Roe overturned

[Flopper]

it slightly less convenient. Without Roe, now she will have to tak

For women with middle class incomes that is true. However 75% of women that get abortions' are low income and 15% are in deep poverty, such as the homeless, runaways, and illegal immigrants. These people are not going to make reservations at an abortion clinic out of state, fly across the country, and find lodging. There are places in the country where nearest abortion clinic is over 600 miles and there is no guarantee of getting an appointment with the number out of state abortion.

These people with very low or no income and education, and who often have poor command of the language will turn to methods that end pregnancy and their life. The hope is they will find a way to get the drug Misoprostol soon enough in the pregnancy. It is an effective method of terminating the pregnancy with little danger to the woman. No doubt the state will do all it can to keep it away from them.

 

[toomuchtime_]

For women with middle class incomes that is true. However 75% of women that get abortions' are low income and 15% are in deep poverty, such as the homeless, runaways, and illegal immigrants. These people are not going to make reservations at an abortion clinic out of state, fly across the country, and find lodging. There are places in the country where nearest abortion clinic is over 600 miles and there is no guarantee of getting an appointment with the number out of state abortion.

These people with very low or no income and education, and who often have poor command of the language will turn to methods that end pregnancy and their life. The hope is they will find a way to get the drug Misoprostol soon enough in the pregnancy. It is an effective method of terminating the pregnancy with little danger to the woman. No doubt the state will do all it can to keep it away from them.

You keep trying to invent a crisis where there is none. All you are saying is that abortion will be less convenient for some women than it had been, not that it will be impossible.

 

[badger2]

this is a Roe thread. Not covid.

You jump to conclusions. Others may wish to contend your overconfidence. Here we link the already-posted abortifacient chemistry for Withania to chloroquine chemistry.

Kennedy Jr. leaves out a newborn and transplacental chloroquine link when he pinpoints where and when Fau Chi lied. Kennedy Jr. is also incorrect for the HCQ/CQ chronology:

'The scientific literature first suggested that HCQ or CQ might be effective treatments for Coronavirus in 2004 (Keyaerts et al, In Vitro Inhibition of Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus by Chloroquine, Biochem. Biophys. Res. Comm., Oct 8, 2004). In that era, following an outbreak, Chinese and Western governments were pouring millions of dollars into an effort to identify existing, a.k.a. "Repurposed", medicines that were effective against coronaviruses. With HCQ, they had stumbled upon the Holy Grail. In 2004, Belgian researchers found that chloroquine was effective at viral killing at doses equivalent to those to treat malaria, i.e., doses that are safe (Keyaerts, et al, In Vitro Inhibition of Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus by Chloroquine, Biochem. Biophys. Res. Comm. 323: 1 [2004]).

A CDC study published in 2005 in the Virology Journal, "Chloroquine is a Potent Inhibitor of SARS Coronavirus Infection and Spread" demonstrated that CQ quickly eliminated coronavirus in primate cell culture during the SARS outbreak. That study concludes: "We report....that chloroquine has strong antiviral effects on SARS-Coronavirus infection of primate cells....[both] before or after exposure to the virus, suggesting both prophylactic and therapeutic advantage."

Chloroquine is a potent inhibitor of SARS coronavirus infection and spread - PMC

Severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS) is caused by a newly discovered coronavirus (SARS-CoV). No effective prophylactic or post-exposure therapy is currently available. We report, however, that chloroquine has strong antiviral effects on SARS-CoV ...

www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

This conclusion was particularly threatening to vaccine makers since it implies that chloroquine functions both as a preventive "vacccine" as well as cure for SARS coronavirus.
....
So, against all that I've shared here, Dr. Fauci offered up one answer: hydroxychloroquine should not be used because we don't understand the mechanism it uses to defeat COVID - another shibboleth transparently invoked to defeat common sense. Regulators do not understand The mechanism of action of many drugs, but they nonetheless license those that are effective and safe.'
(Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., The Real Anthony Fauci, pp. 21 & 23)

Kennedy's text proves that he did not know about the chlroquine time window of Blau and Holmes that we have already mentioned. Furthermore, Kennedy misses the infant connection to chloroquine, which would by default link to the abortifacient chemistry of Withania and the Withania-activated HOX genes of Guttmacher (NIH director):

2009 Transplacental Transmission of Chloroquine

Antiviral activity of chloroquine against human coronavirus OC43 infection in newborn mice - PubMed

Until recently, human coronaviruses (HCoVs), such as HCoV strain OC43 (HCoV-OC43), were mainly known to cause 15 to 30% of mild upper respiratory tract infections. In recent years, the identification of new HCoVs, including severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus, revealed that HCoVs can...

pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

 

[badger2]

Hmmm I may have forgotten who badger is.. If he's that anti-God guy, then he can go somewhere far away from me. In fact I might have him on ignore... lol

Please, put badger on ignore to further dumb yourself down.

 

[badger2]

Note that the report Kennedy missed (post 2,643) is from Rega Institute. Rega Institute is the HIV/AIDS link to Fau Chi, and Hooper lists Fau Chi's opposite number:

Hooper Origin of AIDS
www.aidsorigins.com/people/
'....Professor Edward De Maeyer, virologist who joined Rega Institute, Leuven, in 1957.'

No doubt about it, chloroquine pharmacology is inseparable from abortion chemistry.

 

[Flopper]

You bring up some of theeee most rarest of the rare in order to attempt to debunk what the court has done, but everyone is on to this sort of leftist tactic.

People aren't this ignorant to ignore the most heinous of crimes or acts that are levied against our most vulnerable citizen's in life, otherwise that involves our young in a super tragic way when it comes to such things that affect them in such a negative way in life. They will be helped as always, but the ones that lined up to abuse the system, and was getting away with unborn baby murder, well they won't get the opportunity to do their dirty deeds on demand anymore... Amen.

They seem to be rare today because the vast number of these fetuses are aborted. That will be illegal in most states that have banned abortion.
Here some numbers
1% of abortions occur due to rape
.5% of abortions occur due to incest
3% of all fetuses have birth defects and 25% are aborted
3% fetuses have the most common severe birth defects, heart defects, neural tube defects Down syndrome. 30% of these are aborted.
.05% of fetuses have Trisomy 18 which is always fatal and almost always aborted
.005% of fetus have ‎Encephalocele or there serious defect few of any are survivable and almost all are aborted.

The percentages are small but when you do the math the numbers are not, 43, 550 fetuses or about 10,000 in state with banned abortions. Since most state that banned abortions do allow exceptions for these pregnancies, they will have go to court or seek out of state abortion.

 

[Flopper]

Yet again you misrepresent the facts in your mad search for a crisis where there is none. Even the most restrictive abortion laws cannot prevent a pregnant woman who wants an abortion from taking a bus to a state that has less restrictive abortion laws.

So these highly restriction abortion bans are OK because there are states that have the common sense to allow abortions.

 

[toomuchtime_]

So these highly restriction abortion bans are OK because there are states that have the common sense to allow abortions.

I'm sorry you are having so much difficulty understanding the issue that you have to resort to personal attacks, but restrictive abortion laws are obviously common sense in states that have them just as liberal abortion laws are common sense in states that have them. The simple fact is that overturning Roe will not prevent any women who wants an abortion from getting one; it will simply be a little less convenient.

 

[beagle9]

For women with middle class incomes that is true. However 75% of women that get abortions' are low income and 15% are in deep poverty, such as the homeless, runaways, and illegal immigrants. These people are not going to make reservations at an abortion clinic out of state, fly across the country, and find lodging. There are places in the country where nearest abortion clinic is over 600 miles and there is no guarantee of getting an appointment with the number out of state abortion.

These people with very low or no income and education, and who often have poor command of the language will turn to methods that end pregnancy and their life. The hope is they will find a way to get the drug Misoprostol soon enough in the pregnancy. It is an effective method of terminating the pregnancy with little danger to the woman. No doubt the state will do all it can to keep it away from them.

No moral and responsible resistance to spreading them legs eh ? How about you leftist get out of the way, and let these poor people be educated about the consequences of their recklessness, otherwise if they don't use their brains instead of their lust to rule their outcomes. We've gotten so far removed from personal responsibility due to years of leftist brainwashing and lying, that it's so wonder that we've lasted this long.

 

[badger2]

This is further evidence why the 2-party system is killing America: Trump equates POSCOTUS to a non-existent god while trying to capture future votes: "God made the decision," while the Nazi Dems go directly for the money, picking up $80 million in donations one week after the decision.

 

[badger2]

Edward Hooper's book, The River, can be downloaded From his AIDS origins page and pages 783-786 and mention Rega Institute. The SV40 virus mentioned in those pages, as the diligent reader will discover, is the HOX gene link to the material we've already posted, as well as the abortifacient chemistry we've already posted.

 

[Esdraelon]

These people with very low or no income and education, and who often have poor command of the language will turn to methods that end pregnancy and their life.

What's stopping you folks from coming to their aid with cash to help pay for the trip?

 

[San Souci]

Most of the evil these days is coming from the far right.

Didn't see any Right wingers burning and looting in 2020 and so on. It was not a RW who tried to Assassinate Kavanaugh. It ain't RW shooting each other in Chicago and all other Dem Cities. It ain't RW trying to turn all of our kids into Fags.

 

[San Souci]

STFU

EVERY WOMAN HAS THE RIGHT TO CHOOSE
YOU cannot dictate how a woman will handle an unwanted fetus

Maybe they should stop whoring around.

 

[badger2]

The media is now inserting the religious, who are elated about the overturn, and opposing it to the left, who are discouraged. So says the media, as Trump is now the messianic symbology being flaunted for November midterms. It's un-American to religicize Roe v. Wade, when religion hasn't the IQ required to properly understand abortion dynamics. Currently, Jefferson's wall is even more apropo, and true to Jeffersonian form regarding religion, the US Constitution is exclusionary.

 

[badger2]

Attempting a moral argument to bolster "the Right" has its risks. The main one is that a moral case against nazism is politically disastrous because nazism is morality itself. The media neither cares nor has the IQ to protect you from making yourself a nazi, because Nazi Dems don'r need theology to produce converts: they only need to manipulate the nazi strive for pure form embedded within the moral argument.

 

[beagle9]

Maybe they should stop whoring around.

To be fair, that does work two ways ya know... lol

Some silver tongued devil's can talk a woman right out of her britches, and if no time to get that condom or any other form of contraception to counter the moment, she's as good as pregnant more than likely. This is usually when abortion is chosen as a contraception after the fact, so what has to happen in order to hopefully solve the issue, is to return to morals, ethic's and standard's that were based upon our religious value's and tenant's, otherwise in which we once used forever in this country. Might not stop it all, but it could reduce the numbers dramatically if we just got back to the basics again.

The guy usually doesn't mind the woman getting an abortion undoubtedly, otherwise concerning a woman going through the dramatic experience of aborting her baby, because all he was there for was a quick piece and then cya... This happens in some or in many cases. Not sure on the Numbers.

They are usually both at fault varying back and forth on who the most culpable in the situation were, but the results are devastating when a pregnancy develope's into a life, and then that life is just snuffed out because the poor little human being was considered a mistake when conceived.

Waiting until marriage should be the driven narrative once again in this country, and this could be taught as the leading narrative during sex education classes along with every negative consequence of having sex before marriage.

Most mother's should be considering the birth control pill for their daughter's, otherwise if they feel or know that their daughter might be vulnerable due to characteristics the daughter might start showing as she progresses along the journey of life into her future.

Preventive care on anything is the best care. Reactive care is bad because the situation ends up in usually as a bad rollercoaster ride to hell if not careful.

 

[badger2]

Carlin mentions the contradictions of the current ultraconservative church-and-state SCOTUS:

"Just think about Irish history, the Middle East, the Crusades, the Inquisition, our own abortion-doctor killings and, yes, the World Trade Center to see how seriously religious people take Thou Shalt Not Kill. Apparently, to religious folks -- especially the truly devout -- murder is negotiable. It just depends on who's doing the killing and who's getting killed."
(George Carlin, When Will Jesus Bring the Pork Chops?, 2004)

 

[PoliticalChic]

What's stopping you folks from coming to their aid with cash to help pay for the trip?

WHAT?????


Liberals reach into their own pockets??????


Be serious.



In his book "Intellectuals," Paul Johnson quotes Pablo Picasso scoffing at the idea that he would give to the needy. "I'm afraid you've got it wrong," Picasso explains, "we are socialists. We don't pretend to be Christians."

About HE | Human Events

WILL CHAMBERLAIN, EDITOR-IN-CHIEF AND PUBLISHERWill Chamberlain is a lawyer and the publisher of Human Events. Previously, Will worked as...

www.humanevents.com

 

[task0778]

Carlin mentions the contradictions of the current ultraconservative church-and-state SCOTUS:

"Just think about Irish history, the Middle East, the Crusades, the Inquisition, our own abortion-doctor killings and, yes, the World Trade Center to see how seriously religious people take Thou Shalt Not Kill. Apparently, to religious folks -- especially the truly devout -- murder is negotiable. It just depends on who's doing the killing and who's getting killed."
(George Carlin, When Will Jesus Bring the Pork Chops?, 2004)

Religion had nothing whatsoever to do with the SCOTUS ruling on Roe v Wade. And your attempt to tie the SCOTUS with past atrocities by any church is ridiculous. Their decision was based on the simple fact that nowhere in the US Constitution is there any mention or inference that there is a constitutional right to an abortion. Nor is there any recent history or tradition that can in any way indicate that the right to an abortion ought to be considered as constitutional. The 1973 ruling was bogus, judicial activism and overreach that should have been corrected long ago and but for the progressive liberals who were on the bench all that time would not allow it for purely political reason.