Who are these people who want to tell women what to do in their private lives?

[EvilCat Breath]

Some find chopping off a babies arms, legs, and head barbaric.

My bet is your a male, never been pregnant, never had to worry about getting pregnant. I will only hear a woman's point of view.

We men who oppose abortion can not help it that we are male. Help us understand how being a woman would help us be more tolerant of the denial of children's rights and of the subsequent slaughters by abortion.

Then too, please address the fact that nearly half of those opposed to abortions are women as well. Many of whom have had an abortion of their own.

Sent from my SM-N920V using USMessageBoard.com mobile app

Until you can get pregnant and give birth, maybe you should keep your opinion to yourself.

Your little Trump crowd there doesn't come anywhere close to what was going on in this nation on January 21, 2017. They made a noise that was heard around the world. These weren't just pro-choice women, this was every woman that was tired of being treated as though they're second class citizens with no intelligence or integrity of their own.

Every woman understands that there can be a multitude of complications during a pregnancy. Pro-life/pro-choice women know that there are circumstances that can arise that would require an abortion. This is something that the male counterpart doesn't understand, and never will.

Republicans have awoken a sleeping giant. You have effectively declared war on the largest voting population in this country, and it's a war you're going to lose.

For more pictures of the Womens march and a view of what was going on in every single state, go to this link.
Woman's march pictures

You really think they were all there only for abortion. Most of those women had no idea what they were there for. It was a fun thing to do.

 

[EvilCat Breath]

I have a friend....he was adopted...and was a born through a rape......he is alive today because the mother put the baby up for adoption instead of killing him.......

I knew of one woman who kept the child of a rape. A pretty biracial girl. Both mother and daughter had lives locked in agony. The woman went from a successful professional to an alcoholic on welfare. The girl killed herself at 17. The mother died of cirrhosis in her late 40s.

By the way, the decision not to abort was not made on religious beliefs. The woman was an atheist.

 

[2aguy]

I have a friend....he was adopted...and was a born through a rape......he is alive today because the mother put the baby up for adoption instead of killing him.......

I knew of one woman who kept the child of a rape. A pretty biracial girl. Both mother and daughter had lives locked in agony. The woman went from a successful professional to an alcoholic on welfare. The girl killed herself at 17. The mother died of cirrhosis in her late 40s.

By the way, the decision not to abort was not made on religious beliefs. The woman was an atheist.

Abortion does not depend on religious beliefs.....the baby is a human regardless of the mothers religious beliefs.

 

[Bob Blaylock]

I have a friend....he was adopted...and was a born through a rape......he is alive today because the mother put the baby up for adoption instead of killing him.......

My sister was adopted. Eventually, she tracked down her birth mother, and leaned of the unfortunate circumstances of her own conception and birth. She now has five children, and one grandchild. It's chilling to think of the impact, had she been made a victim of abortion, because of the circumstance which created her.

 

[Flash]

Who in the hell wants to make it legal for a woman to kill her child on demand just for the sake of convenience?

If, we as a civilized society, are going to let a woman kill her child shouldn't it be for a little better reason than she just doesn't want to be bothered?

To answer your question, about half the states, mostly in the Northeast and in the Far West DO want to KEEP it legal.

But that has nothing to do with the issue of Roe v. Wade.

Roe is all about States' Rights to BAN the procedure.

As a medical procedure in demand with lots of tried and true surgical methods, it starts out as legal. Surgery has no moral issues attached to it.

Then WHAM! some state legislatures come along and try to make this ILLEGAL for moral reasons. This is where the 1st Amendment of separation of church and state get violated.

So something has to give. Either states' rights had to give or the 1st Amendment had to give.

The Berger Court ruled essentially in favor of the 1st Amendment against States' Rights, but they did it with an off the wall "right to privacy" interpretation which does not exist for women and their vagina's in the Federal Constitution.

Oh well. Bad law. But both the 1st Amendment AND States' Rights (the 10th Amendment) could not win. One of them had to lose.

This issue supersedes States rights v Federal. It is a question of morality. Are we as a civilized nation going to allow parents to kill their children on demand for the sake of convenience?. The protection of our children is a fundamental human instinct that the abortion law circumvents. Really disgusting when you think about it.

You are correct. Roe v Wade is bad law. It puts the right of a mother to kill a child for the sake of convenience over the right of the child to live. You would think that rational judges would have chose life over death.

If the question of abortion had to do with legitimate medical concerns there would not be much of a discussion. Most people would come to an agreement on that. Even people like me who are adamant anti abortion advocates would agree to allow a mother and her doctor to make those decisions. It is the wholesale slaughter of children simply for the sake of convenience that is abhorrent.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Try this... Want me to keep my opinions to myself with your left hand and SHIT in the right one. Then, tell me which one gets filled up first.
[/QUOTE]None of which means anything, Chuz, in this discussion. You have every right to opine wrongly, as you so often do.

 

[JakeStarkey]

The issue is that Gorsuch's writing give no indication that he has trouble at all with stare decisis. He is far more interested in protecting business than worried about abortion. To the idiot says that his morality overrides the law, tough: it does not. Roe is safe.

 

[gipper]

Now the Arkansas legislature "passes law allowing rapists to sue victims who want an abortion."

Arkansas just passed a law that will let rapists sue victims who want an abortion

This law (1) gives the husband of his pregnant wife the legal right "to stop her from having an abortion, even in cases of spousal rape . . .". That will be cheered on by Iranian parliament.

And (2) husbands can sue for damages the doctors who carry out such abortions.

Insanity reigns in Arkansas.

Why do you like killing babies?

Are you a serial killer?

 

[JakeStarkey]

Now the Arkansas legislature "passes law allowing rapists to sue victims who want an abortion."

Arkansas just passed a law that will let rapists sue victims who want an abortion

This law (1) gives the husband of his pregnant wife the legal right "to stop her from having an abortion, even in cases of spousal rape . . .". That will be cheered on by Iranian parliament.

And (2) husbands can sue for damages the doctors who carry out such abortions.

Insanity reigns in Arkansas.

Why do you like killing babies? Are you a serial killer?

You are serially stupid as usual. gipper thinks a rapist has the right to force his victim to have a rape baby.

 

[there4eyeM]

What is the difference between living sperm, living eggs and a fertilized egg?

 

[Chuz Life]

What is the difference between living sperm, living eggs and a fertilized egg?

Do you seriously not know the difference or are you simply being facetious?

Sent from my SM-N920V using USMessageBoard.com mobile app

 

[JakeStarkey]

What is the difference between living sperm, living eggs and a fertilized egg?

Do you seriously not know the difference or are you simply being facetious?

Sent from my SM-N920V using USMessageBoard.com mobile app

A fetus is not a baby in terms of murder, Chuz. It is not an independent living entity. Only if it, as part of the pregnant woman's body, is illegally and criminally terminated can a person be prosecuted. That is not changing anytime soon.

 

[Pop23]

Every single tome a woman decides not to carry to term because she just doesn't want to.

Sweet baby Jesus you people are dumber than shit.

1. Is the Republican party going to tell a mother that she has too die to give birth to a baby, when she may have two kids at home already that she needs to raise, along with a Husband who may object to you telling him he will raise the baby and two kids by himself.

2. Is the Republican party going to tell a lucky to be alive woman, (who is simply trying to put her life back together) that she needs to carry a rape baby to full term, when she also may have a husband and family members that would object to that.

3. Is the Republican party going to tell the parents of a young girl that was repeatedly raped by a relative that their daughter needs to risk her life to give birth?

You have NO RIGHT to intervene into the very private, personal decisions that women and their families make. And we can only Thank God that the U.S. Supreme court, insures you don't. It's NONE of your business.

For myself...asswipe.......I have already stated that the only moral reason to have an abortion is to save the life of the mother...from death. Any other reason is wrong.....You say we have no right to intervene to stop a murder.....so why do we have police and detectives to investigate when a murder happens....?

Murder is a legal term. Abortion is a medical term. Your opinion is . . . only your opinion, and is neither a medical nor a legal term.

Removing a kidney is a medical procedure...removing the kidney with the intent to end the life of the human being is murder.

Until it's your body, your RISK, you have NO right to say what a woman is going to do with hers?

The Supreme court decided this 47 years ago.

Sure, so the man should have the legal right to abort all future financial support if the child should the female decide to take the pregnancy full term?

Equality for all

 

[JakeStarkey]

Sweet baby Jesus you people are dumber than shit.

1. Is the Republican party going to tell a mother that she has too die to give birth to a baby, when she may have two kids at home already that she needs to raise, along with a Husband who may object to you telling him he will raise the baby and two kids by himself.

2. Is the Republican party going to tell a lucky to be alive woman, (who is simply trying to put her life back together) that she needs to carry a rape baby to full term, when she also may have a husband and family members that would object to that.

3. Is the Republican party going to tell the parents of a young girl that was repeatedly raped by a relative that their daughter needs to risk her life to give birth?

You have NO RIGHT to intervene into the very private, personal decisions that women and their families make. And we can only Thank God that the U.S. Supreme court, insures you don't. It's NONE of your business.

For myself...asswipe.......I have already stated that the only moral reason to have an abortion is to save the life of the mother...from death. Any other reason is wrong.....You say we have no right to intervene to stop a murder.....so why do we have police and detectives to investigate when a murder happens....?

Murder is a legal term. Abortion is a medical term. Your opinion is . . . only your opinion, and is neither a medical nor a legal term.

Removing a kidney is a medical procedure...removing the kidney with the intent to end the life of the human being is murder.

Until it's your body, your RISK, you have NO right to say what a woman is going to do with hers?

The Supreme court decided this 47 years ago.

Sure, so the man should have the legal right to abort all future financial support if the child should the female decide to take the pregnancy full term?

Equality for all

Fallacy of false equivalency. You really don't understand.

 

[Pop23]

For myself...asswipe.......I have already stated that the only moral reason to have an abortion is to save the life of the mother...from death. Any other reason is wrong.....You say we have no right to intervene to stop a murder.....so why do we have police and detectives to investigate when a murder happens....?

Murder is a legal term. Abortion is a medical term. Your opinion is . . . only your opinion, and is neither a medical nor a legal term.

Removing a kidney is a medical procedure...removing the kidney with the intent to end the life of the human being is murder.

Until it's your body, your RISK, you have NO right to say what a woman is going to do with hers?

The Supreme court decided this 47 years ago.

Sure, so the man should have the legal right to abort all future financial support if the child should the female decide to take the pregnancy full term?

Equality for all

Fallacy of false equivalency. You really don't understand.

Equality is not a fallacy.

Their are two adults involved in each pregnancy. Only one is allowed no decision in it. The male.

 

[there4eyeM]

What is the difference between living sperm, living eggs and a fertilized egg?

Do you seriously not know the difference or are you simply being facetious?

Sent from my SM-N920V using USMessageBoard.com mobile app

A fetus is not a baby in terms of murder, Chuz. It is not an independent living entity. Only if it, as part of the pregnant woman's body, is illegally and criminally terminated can a person be prosecuted. That is not changing anytime soon.

A man's sperm is alive. The woman's egg is alive. A fertilized egg is alive. It is a continuum of life that has been going on for a very, very long time. Arbitrary time determinations can be made at any point we wish, and remain arbitrary. In human and legal terms, a person is a presence in our human world of movement, action and, in the case of children, increasing independence.
A responsible human would not engage in sex with the risk of causing pregnancy unless he/she were ready to accept the consequences. No truly rational woman could want to go through an abortion as a caprice. If we want to talk about how we get to responsibility and rationality, that is one thing. If we want to talk about making a decision about a woman's body for her, instead of her, we take away her responsibility irrationally.

 

[there4eyeM]

Two sexually mature individuals are necessary to fertilize an egg. If they do that in consensual agreement with the intention of having a baby, both may have a voice in continuation or not. When only the physical bearing of the baby is concerned, the male is not concerned.

 

[Pop23]

What is the difference between living sperm, living eggs and a fertilized egg?

Do you seriously not know the difference or are you simply being facetious?

Sent from my SM-N920V using USMessageBoard.com mobile app

A fetus is not a baby in terms of murder, Chuz. It is not an independent living entity. Only if it, as part of the pregnant woman's body, is illegally and criminally terminated can a person be prosecuted. That is not changing anytime soon.

A man's sperm is alive. The woman's egg is alive. A fertilized egg is alive. It is a continuum of life that has been going on for a very, very long time. Arbitrary time determinations can be made at any point we wish, and remain arbitrary. In human and legal terms, a person is a presence in our human world of movement, action and, in the case of children, increasing independence.
A responsible human would not engage in sex with the risk of causing pregnancy unless he/she were ready to accept the consequences. No truly rational woman could want to go through an abortion as a caprice. If we want to talk about how we get to responsibility and rationality, that is one thing. If we want to talk about making a decision about a woman's body for her, instead of her, we take away her responsibility irrationally.

You will never make women completely responsible for their part in this process as long as they can make the male a subservient participant - after the fact.

 

[Pop23]

Two sexually mature individuals are necessary to fertilize an egg. If they do that in consensual agreement with the intention of having a baby, both may have a voice.

Not at all true. Only one has all the rights to progression of the pregnancy.

 

[2aguy]

Two sexually mature individuals are necessary to fertilize an egg. If they do that in consensual agreement with the intention of having a baby, both may have a voice in continuation or not. When only the physical bearing of the baby is concerned, the male is not concerned.

Wrong.....the boy or girl is their son or daughter as well.......they need to have a say on the life or death of their children.