PROSECUTOR TO DROP CHARGES AGAINST TEXAS WOMAN OVER HER ABORTION

What men think on the matter should have no bearing, if it does then that’s men voting to have a say in something that’s none of their business.
The states should get to decide. Of course some states will never learn from prohibition, banning things like guns/abortion/drugs doesn’t stop them from happening at all.

 

Your opinion on what "should" be is what has "no bearing" on things. It's irrelevant that you think it is "none of [men's] business". I happen to think the killing of unborn children affects all of us, in a way similar to how child abuse is the "business" of all of society.

I'm glad we agree on this. Hopefully soon that will be the reality.

Oh, I bet if we hung a few abortion docs it would tamp down the practice a fair bit. Sure, we may not completely eliminate it, but if we drive the frequency down to a fraction of its current practice, we could save hundreds of thousands of lives each year. I think it's worth the effort.

 

Then given this answer, you MUST save the fertilized eggs over a baby. Its the only logical choice.

If you dont, then your just a hypocrite.

 

Or I act illogically.

 

You have NO right to control another persons health and reproductive desicions.

Like it or not, your nothing but a doner.

 

Naw, banning things has never worked. I've no idea how it seems ethical to murder a doctor to stop a few abortions while they're still going on elsewhere, but hey why NOT go all africa on people? Actually, this makes me like abortions even more. They cull the population that would have very little chance to do well with society. I'm still 100% sure that the ends do not justify the means, murdering a doctor is still murder. isn't that still a sin to murder a doctor is is that a different form of ethics? Oh **** I forgot that doesn't matter.

 

state-sanctioned executions (which is what I was referring to) are not "murder", they are legal killings.

How very eugenicist of you.

 

We will never kill abortion doctors, that's some third world thinking at best. This isn't the middle east.

I'm a realist, if you want more welfare babies and crackheads with no parents that's cool. I'm also 100% sure that smaller gov means less bs and more freedom even if you do not agree with the freedoms that others have.

 

I really don't give a rat's butt what your political position is or whether it's different from that poster or this poster. But the snide remarks both you and Ditka did had to be responded. I was willing to let one go, yours, but not both. Hence why I directed at both of you.

Before we get into how many weeks can be allowed for an abortion, the debate of when human life begins must be resolved. That would be a more philosophical debate than religious or biology. And why I said that it is esoteric when discussing when human life begins.

Furthermore, I was trying to get people to think outside of their conform zone. When it comes to certain issues, like abortion, most people will only discuss that topic and make arguments that they are confortable making. And that too needs to change.

 

I have already explained it. You need to read and understand my post again, espeically about how to discuss when Human Life begins, how that argument is more esoteric than religious or biological. Nor am I going to explain my methodology to you. I merely responded first to two snide remarks and then gave what my reasoning was.

 

Let's try a simple one: do you (now) understand that the vast majority of chicken eggs purchased in grocery stores across the country, including the ones later turned into scrambled eggs, are UNFERTILIZED?

 

You have no excuse for your indignant tone. Your post said absolutely nothing to me, about my having made, what you considered to be, a "snide comment." Hence, I took your words at face value, and proceeded precisely as you had suggested-- did I not?

And now, for indulging what seemed to be your suggestion-- to "settle this like real people"-- I get your unjustified rudeness. You have now postured for two, good-sized posts, and you have failed to even hint at, to which of my comments, you objected. It is, therefore, I who have the true cause for indignation, being upbraided by the type of person who seems to believe that everyone should be able to read her mind, and are at fault, if they can't.

On top of that, you clearly show that you have lost patience with me, though I am the one who has been forced to read the meandering, disingenuous appeals for civil debate, from someone who not only, doesn't "give a rat's butt," about my opinion, but who is also so poor as you have been, at expressing her thoughts. Was the opening part of your first post, supposed to mean something to me? All you do is talk about a different poster:

Well if anyone should know about gross over- generalization, it's the woman who can't seem to specify what it is that bothered her, about my comment, or even which comment(s), it was (hint: the forum has a "quote," function). If it was my 2¢ about store- bought eggs not being fertilized, I guess I can add inept comprehension, to your communication traits: there was absolutely nothing that a sane person could object to, in that. I specifically said, that I was only addressing it, on the mundane level, not wanting to get mired in whatever symbolic relevance it had, in your argument. But, you just disregarded that? In addition to believing that others should be aware of your unexpressed thoughts, are you one of those really "special" people, who also thinks that she can know the unexpressed thoughts of others? Oh boy, lucky us!

Was there anything in the self-justifying and excuse- making indulgence, of the rest of this post, that finally makes clear, your bone of contention?

I suggest you work harder at getting yourself to be less opaque about making your own point, and worry less about trying to "help" others think about things.

 

Wow - you read all of that info from just the Jeopardy theme? What do you read into this?

 

Statistically when they attempt to induce their own abortion. Yes.

 

That middle school must be out for the day.

 

lol...

 

Even though woke white gentry love it, Latinos do not.

“DEMOCRATS BEFORE AND AFTER SEEING POLLS:



Obama pollster to Dems: ‘Latinx’ is still not a thing despite your wokest efforts.

“This is hardly the first poll to show that “Latinx” is not just a fringe construct but actively annoying to Hispanic voters. Bendixen & Amandi pollster Fernand Amandi wonders why Democrats keep insisting on promoting its usage. . . . The answer is simple — Democrats have invested themselves far more into the faculty lounge and activist donor base than they have with Hispanic voters. This isn’t the only reason why Hispanics are moving to the GOP in the last couple of cycles, but this disconnect certainly doesn’t help matters.”

 

The only women who try to induce their own abortion, generally, are women without access to medical abortion services, so your supposed "statistical," evidence, makes no sense. For a real statistic, however, it may interest you to learn that most abortions performed are for women who already have one or more children. This suggests that the most common cause for getting an abortion, is controlling family size. I don't know how you could logically deduce from that, that these women are therefore "sluts." This would be dependent, at least, on how many were married, or lived together in a stable relationship, with the father. If this is the better part of that group, it would suggest that family economics play a greater part in abortions, than the desire to, "party all the time." Even in ancient societies, BTW, female children are known to have sometimes been killed, when they would place too great a strain on a family's finances; this, of course, did not occur until after the child's birth.