Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
El Salvador has an abortion ban. Apparently women who have miscarriages are charged and jailed. So how do you intend to tell if a woman had a miscarriage or took one of the chemical abortificants? There's no way. El Salvador banned abortion but all they really did was create a black market for abortion drugs and jails filled with women. Abortion is here to stay not because people like abortion but because the alternative is horrible.So how long do you want send a woman to jail for having an abortion? Trump was asked this question and he had no answer.No one really wants to ban abortion, not really. The truth of that is in how even the most ardent anti abortion advocates have never thought about what happens next.
Maybe we are not afraid or maybe we not not lack the confidence in our ability to handle what happens next.
Did you ever think about that?
When Supreme Court justice Potter Stewart contemplated that a State could establish that an unborn fetus is a person. . . Neither did he go on to freak out about the downsides of doing.
Neither did the pro-abortion attorney (Sarah Weddington) express any of concern of her own.
Maybe that's because when "Roe" was being decided, they were already living in a world where abortions WERE banned and the sky was NOT falling.
I have no trouble answering this question because I am consistent with my views no matter how much it costs me politically among my friends.
We have many fetal HOMICIDE laws on the books today, where a person can be (and have been) charged with MURDER for killing a child inthe womb, even accidentally, during the committing of a criminal act.
I have a hard time seeing why a womanwho kills that same child INTENTIONALLY should be charged with anything less.
Late term abortion is always for non-viable infants that have things that cannot be detected early. You would know that if the anti-abortion people were not the worst kind of liar.Government should never, ever interfere with medical care. I read a piece the other day that was the review of the materials that some states legally require doctors to give to abortion patients. The reviews were done by medical professionals. The level of false information in these materials was shocking, and most crafted by people in state governments who seemingly had no medical background.The materials did not contain any references to the sources of the assertions made in them. So much for letting Big Government into doctors' offices.
It is the ultimate in absurdity to think that a person would carry a fetus to term and then decide on the operating table that it should be killed for no reason.
El Salvador has an abortion ban. Apparently women who have miscarriages are charged and jailed. So how do you intend to tell if a woman had a miscarriage or took one of the chemical abortificants? There's no way. El Salvador banned abortion but all they really did was create a black market for abortion drugs and jails filled with women. Abortion is here to stay not because people like abortion but because the alternative is horrible.So how long do you want send a woman to jail for having an abortion? Trump was asked this question and he had no answer.No one really wants to ban abortion, not really. The truth of that is in how even the most ardent anti abortion advocates have never thought about what happens next.
Maybe we are not afraid or maybe we not not lack the confidence in our ability to handle what happens next.
Did you ever think about that?
When Supreme Court justice Potter Stewart contemplated that a State could establish that an unborn fetus is a person. . . Neither did he go on to freak out about the downsides of doing.
Neither did the pro-abortion attorney (Sarah Weddington) express any of concern of her own.
Maybe that's because when "Roe" was being decided, they were already living in a world where abortions WERE banned and the sky was NOT falling.
I have no trouble answering this question because I am consistent with my views no matter how much it costs me politically among my friends.
We have many fetal HOMICIDE laws on the books today, where a person can be (and have been) charged with MURDER for killing a child inthe womb, even accidentally, during the committing of a criminal act.
I have a hard time seeing why a womanwho kills that same child INTENTIONALLY should be charged with anything less.
I don't agree. You are still trying to place women in bondage to the law and their reproductive process.El Salvador has an abortion ban. Apparently women who have miscarriages are charged and jailed. So how do you intend to tell if a woman had a miscarriage or took one of the chemical abortificants? There's no way. El Salvador banned abortion but all they really did was create a black market for abortion drugs and jails filled with women. Abortion is here to stay not because people like abortion but because the alternative is horrible.So how long do you want send a woman to jail for having an abortion? Trump was asked this question and he had no answer.No one really wants to ban abortion, not really. The truth of that is in how even the most ardent anti abortion advocates have never thought about what happens next.
Maybe we are not afraid or maybe we not not lack the confidence in our ability to handle what happens next.
Did you ever think about that?
When Supreme Court justice Potter Stewart contemplated that a State could establish that an unborn fetus is a person. . . Neither did he go on to freak out about the downsides of doing.
Neither did the pro-abortion attorney (Sarah Weddington) express any of concern of her own.
Maybe that's because when "Roe" was being decided, they were already living in a world where abortions WERE banned and the sky was NOT falling.
I have no trouble answering this question because I am consistent with my views no matter how much it costs me politically among my friends.
We have many fetal HOMICIDE laws on the books today, where a person can be (and have been) charged with MURDER for killing a child inthe womb, even accidentally, during the committing of a criminal act.
I have a hard time seeing why a womanwho kills that same child INTENTIONALLY should be charged with anything less.
This is one area where I have more tolerance for incrementalism. Baby steps, etc.
The first of which is to establish in no uncertain terms that a child's life and RIGHTS begins at conception.
Agree?
Late term abortion is always for non-viable infants that have things that cannot be detected early. You would know that if the anti-abortion people were not the worst kind of liar.Government should never, ever interfere with medical care. I read a piece the other day that was the review of the materials that some states legally require doctors to give to abortion patients. The reviews were done by medical professionals. The level of false information in these materials was shocking, and most crafted by people in state governments who seemingly had no medical background.The materials did not contain any references to the sources of the assertions made in them. So much for letting Big Government into doctors' offices.
It is the ultimate in absurdity to think that a person would carry a fetus to term and then decide on the operating table that it should be killed for no reason.
I don't agree. You are still trying to place women in bondage to the law and their reproductive process.El Salvador has an abortion ban. Apparently women who have miscarriages are charged and jailed. So how do you intend to tell if a woman had a miscarriage or took one of the chemical abortificants? There's no way. El Salvador banned abortion but all they really did was create a black market for abortion drugs and jails filled with women. Abortion is here to stay not because people like abortion but because the alternative is horrible.So how long do you want send a woman to jail for having an abortion? Trump was asked this question and he had no answer.Maybe we are not afraid or maybe we not not lack the confidence in our ability to handle what happens next.
Did you ever think about that?
When Supreme Court justice Potter Stewart contemplated that a State could establish that an unborn fetus is a person. . . Neither did he go on to freak out about the downsides of doing.
Neither did the pro-abortion attorney (Sarah Weddington) express any of concern of her own.
Maybe that's because when "Roe" was being decided, they were already living in a world where abortions WERE banned and the sky was NOT falling.
I have no trouble answering this question because I am consistent with my views no matter how much it costs me politically among my friends.
We have many fetal HOMICIDE laws on the books today, where a person can be (and have been) charged with MURDER for killing a child inthe womb, even accidentally, during the committing of a criminal act.
I have a hard time seeing why a womanwho kills that same child INTENTIONALLY should be charged with anything less.
This is one area where I have more tolerance for incrementalism. Baby steps, etc.
The first of which is to establish in no uncertain terms that a child's life and RIGHTS begins at conception.
Agree?
If you don’t like abortion, don’t get an abortion.
It’s as simple as that.
And if you can’t stand the fact that you live in a country that allows abortion, move somewhere else.
.
Save the guilty little horrors you people share among yourselves. The horror you would inflict upon society is something you would never take the blame for.Late term abortion is always for non-viable infants that have things that cannot be detected early. You would know that if the anti-abortion people were not the worst kind of liar.Government should never, ever interfere with medical care. I read a piece the other day that was the review of the materials that some states legally require doctors to give to abortion patients. The reviews were done by medical professionals. The level of false information in these materials was shocking, and most crafted by people in state governments who seemingly had no medical background.The materials did not contain any references to the sources of the assertions made in them. So much for letting Big Government into doctors' offices.
It is the ultimate in absurdity to think that a person would carry a fetus to term and then decide on the operating table that it should be killed for no reason.
Save the guilty little horrors you people share among yourselves. The horror you would inflict upon society is something you would never take the blame for.Late term abortion is always for non-viable infants that have things that cannot be detected early. You would know that if the anti-abortion people were not the worst kind of liar.Government should never, ever interfere with medical care. I read a piece the other day that was the review of the materials that some states legally require doctors to give to abortion patients. The reviews were done by medical professionals. The level of false information in these materials was shocking, and most crafted by people in state governments who seemingly had no medical background.The materials did not contain any references to the sources of the assertions made in them. So much for letting Big Government into doctors' offices.
It is the ultimate in absurdity to think that a person would carry a fetus to term and then decide on the operating table that it should be killed for no reason.
The question is meaningless. The real question is: Do women have rights? In your world they do not.Save the guilty little horrors you people share among yourselves. The horror you would inflict upon society is something you would never take the blame for.Late term abortion is always for non-viable infants that have things that cannot be detected early. You would know that if the anti-abortion people were not the worst kind of liar.Government should never, ever interfere with medical care. I read a piece the other day that was the review of the materials that some states legally require doctors to give to abortion patients. The reviews were done by medical professionals. The level of false information in these materials was shocking, and most crafted by people in state governments who seemingly had no medical background.The materials did not contain any references to the sources of the assertions made in them. So much for letting Big Government into doctors' offices.
It is the ultimate in absurdity to think that a person would carry a fetus to term and then decide on the operating table that it should be killed for no reason.
Why are you dodging even the most basic of questions?
The question is meaningless. The real question is: Do women have rights? In your world they do not.Save the guilty little horrors you people share among yourselves. The horror you would inflict upon society is something you would never take the blame for.Late term abortion is always for non-viable infants that have things that cannot be detected early. You would know that if the anti-abortion people were not the worst kind of liar.Government should never, ever interfere with medical care. I read a piece the other day that was the review of the materials that some states legally require doctors to give to abortion patients. The reviews were done by medical professionals. The level of false information in these materials was shocking, and most crafted by people in state governments who seemingly had no medical background.The materials did not contain any references to the sources of the assertions made in them. So much for letting Big Government into doctors' offices.
It is the ultimate in absurdity to think that a person would carry a fetus to term and then decide on the operating table that it should be killed for no reason.
Why are you dodging even the most basic of questions?
I am a big states rights guy, and I am not sure any federal court should be deciding if and at what point a fetus becomes human enough to protect it's right to life prior to birth. Beyond the cases of rape, incest, and health of the mother I mean, maybe that decision ought to rest within each state; their voters can make that call or change their position if circumstances change.
Personally, I don't like it after the 1st trimester. That's enough time IMHO to decide what to do, and once viable the fetus can be removed from the womb and given to those who would provide for him/her. Certainly I'd rather see the money spent on aborting the baby to keeping him/her alive.
I disagree with the idea that personhood is something that (constitutionally) can be decided and vary State to State.
Certainly if marriage can't, then neither can personhood.
i guess we have to let individuals rely on the subjective value of morals.Why Americans Should Applaud the Virginia, New York Abortion Bills
Why Americans Should Applaud the Virginia, New York Abortion Bills
Americans should applaud the new abortion legislation proposed in states like Virginia and New York. That’s because, in bowing to a progressive agenda, these bills are exposing abortion for what it is: death.
Several states already support abortion up until birth. But only now are Americans causing an uproar over them. That’s because certain politicians appear to not only support and celebrate unrestricted abortion, but also expand it to include newborns. Infanticide. That isn’t something that just concerns the pro-life movement and Republicans. It’s detached from Democrats. It’s out of touch with Americans. It’s atrocious to human beings.... Or it should be.
Americans expressed horror Jan. 28 when Democratic delegate Kathy Tran introduced a Virginia bill she said would allow abortion even while a woman is in labor. Virginia Governor Ralph Northam, a Democrat, made more waves two days later during a WTOP interview where he defended the bill – and suggested leaving babies to die after birth.
“It’s done in cases where there may be severe deformities, there may be a fetus that’s nonviable. If a mother is in labor, I can tell you exactly what would happen,” Northam said. “The infant would be delivered. The infant would be kept comfortable. The infant would be resuscitated if that’s what the mother and the family desired, and then a discussion would ensue between the physicians and the mother.”
His comments came days after New York Governor Andrew Cuomo signed the Reproductive Health Act (RHA) on Jan. 22. Among other things, the New York law allows late-term abortion “at any time” to “protect a patient’s life or health.” The RHA also repealed protections for born babies that survive failed abortions.
Then there are other states, like Rhode Island, that are making headlines for bills that would repeal bans on partial-birth abortion.
A Jan. 15 Marist poll showed 75% of Americans want abortion restricted to the first three months of pregnancy. Americans cherish a culture of life, and their outcry for the unborn human person is a cause for hope – hope that life might one day champion death.
~~~~~~
The Democrat Party of America - proudly enslaving and murdering Americans since 1840. Just another case of Democrats being Democrats.
Lest we forget, the Progressive Marxist Socialist Democrats are already bought and paid for by the Mexican Cartels funneling Marijuana, Heroin, Cocaine and now Fentanyl to the heartland to do post natal genocidal abortion on voters in Ohio, Pennsylvania, West Virginia, upstate New York, and other places
We the Deplorables have to remember what the aims of Democrats are all about especially when the presidential election is at the forefront.
I am a big states rights guy, and I am not sure any federal court should be deciding if and at what point a fetus becomes human enough to protect it's right to life prior to birth. Beyond the cases of rape, incest, and health of the mother I mean, maybe that decision ought to rest within each state; their voters can make that call or change their position if circumstances change.
Personally, I don't like it after the 1st trimester. That's enough time IMHO to decide what to do, and once viable the fetus can be removed from the womb and given to those who would provide for him/her. Certainly I'd rather see the money spent on aborting the baby to keeping him/her alive.
I disagree with the idea that personhood is something that (constitutionally) can be decided and vary State to State.
Certainly if marriage can't, then neither can personhood.
We allow some states to have the death penalty, no? I think that issue is far more applicable than marriage is. Nobody dies when you get married, and it's a free choice made by both parties. IMHO, that's why I don't think they too correlate that much. Clearly, in this country abortion rights is a hotly contested issue, and whichever way you go will not be received well by a lot of people. At this point, I am just not sure we should be making that decision for everybody, nation-wide.
At birth just like it always has. The very idea that a fetus has rights surpassing their mother is ludicrous.The question is meaningless. The real question is: Do women have rights? In your world they do not.Save the guilty little horrors you people share among yourselves. The horror you would inflict upon society is something you would never take the blame for.Late term abortion is always for non-viable infants that have things that cannot be detected early. You would know that if the anti-abortion people were not the worst kind of liar.
Why are you dodging even the most basic of questions?
There is no question that women have rights.
The question is when does her rights begin.
At birth just like it always has. The very idea that a fetus has rights surpassing their mother is ludicrous.The question is meaningless. The real question is: Do women have rights? In your world they do not.Save the guilty little horrors you people share among yourselves. The horror you would inflict upon society is something you would never take the blame for.
Why are you dodging even the most basic of questions?
There is no question that women have rights.
The question is when does her rights begin.
At birth just like it always has. The very idea that a fetus has rights surpassing their mother is ludicrous.The question is meaningless. The real question is: Do women have rights? In your world they do not.Save the guilty little horrors you people share among yourselves. The horror you would inflict upon society is something you would never take the blame for.
Why are you dodging even the most basic of questions?
There is no question that women have rights.
The question is when does her rights begin.
Maybe you can ignore the evidence and arguments to the contrary. I can't and I'm not going to try harder to do so.
At birth just like it always has. The very idea that a fetus has rights surpassing their mother is ludicrous.The question is meaningless. The real question is: Do women have rights? In your world they do not.Why are you dodging even the most basic of questions?
There is no question that women have rights.
The question is when does her rights begin.
Maybe you can ignore the evidence and arguments to the contrary. I can't and I'm not going to try harder to do so.
Being steadfastly anti-abortion requires you to ignore a host of societal problems that make abortion a necessary evil. The best way to end abortion is not to directly attack women's rights but to work on why pregnancy is a trap for a disadvantaged woman.
