstances...AND judges.

My first reply to Nooimitic above is the easiest and most permanent way to do it. And since over 70% of Americans say they do NOT believe in abortion, Congress CAN be pressured into doing it to keep their jobs.

Thing is, when Congress uses SCIENCE to define when life begins...it becomes a matter of justifiable homicide or murder, which can be defined by statutes!

Fortunately Noomitic lives in Australia. The VAST MAJORITY of Americans do NOT share that lunatic fringe view. We CAN eventually put an end to the practice of delivering viable babies and murdering them. Just going to take the will of the nation.

Right now...although this is great forum and stump speech fodder, it's the economy stupid, to quote over used cliche. LOL

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

Democrats vote down late term abortion restrictions in D.C.

No, democrats vote down inane and pointless legislation contrived by partisan conservative hacks:

[T]he bill won't proceed to the Democratic-controlled Senate, where it was unlikely come up for a vote.

Though D.C. permits late-term abortions, the practice is still uncommon in the district. CDC statistics for 2007 show that zero abortions after 20 weeks of pregnancy were performed that year. However, 152 were performed for pregnancies between 18 and 20 weeks.

This is also an example of conservative hypocrisy, where the will of the local community is being thwarted by Federal excess.

 

[GuyPinestra]

Democrats support the rights of women.

And even if a fetus does feel pain at 20 weeks, just put the woman to sleep before the abortion, and the fetus is asleep as well so it won't feel anything. That it what I would prefer anyway, because no one wants to think of abortion as being painful.

God forbid it should hurt while you murder your child, right?