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

[whutTHEYsay]

I wouldn’t address it either if I were you.

No government should force a women who has been raped to gestate the rapists fetus to a full term live birth even if it only happens once out of million births.

 

[Papageorgio]

No government should force a women who has been raped to gestate the rapists fetus to a full term live birth even if it only happens once out of million births.

Okay, I agreed with you that it is a topic you need to stay away from but hey, you can go on forever, not my concern what you. Do but you can’t say I didn’t agree with you.

 

[Mrkelly]

No government should force a women who has been raped to gestate the rapists fetus to a full term live birth even if it only happens once out of million births.

But But

States rights

 

[HeyNorm]

No government should force a women who has been raped to gestate the rapists fetus to a full term live birth even if it only happens once out of million births.

And……….

No government should force a man to support a child when the woman could have aborted it.

 

[whutTHEYsay]

No government should force a man to support a child when the woman could have aborted it.

You need to make an argument as to why society has to help pay for the offspring of a dickhead loser who puts his penis in a vagina but does not want to contribute to the support of any children that may arise from that act.

 

[Billy000]

This thread is a DING. Abortion is a state issue. The End.

Too bad that doesn’t work. Half of all abortions happen because of two drugs regulated by the FDA.

 

[initforme]

To settle the conflict let's advise all young married couples to take the steps to NEVER conceive. Argument settled with the best outcome. Do this for the next 10 years and it's all good.

 

[HeyNorm]

You need to make an argument as to why society has to help pay for the offspring of a dickhead loser who puts his penis in a vagina but does not want to contribute to the support of any children that may arise from that act.

No, she would have every right to abort. If she decides not to, and can’t afford to raise the child, she should have the children removed and go to jail for non support.

Of course it would be completely different if abortions were banned. Then the Man could be compelled by the court, once a dna proved he was the father, to provide support.

Pretty simple dude, so simple even a cuck should be able to understand

 

[HeyNorm]

To settle the conflict let's advise all young married couples to take the steps to NEVER conceive. Argument settled with the best outcome. Do this for the next 10 years and it's all good.

How does that settle the conflict.

 

[whutTHEYsay]

To settle the conflict let's advise all young married couples to take the steps to NEVER conceive.

Why? There is no conflict if we could get white Christian nationalists to mind there own religion by getting their religion out of Republican uterus controlling government.

Everybody gets to have babies whenever they want them as it should be in a free society.

 

[Lone Wanderer]

Regardless of where you stand on abortion, you have to decide when life legally begins.

 

[whutTHEYsay]

Regardless of where you stand on abortion, you have to decide when life legally begins.

Roe v Wade decided when unborn life legally ceases to be a private matter between the woman and her God. White Christian nationalists forced the Republican Party to fuck that fifty years of precedent up.

 

[Lone Wanderer]

Roe v Wade decided when unborn life legally ceases to be a private matter between the woman and her God. White Christian nationalists forced the Republican Party to fuck that fifty years of precedent up.

Roe v. Wade was a ruling based on a woman who later recanted her story, a distortion of a Constitutional right, and a moving target determined by technology (viability). It was one of the flimsiest rulings made in the last century and deserved to be overturned.

Abortion is a state issue just like most issues are. The federal government was supposed to only deal with a very limited set of responsibilities. Granted, we've ignored federalism since at least the late 1800s thanks to various types of statists that have gained power.

 

[whutTHEYsay]

Abortion is a state issue

Abortion is an individual rights issue that cannot be denied by the states. Women are owed due process before a state can invade the privacy of her body in order to prevent her from terminating her pregnancy,

 

[Papageorgio]

Abortion is an individual rights issue that cannot be denied by the states. Women are owed due process before a state can invade the privacy of her body in order to prevent her from terminating her pregnancy,

That isn’t how the law reads, so it IS a states issue until Congress decides otherwise, it’s all in Congress’s hands.

 

[Lone Wanderer]

Abortion is an individual rights issue that cannot be denied by the states. Women are owed due process before a state can invade the privacy of her body in order to prevent her from terminating her pregnancy,

The "right to privacy" doesn't exist. I would support an Amendment to create one, but until then, that would fall under state regulation.

Also, privacy is a lesser concern than the right to life.

 

[whutTHEYsay]

Roe v. Wade was a ruling based on a woman who later recanted her story

For half a million dollars …..

Roe v Wade: Woman behind US abortion ruling was paid to recant

Norma McCorvey, better known as Jane Roe, says she took money from evangelicals to condemn abortion.

www.bbc.com

Roe v Wade: Woman behind US abortion ruling was paid to recant​

20 May 2020
Share

Getty Images
McCorvey spent the final years of her life campaigning against abortion access
The woman behind the 1973 ruling legalising abortion in the US is seen admitting in a new documentary that her stunning change of heart on the issue in later life was "all an act".
Norma McCorvey, known as Jane Roe in the US Supreme Court's decision on Roe v Wade, shocked the country in 1995 when she came out against abortion.
But in new footage, McCorvey alleges she was paid to switch sides.
The documentary, AKA Jane Roe, airs this Friday on the US channel FX.
The programme was filmed in the last months of McCorvey's life before her death at age 69 in 2017 in Texas.

The Supreme Court ruling came after McCorvey, then a 25-year-old single woman under the pseudonym "Jane Roe", challenged the criminal abortion laws in Texas that forbade abortion as unconstitutional except in cases where the mother's life was in danger.
Henry Wade was the Texas attorney general who defended the anti-abortion law. McCorvey first filed the case in 1969, when she was pregnant with her third child and claimed that she had been raped. But the case was rejected and she was forced to give birth.

• Woman in US abortion legal test case dies
• Roe v Wade explained

In her "deathbed confession", as she calls it, a visibly ailing McCorvey says she only became an anti-abortion activist because she was paid by evangelical groups.
"I was the big fish," she said. "I think it was a mutual thing. I took their money and they'd put me out in front of the cameras and tell me what to say.

"That's what I'd say. It was all an act. I did it well too. I am a good actress. Of course, I'm not acting now."
She added: "If a young woman wants to have an abortion, that's no skin off my ass. That's why they call it choice."

 

[HeyNorm]

Why? There is no conflict if we could get white Christian nationalists to mind there own religion by getting their religion out of Republican uterus controlling government.

Everybody gets to have babies whenever they want them as it should be in a free society.

Dude, the way you talk about men’s reproductive rights, one one think you are the white Christian nationalist.

Strange.

 

[Lone Wanderer]

For half a million dollars …..

Roe v Wade: Woman behind US abortion ruling was paid to recant

Norma McCorvey, better known as Jane Roe, says she took money from evangelicals to condemn abortion.

www.bbc.com

Roe v Wade: Woman behind US abortion ruling was paid to recant​

20 May 2020
Share

Getty Images
McCorvey spent the final years of her life campaigning against abortion access
The woman behind the 1973 ruling legalising abortion in the US is seen admitting in a new documentary that her stunning change of heart on the issue in later life was "all an act".
Norma McCorvey, known as Jane Roe in the US Supreme Court's decision on Roe v Wade, shocked the country in 1995 when she came out against abortion.
But in new footage, McCorvey alleges she was paid to switch sides.
The documentary, AKA Jane Roe, airs this Friday on the US channel FX.
The programme was filmed in the last months of McCorvey's life before her death at age 69 in 2017 in Texas.

The Supreme Court ruling came after McCorvey, then a 25-year-old single woman under the pseudonym "Jane Roe", challenged the criminal abortion laws in Texas that forbade abortion as unconstitutional except in cases where the mother's life was in danger.
Henry Wade was the Texas attorney general who defended the anti-abortion law. McCorvey first filed the case in 1969, when she was pregnant with her third child and claimed that she had been raped. But the case was rejected and she was forced to give birth.

• Woman in US abortion legal test case dies
• Roe v Wade explained

In her "deathbed confession", as she calls it, a visibly ailing McCorvey says she only became an anti-abortion activist because she was paid by evangelical groups.
"I was the big fish," she said. "I think it was a mutual thing. I took their money and they'd put me out in front of the cameras and tell me what to say.

"That's what I'd say. It was all an act. I did it well too. I am a good actress. Of course, I'm not acting now."
She added: "If a young woman wants to have an abortion, that's no skin off my ass. That's why they call it choice."

And if she's willing to recant a story over a relatively low sum, do you really trust her original testimony?

 

[HeyNorm]

Regardless of where you stand on abortion, you have to decide when life legally begins.

No, not according to the left. Life begins with words on a piece of paper.