It’s Official: Democrats Are Performing Better After The Abortion Ruling

TOLD YOU!!!!
This was a dumb move by the SC and not ONE baby will be saved. All this did was turn the red wave into a red puddle.

 

The decision to kill their unborn babies yes I know and it is giving the left a thrill. They aren't impersonal edicts, it's about our fundamental rights as guarantied in our founding document.

 

Americans don't want fanaticism dictated to them by politicians. They made that clear.

 

The crackpots who fantasize that a microscopic, mindless amalgam of cells is a person, and that state bureaucrats should dictate to women concerning such a personal, private matter, cannot be allowed dominion over everyone.

 

Oh it's not that clear at all but if they want to get all giddy about mother's being able to kill their babies without restriction that's their choice.

 

Its stupid to attribute any one thing to ...well...anything political. Unless you're a mind reader much of what was quoted is nothing more than propaganda.

And I find it ironic in the extreme when one talks about freedom and rights while killing millions.

 

Spiritual matters should be left up to personal feelings and beliefs. IE: "what is a person" is an irrelevant question when talking about government. Whenever possible the government should go by facts. Period.

 

Authoritarian agendas must defer to liberty. Such personal, private matters should not be dictated via impersonal, public edicts.

An American asserting dominion over her own person in consultation with trusted medical and spiritual advisers and loved ones is vastly preferable to statist intimidation.

 

Advanced, democratic nations respect personal liberty. Americans have been expressing the same sentiment in referenda.

Would you rather emulate Nicaragua, El Salvador, Haiti, or Iraq where reproductive freedom does not exist?

 

Told us what, republican policy is failed policy?
Nah, I'm pretty sure we tell you guys that on a daily basis.

It wasn't the SC ruling, it was the republican policy of attempting to regulate body autonomy.

 

YES, they would, unfortunately....

 

She asserted her own personal dominion and liberty when she had sex knowing that it could lead to pregnancy.

Advanced nations should know that killing a human is unacceptable. Pretty sad that 3rd world nations get this and we don't.

 

Yup. All red states had to do was to allow abortion under what is generally accepted situations. Most americans are against late term abortion. So there's your baramoter. This is something you have to nudge towards being more restrictive. You can't go full abortion ban.

It was the correct call by the SC. Republicans ****ed up by going to quick in the restrictions.

Still not pro abortion. But I get we have to nudge the population into respecting the wieght of the act.

 

If you prefer authoritarian governance, there are several regressive nations that force your restraints upon everyone. Celibacy for women and the pretense that a microscopic, mindless amalgam of cells is a person may or may not be among the notions imposed by the State.

 

Again, what is and isn't a person is irrelevant. That is just your attempt change the conversation into something spiritual and nebulous. And to ignore the fact that you support killing innocent humans. Millions of them. Kinda like Hitler.

 

It is to most Americans.

You can pretend everyone is "Hitler" if you need to, but Americans do not want an authoritarian regime dictating such personal decisions to them as if the U.S. were Nicaragua or El Salvador.

Every epidermal cell you have is "human" but it is not a person.

 

Every epidermal cell I have has the same DNA as me and therefore a part of me. A ZEF has its own distinct DNA separate from anyone else on this planet.

And most American's want to ban 3rd trimester abortions...are you going to agree to ban them? Or should women still have a right to kill that human up to just before its born?

 

Every individual cell in a microscopic, mindless amalgam of cells in the womb is human. None constitutes a person that allows the State to seize control.

Terminating a pregnancy after 21 weeks is exceedingly rare. Politicians should not be licensed to dictate to caregivers by banning the termination of fetuses when fatal anomalies are discovered or when the life of the mother is threatened.

 

Every cell being human =/= belonging to the human adult. I know you want to disregard the fact that ZEF's have their own distinct human DNA separate from that of its mother and father...and every other single human on this planet. But the fact remains that it does.

And again, the State should not be determining what does and doesn't constitute a "person". That is a spiritual/belief matter and has no bearing on The State. We allowed the State to determine that once remember? Slavery? Oh but that was different huh? No. It's not. Human is human. We all go through different stages of development. In each and every single stage we are human. From Zygote to the Elderly. Your belief of wanting to not consider a zygote as a human worth saving makes your belief no different than that of slavers or Hitler.

And getting pregnant from rape is exceedingly rare also. Yet you holler about it as an excuse to allow abortion....not just allow abortion mind you, but allow abortion for everyone possible and for any reason possible. What's good for the goose, is good for the gander. But I see you reject the fact that the majority of people believe that the 3rd trimester abortions should be banned. And yet you expect me to bend to the will of the majority that have no problem with 1st trimester abortions. Amazing how hypocritical your argument is.

 

I agree that matters of spiritual/belief are personal, not dictated by the State.

You are not telling the truth. When did I mention rape or women becoming pregnant as a result of it?

I share with most folks in advanced nations respect for a woman's being capable of making personal decisions in consultation with trusted medical and spiritual advisers and loved ones.

I oppose the authoritarian statism of an El Salvador, Nicaragua, or Iraq where politicians and bureaucrats dictate impersonal edicts to women concerning reproductive matters..

 

Great! Then we can stop talking about "person". Lets stick to the science.

Sorry, that was a royal "you" not a you "you". I should have been clearer on that. My apologies. I was partially thinking ahead about how you ignored the majority stance for 3rd trimester, while pointing to the majority stance of 1st trimester.

And I do not consider it authoritarian or statism in the least to save the life of an innocent. At least no more authoritarian or statist than it is to make murder illegal. Do you consider murder laws to be authoritarian or statist?

 

... as a medical procedure, they are relatively rare. According to the Guttmacher Institute... a little more than 1 percent occur sometime after 21 weeks, which is still well within the second trimester.​

Would you want your politicians to dictate to medical professionals in this case:

Dana Weinstein was 31 weeks into her second pregnancy, preparing to welcome a daughter, when she and her husband were given horrible news: A critical piece of the brain had not developed properly.

“[We were told] that our baby would have seizures 70% of the time — that was a best-case scenario; that when we delivered her, that we’d need to have a resuscitation order in place because she would most likely seize to death,” Weinstein said.

Almost a decade later, Weinstein and her husband are the parents of three active children — a boy and two girls. She’s 48, living in the suburbs of Washington, D.C., and working for a nonprofit.

She still tears up when she talks about that diagnosis and the difficult decisions that surrounded it. Fearing a short and painful life for their baby, Weinstein and her husband chose to travel to Boulder, Colo., to end the pregnancy, at one of the few clinics in the country that offer third-trimester abortions.

Weinstein has been speaking publicly about her experience for years. But she decided to tell her story again recently, amid renewed national debate over decisions like hers.

“I just don’t understand why and how this is so front and center in the national debate,” Weinstein said. “I would have given anything to have been able to help our baby live if she could have lived. But she was going to be incapable of that.”

[https://www.cpr.org/2019/04/30/abor...-decision-often-made-in-tragic-circumstances/]​

Please respect the right of a woman to control her own body rather than have your politicians impose your notions upon her.

That is the prevailing sentiment regarding such State intrusion in advanced nations, including the United States.

Abortion Rights Supporters Win All 5 State Ballot...
​

 

The vast majority of Americans are perfectly capable of distinguishing murder from abortion.

Do you refuse to respect a woman making a personal decision and opting to terminate a pregnancy during the first trimester (when 88% of abortions are performed) and want her prosecuted for murder?

 

Oh so you wish to use emotionalism by providing examples? Ok. Enjoy...

LINK: They Are Real: Meet Born-Alive Abortion Survivors - Human Defense

There are multiple abortion survivors in that link.

It is not JUST a womans body at issue here. These are real humans. Just as human as you and I. They have a Right to Life. And all too often the ones who survive an abortion have lifetime disabilities thanks to the attempted abortion that they underwent. The woman made her choice when she consented to having sex knowing that she could get pregnant. Her AND the man she slept with have a responsibility to own up to that fact AND to the responsibility of making sure that life they just created has every possibility to live. If they wish to give up that life to an adoption agency then so be it. But until such time they have a responsibility to that life they created.

And honestly, I don't care what the prevailing sentiment is right now. Once upon a time the prevailing sentiment was that black people were not human, or at best a subset of humans. Argumentum ad populum.

 

Apparently not.

If its proven beyond a shadow of a doubt that she had an abortion...then yes. Why wouldn't we? We already charge people with 2 counts of murder when they kill a pregnant woman in which the ZEF was killed. Why should this be handled differently?

And the woman already made a decision by consenting to have sex knowing there was a possibility of getting pregnant.