"Pro life" is not a conservative position.

[EMH]

Unless those political opponents are performing abortions, an abortion ban cannot be used against them.

That assumes "no corruption" and we know your side is nothing but corruption.

 

[EMH]

I know the point you are trying to make.

Can you agree that there is much more leeway (room for compromises) in regulating booze than there is on the government's obligations towards protecting the lives and basic human rights of human beings?

Edit, Booze may have an indirect impact on human lives. Abortions are guaranteed to take human lives. That's the who idea. It's what they are designed to do.

You dodged the issue. A law making abortions illegal will result in a black market, and screams from your side for

MORE BIGGER GOVERNMENT to "enforce the law."


That is the problem with anti abortion Christians, they DON'T GET IT that EXPANDING GOVERNMENT is ACTUALLY BAD. They cheered everything W did to prove it.

 

[EMH]

The govt shouldnt be dictating what we do with our bodies.
Yall would all be agreeing with me if we were talking about the clot shot.

Well, for minors, banning trans surgery is "big government" but not for adults. And I support banning trans surgery. Maybe that makes me a hypocrite, but I am against trans surgery period. The overall effect of banning trans surgery, from my point, is positive, because trans surgery is the wrecking of a human life. It is also something that a "coat hanger" won't "fix." It takes a huge hospital to do it.

In general, yes, the smaller the government and the less poking into private lives, the better. And there should be a legit reason to poke into private lives, a very strict standard.

 

[EMH]

No conservatives backed the BBB? Really?

How many "conservatives" still defend W??

 

[martybegan]

Whatever it is the left made me pro heartbeat ...
I was always fine with first trimester until they wanted to kill newborns


Normies libertarians and fence sitters one day the left is gonna completely knock yas off the fences

Yeah we know
We also just wanted to be left alone

View attachment 1169092

Well now it becomes a question of "where" you can get certain things.

In NY, the best I can hope for is a 10-12 week restriction on birth control abortions, and then after life of the mother and/or fetal viability, but even that would be a stretch here.

 

[EMH]

You and all the pro-aborts have it exactly backwards

There is a huge difference between the positions of Newt and Hillary.

Newt is/was against abortions, he spoke out against them, advocated for women to talk to Pro Life people before deciding.

Hillary is pro abortion, in part because without abortions, Bill would have 150 kids, none from Hillary.

 

[22lcidw]

The govt shouldnt be dictating what we do with our bodies.
Yall would all be agreeing with me if we were talking about the clot shot.

It's the massive taxation that gives people irresponsible ways of handling their bodies.

 

[g5000]

That assumes "no corruption" and we know your side is nothing but corruption.

Flash news alert: I am not part of any "side". I think for myself, and that confuses a lot of people. You all keep falling into the False Dichotomy hole.

 

[marvin martian]

Flash news alert: I am not part of any "side". I think for myself, and that confuses a lot of people. You all keep falling into the False Dichotomy hole.

You're the worst of the worst. You call yourself "pro-life", but support the most pro-abortion politicians in American history.

 

[martybegan]

You're the worst of the worst. You call yourself "pro-life", but support the most pro-abortion politicians in American history.

He forgets the dichotomy isn't false when the system is binary.

 

[g5000]

You dodged the issue. A law making abortions illegal will result in a black market, and screams from your side for

MORE BIGGER GOVERNMENT to "enforce the law."

Untrue.

Before Roe v. Wade, there was a mix of states where abortion was legal and illegal.

However, even in the majority of states where abortion was banned, there were exceptions for the health of the mother, and this was used by the medical community as a loophole big enough to drive a truck through.

"Health of the mother" was used to cover physical health, mental health, financial health, and so on.

And hold onto your hat because even the Catholic Church at one time allowed for abortions prior to "the quickening" and also to save the health of the mother.


I know all this because as I mentioned earlier, I looked deeply into this issue many years ago. I went into it with pretty strong preconceived notions as a pro-lifer, assuming the number of abortions prior to Roe v. Wade was very tiny.

I was wrong and was surprised to discover the number of legal abortions prior to Roe was about the same as after. And this is precisely why I have been saying since coming to this forum that overturning Roe would have a negligible effect on abortions.

I have also mentioned we have allowed the extremists on both sides to hijack the issue and the solution to the problem has been out of reach because of this.

Right now, we are in a period where the cruelest pro-life extremists are taking their vengeance. Texas, making it a crime to help a pregnant woman leave their jurisdiction to get an abortion.

Prior to the repeal of Roe, the state of Virginia required a woman be subjected to mechanical rape by inserting a wand into their vagina for an ultrasound before they could receive an abortion.

This is not Christian behavior.

My wife is as pro-life as it gets. When Virginia passed the mandatory mechanical rape law, I've never seen her turn so cold with fury. Not before or since. Virginia damn near made her pro-choice.

In MAGA world, everything is all about the cruelty.

But this will pass. Cooler heads will eventually prevail as they did in the past.

Sadly, though, the real solution is still far out of reach.

 

[Votto]

Yeah, **** the mother. Its just a vessel. **** her human rights.

The whole issue is about human rights. The issue is does the unborn child have those rights

To suggest that conservatives should not oppose abortion based on this is a strawman because the conservative believes that the unborn is human.

In fact, the whole notion of natural rights was derived upon the notion that God gave us our rights This is what the Founding Fathers believed and why we have a Bill of Rights to begin with. The state can either acknowledge them or be at war with those rights.

Who here thinks that God would be Ok with snuffing out the life of the unborn?

Anyone?

 

[Votto]

Well, for minors, banning trans surgery is "big government" but not for adults. And I support banning trans surgery. Maybe that makes me a hypocrite, but I am against trans surgery period. The overall effect of banning trans surgery, from my point, is positive, because trans surgery is the wrecking of a human life. It is also something that a "coat hanger" won't "fix." It takes a huge hospital to do it.

In general, yes, the smaller the government and the less poking into private lives, the better. And there should be a legit reason to poke into private lives, a very strict standard.

Yes, is does make you a hypocrite, but you don't care.

At least you acknowledge that kids need to be protected from the gender cult, the same way that the unborn needs to be protected from the abortion cult.

They are both defenseless.

Does it even give you pause that you have aligned yourself with the filthy malignancy, known as the DNC, on the abortion issue?

 

[Missouri_Mike]

No it isnt. Killing your child is murder. We are talking about fetuses, not a child.

Fetus is just another name for child. That doesn’t change what it is you’re killing.

 

[Unkotare]

Nope.

Yup.

 

[Scoutster]

I am pro choice for a number of reasons, with reasonable restrictions. Mostly that when the accepted time comes that a baby can survive outside the womb, abortion is no longer an option by and large.

 

[OldFlame]

If you're pro-choice, you still have to decide when life legally begins. If the argument is that life legally begins at birth, then killing a pregnant woman should only count as a single homicide. Many pro-choice jurisdictions still treat it as a double homicide, which often contradicts how they define life regarding abortion, depending on how far into the pregnancy the woman was.

Most pro-choice people believe life legally begins sometime before birth, which, by your definition, would make anyone who believes life begins at any point before birth is "big government."

Bodily autonomy is indeed important, but a lot of the pro-choice people didn't apply that to vaccines during COVID. A lot of people are hypocrites in general, of course.

There has to be some logical distinction of when life legally begins, and from there, restrictions should apply to abortion. Personally, I think conception is that point, but I support exceptions for medical and eugenic reasons.

Sadly, the entire concept of single or double homicide is based on whether or not the woman wants the baby. If she doesn't want it, then it's not 'life', if she did want it, then it's a cherished life. And that decision should not be up to the individual opinion, it either is or isn't cherished life.

 

[OldFlame]

No it isnt. Killing your child is murder. We are talking about fetuses, not a child.

That's YOUR opinion only.

 

[OldFlame]

Yeah, **** the mother. Its just a vessel. **** her human rights.

She has the right to use birth control and not get pregnant, but I know, **** individual responsibility and accountability.

 

[Dorian Mode]

Seems to me the left have lost every recent debate on the issues, and have to fall back to the old and stale abortion BS.