Republicans fail to make any rational argument why society must force full term gestation on all women. Their failed arguments are examined here:

[kyzr]

And let’s have that vote. But be real about it. If women want total control, give it to them, but at the same time, she needs to take complete responsibility as well and all child support should be voluntary I’m good with that although most abortions are repulsive

1. So if she has the baby you want to eliminate child support.
2. If she aborts the baby she's a horrible person.

Very gentlemanly and chivalrous of you.

 

[Weatherman2020]

Republicans fail to make any rational argument why society must force full term gestation on all women. It is why Republicans are suffering politically since they won a states rights argument with the Dobbs decision.

But state’s rights do not supersede individual right’s including the unenumerated individual right to privacy for impregnated women.

One of Saint Ding’s failed arguments goes something like this:

ding said: It's extremely clear that the reason you are playing word games in your dehumanization of human life is to make it easier to kill them and dismiss their right to life. dvng. #4,716​

An argument based upon what Saint Ding thinks I am thinking being evil, is not an argument at all.

Protected unborn life from the instant of conception has not been a norm for Americans for centuries. The norm the past fifty years has been that protected life begins at reasonable expectation of life outside the womb.

Saint Heynorm does the same thing by accusing me of thinking ZEFs are worthless clump of cells,

HeyNorm said: “ ….. all they are carrying is a worthless clump of cells, right? Like a parasite, right?” hynrm.23.11.19 #772​

I don’t think that at all. My response is here:
nf.23.11.21 #11,948 to hynrm.23.11.19 #772

nf.23.11.21 #1

Infants live after 21 weeks.
Everything after that is murder to even the most evil moron.

 

[Billy000]

And let’s have that vote. But be real about it. If women want total control, give it to them, but at the same time, she needs to take complete responsibility as well and all child support should be voluntary

I’m good with that although most abortions are repulsive

So to be clear you think the man should be able to opt out from taking care of the child in any capacity while also believing that abortion is repulsive and immoral?

 

[Billy000]

1. So if she has the baby you want to eliminate child support.
2. If she aborts the baby she's a horrible person.

Very gentlemanly and chivalrous of you.

Exactly. What he’s saying is absolutely ridiculous lol

 

[HeyNorm]

1. So if she has the baby you want to eliminate child support.
2. If she aborts the baby she's a horrible person.

Very gentlemanly and chivalrous of you.

What does being a gentleman have to do with the law?

I guess supporting killing offspring is what you consider gentlemanly?

Do tell.

And, as I’ve said before, States that make abortion illegal should leave child support mandatory.

States that allow abortion should make child support voluntary.

 

[HeyNorm]

Exactly. What he’s saying is absolutely ridiculous lol

Oh, men have a say in whether the child lives or are aborted?

If not? Not my circus, ain’t my clowns.

 

[Billy000]

What does being a gentleman have to do with the law?

I guess supporting killing offspring is what you consider gentlemanly?

Do tell.

And, as I’ve said before, States that make abortion should leave child support mandatory.

States that allow abortion should make child support voluntary.

The issue is your personal view. Set aside legality for a second. You think it’s immoral to kill a fetus but you think men should be able to opt out of child support in any capacity. That’s just pathetic

 

[HeyNorm]

So to be clear you think the man should be able to opt out from taking care of the child in any capacity while also believing that abortion is repulsive and immoral?

In States where abortion is legal. Yup

 

[HeyNorm]

The issue is your personal view. Set aside legality for a second. You think it’s immoral to kill a fetus but you think men should be able to opt out of child support in any capacity. That’s just pathetic

No, it’s logical.

 

[MarathonMike]

MarathonMike said: Do you support full-term abortion, yes or not? mrthnmk.23.11.23 #230

Yes. I support exactly what 24% of white Evangelical Christian and many Republicans in Ohio supported earlier this month.

nf.23.11.23 #231 to mrthnmk.23.11.23 #230

You are a liar. No Christian or any person of reasonable mind supports full term abortion. FYI full term abortion and stabbing a new born to death in her carseat is exactly the same act.

 

[Billy000]

Oh, men have a say in whether the child lives or are aborted?

If not? Not my circus, ain’t my clowns.

Well they can’t have the final say in keeping the kid for the most obvious reason. As far as the formation of that child goes, all the guy did was blow his load. The woman has the burden of carrying that child for 9 months and gambling with her health. Changing her lifestyle.

 

[Billy000]

No, it’s logical.

Lol god you’re an idiot. You can’t be older than 14. There’s no way

 

[Billy000]

In States where abortion is legal. Yup

See you don’t even care about the kid really. Is that right? The kid existing or not existing doesn’t matter to you. You’re so obsessed with sticking it to the pro-choice women that that is all you actually care about.

 

[EvilCat Breath]

Link us up to this list of hospitals who closed their maternity wards, and their reasons given.

Watch Dragonlady squirm.

Oh, and the vast majority of your shithole country has no abortion clinics. They are concentrated in the big cities and along the US border, so feel free to STFU, KKKanadian bermin.

The tiny heart kept beating! What unmitigated poppycock. How big is she trying to sell a fallopian tube? It's I mm to 4mm . A piece of spaghetti is 2mm. Just to compare. There is no beating heart in an ectopic pregnancy. There is no abortion either. There is no implantation. No need for an abortion.

Dragonlady might bask in her own ignorance but quit trying to sell the garbage to those who know better. Which is just about everyone.

 

[whutTHEYsay]

Mississippi argued Dobbs A B & C

{A) Mississippi, through Dobbs, argued that the Constitution does not provide a right to abortion (and as such, states can freely ban abortions if it is rationally related to legitimate government interests).​

​

{B} Mississippi argued that “liberty” as written in the Fourteenth Amendment only implicates fundamental rights that are “deeply rooted in U.S history and tradition.”​

{C} Mississippi contended that the “viability line” prevented a state from protecting its interest and was too arbitrary or subjective​

NotfooledbyW said: Republicans fail to make any rational argument why society must force full term gestation on all women. • ¥a • nf.23.11.21 #1

Bob Blaylock said: “Really, it gets back to the premise of the OP, of the thread title.” • ¥ • bbblylck.23.11.25 #376

Bob Blaylock said: “Killing an innocent human being is wrong, on the most basic level. That is •THE• one point, the one main argument against abortion.” • ¥¥ • bbblylck.23.11.25 #376

This is in response to • ¥¥ • #376 which is Saint Bobblaylock’s irrational argument that an unborn human being has it settled in law somehow to have the same state interests and protections as a human being who has met a live birth requirement and is lawfully participating in our free society.

Argument (A) above says states can freely ban abortions if it is rationally related to legitimate government interests). Saint Bobblaylock argues that killing a human being in the fetal stage of development is wrong from the moment of conception. That “killing” it would seem must be Mississippi’s “state interest” in protecting baby fetus if Saint Bobblaylock’s argument is legit.

But now we find irrationality in Dobbs itself if saving Baby Fetus from being killed is the objective.

Mississippi petitioned to have a right to ban abortion after 15 weeks. That restriction would not save Baby Fetus from death by abortion for convenience as shown here;

Based on the date of the mother’s last menstrual period, the breakdown of abortions is as follows:

Weeks of Pregnancy	Percentage	Yearly total
< 9 weeks	65.4%	563,958
9-10 weeks	14.7%	126,761
11-12 weeks	8.2%	70,710
13-15 weeks	6.3%	54,326
16-20 weeks	4.1%	35,355
21+ weeks	1.3%	11.,210
All abortions	100%	862,320

This means approximately 88% of abortions occur in the first trimester (first 12 weeks) of pregnancy. nf.23.06.08 #9,115


So the challenge remains to MAGA ENTHUSIASTS / Is there a rational argument why society must force full term gestation on all women?

Or as Mississippi argues in Dobbs: why do some states need to freely ban abortions and what are the rationally related legitimate interests to deprive women of a right they have had for fifty years?

nf.23.11.26 to bbblylck.23.11.25 #376

 

[Papageorgio]

Republicans fail to make any rational argument why society must force full term gestation on all women. It is why Republicans are suffering politically since they won a states rights argument with the Dobbs decision.

But state’s rights do not supersede individual right’s including the unenumerated individual right to privacy for impregnated women.

One of Saint Ding’s failed arguments goes something like this:

ding said: It's extremely clear that the reason you are playing word games in your dehumanization of human life is to make it easier to kill them and dismiss their right to life. dvng. #4,716​

An argument based upon what Saint Ding thinks I am thinking being evil, is not an argument at all.

Protected unborn life from the instant of conception has not been a norm for Americans for centuries. The norm the past fifty years has been that protected life begins at reasonable expectation of life outside the womb.

Saint Heynorm does the same thing by accusing me of thinking ZEFs are worthless clump of cells,

HeyNorm said: “ ….. all they are carrying is a worthless clump of cells, right? Like a parasite, right?” hynrm.23.11.19 #772​

I don’t think that at all. My response is here:
nf.23.11.21 #11,948 to hynrm.23.11.19 #772

nf.23.11.21 #1

Thanks for the comedy show.

 

[whutTHEYsay]

Papageorgio said: the quickest path to legalize abortion in all 50 states is through Congress. ppgrg.23.09.18 #11,086


Now that is comedy., We have Republican Mike Johnso sitting Bikle in Hand in the Speakers Chaur


that’s gonna happen

Mike Johnson, history buff, might consider there’s another thing the Constitution doesn’t mention: abortion. In fact, when our nation was founded, abortion before “quickening” (the moment the pregnant woman feels the fetus kick, sometime between the 16th and 24th week of pregnancy) was legal in every state. It remained so until 1821, when Connecticut passed a law banning the use of “poison” to end a pregnancy, and was criminalized state by state only after the Civil War. In the 18th century and thereafter, abortifacients were plentiful, openly sold, and advertised in newspapers with euphemistic phrases like “relief for Ladies.” Abortion was understood as women’s business, and I very much doubt the founders wanted to hear anything about it, any more than most men today want to hear about the bloody details of female biology. (Interestingly, abortion is not mentioned in the Bible either.​

​

Mike Johnson's “18th-Century Values”

The new speaker of the House says he's a history buff. But has he learned from it, or is he condemned to repeat it?

www.thenation.com

 

[whutTHEYsay]

kyzr said: I'm a pro-choice Republican now, the fewer democrats the better. • ¥¥¥ • kyzr!.23.11.08 #70

When Democrats lose an election all women lose liberty and they lose protection against government intrusion into their privacy.

Saint Kyzr stands steadfast with Republicans and invading the privacy of all women. There is no way to consider him to be against forcing full term gestation on all women.

nf.23.11.26 #398 to kyzr!.23.11.08 #70

 

[kyzr]

What does being a gentleman have to do with the law?
I guess supporting killing offspring is what you consider gentlemanly? Do tell.
And, as I’ve said before, States that make abortion illegal should leave child support mandatory.
States that allow abortion should make child support voluntary.

1. His proposed changes to the law made pregnant women victims, whether they had an abortion or had the baby.
2. Gentlemanly in that the woman has total control of whether she aborts or she has the baby.
3. Agree that child support needs to be mandatory. Corollary: If the chick is fuckable, she needs to be marryable, or your life will suck.
4. If states allow abortion...okay, make child support voluntary.

 

[kyzr]

kyzr said: I'm a pro-choice Republican now, the fewer democrats the better.
When Democrats lose an election all women lose liberty and they lose protection against government intrusion into their privacy.
Saint Kyzr stands steadfast with Republicans and invading the privacy of all women. There is no way to consider him to be against forcing full term gestation on all women.

Republicans will win soccer moms and security moms. Democrats are the party of criminals.

Do you know what Pro-Choice means? It means I oppose banning abortions. I'm okay with a 15 week ban like the EU has.