Supreme Court says it will consider Louisiana abortion access law

FoxHastings said: ↑
Which is hardly an honest argument...

GOOD arguments are based on facts, not emotions...






Which is not only ridiculous(and based on EMOTION rather than FACT ) but has NOTHING to do with the post of mine you quoted...

LOL, from one promoting emotion over fact...

 

See even if its just a "fetus" it still does not make it morally right to kill it only currently legally okay. By your logic slavery and segragation and the owning of women was right because it was legal

 

You are seriously UNDERESTIMATING women!

If you actually believe that claptrap then you are in for a BIG SURPRISE!

Women do NOT appreciate having old white men taking away their Constitutional Rights and there are a lot of men who do not appreciate that happening either.

The SCOTUS can make that ruling but I can assure you that it will RESULT in a BLUE TSUNAMI in the 2020 elections as the GOP is wiped out of office nationwide.

The net result of that ruling will be to ENSURE that abortion is not only LEGAL nationwide but that it is also FULLY FUNDED by the Federal government for EVERY WOMAN who wants and/or needs an abortion.

 

No, those laws were wrong and took away the right to bodily autonomy, EXACTLY what Anti-Choicers want to do to women by banning abortion.


And so what if someone says it's "morally " wrong to abort a fetus? Many people don't think it's morally wrong at all....which is why laws are NOT based on "morality".


I do note how, when you're shown to be wrong, you change the subject

 

Oh trust me I know what women can do united, they got the 18th amendment passed (its life was to short) without even having the vote.

Women are not united on this there are a huge amount of women who are pro life.

I agree with this premise, the thing is, many women find it repulsive to use abortion as birth control, just like many men, at-least 1/3 of democrats are pro-life.

No it would be stupid of the democrats to run ads saying they will protect abortion, what they need to do is keep it a local issue, because if you want the GOP to get evey member out to vote, saying "we will fight to keep abortion legal" is how you do it.

If that is made the campaign promise, I can tell you that every single person who is GOP or independent and pro life will come out and vote for the GOP I am a democrat, and I can tell you that we will come out in force to get Pro life dems winning primaries.

 

You are entitled to your misinformed opinion but 61% of the nation wants abortion LEGAL in either ALL or MOST instances. It gets even WORSE for your side when it comes to RvW because 70% are AGAINST overturning it.

https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2019/08/30/facts-about-abortion-debate-in-america/

That leaves you with a SHRINKING MINORITY who will find themselves MARGINALIZED and ultimately DEFEATED in those red states.

And in case you never heard the expression that timing is everything the SCOTUS ruling will only come out AFTER the Dem Primaries are OVER!

That means that the MOTIVATION for Progressives to get out the vote will be INTENSE and TARGETED and they will be DRIVEN to WIN every single race across the nation.

There just are NOT enough anti-women's rights voters to stop that from happening.

 

We have already tried anti-abortion laws in this country. They didn't work. Those women with any financial means just took "vacations" to areas where it is legal and the only women ever taken to court were the very poor who got caught up with back alley doctors. If you look at the Roe v. Wade court decision, this unequal application of law was one of the main reasons the the justices decided to strike down anti-abortion laws.

So we know anti-abortion laws don't work. We have the history. And that was back in a time where the entire country was far more conservative than it is now. It's insane to think that anti-abortion laws will apply to anyone but the poor in this country. We could save far more lives by putting that same money into pre-natal care and more incubators for saving the lives of wanted babies. But "pro-life" is not about saving lives, it's about control.

 

I would be in support of real sex ed like in Norway. Starting in 1st grade and going through 12th, where in the beginning they just answer all the questions about the body honestly and the as they get older they tell them more, they don't tell them sex is bad, then simply tell them and show them why its an adult activity and how to prevent pregnancy if you do end up having sex. only 6 out of 1000 teen girls are pregnant. Oh and free birth control/contraceptives with no parent signing for them. Free pregnancy screening without needing parent with them.

I support medicare for all, universal preschool/daycare, free baby supplies for women who can't ford them so that cost is never a reason not to want to have a baby. I support paid parental leave, 6 months for the mother 6 months for the father. Oh I also support 3 meals a day in schools for children who don't have food at home. I support free college. I also support banning guns, removing the death penalty, ending the wars. Open borders, easier path to citizenship.

I am the real deal, it is about life.

 

That's in Norway, this is the US....and NONE of that requires taking away women's right to their own bodies.

 

Oh so now that I came up with a solution to make abortion basically non existent (would drop from 600K to 9K) now you are against it, hmm its almost as if you want abortion to keep happening in large numbers. Since only having 24 abortions a day as opposed to 1643 per days is "female slavery" or maybe its because you would realize that it would allow abortion to be banned for all non life saving reasons because shocker that's the only reason people get abortion under the Norway system.

 

FoxHastings said: ↑
That's in Norway, this is the US....and NONE of that requires taking away women's right to their own bodies.

,


Hey, how about you show EXACTLY WHERE in the post of mine you quoted that I SAID I WAS AGAINST IT .


(Quick now, change the subject )

Another word salad that has nothing to do with the post you quoted...

Quick, change the subject !!

 

"FoxHastings said: ↑
That's in Norway, this is the US

 

FoxHastings said: ↑
Hey, how about you show EXACTLY WHERE in the post of mine you quoted that I SAID I WAS AGAINST IT .



...and NONE of that requires taking away women's right to their own bodies.

 

If you agreed you would have stated such, instead you claimed that this still some how infringes on women's rights, when it does just about everything to promote life.

 

There was NO obligation to agree nor disagree.

I stated a FACT: ""That's in Norway, this is the US""

...and you think you can interpret it anyway you want ( YOU did state you prefer emotion over fact !!!)....IF you notice the word "against" is NOT in that phrase....YOU invented it.


Here's another fantastic "interpretation" of what I said :

Which I never said nor indicated...

What I REALLY said was : ""...and NONE of that requires taking away women's right to their own bodies."""

 

That last line is not necessary unless you are claiming that the stated plan is hostile to women's rights to their bodies (abortion)

I never stated any such thing in the policy of taking away abortion rights, I simply stated how they will become non existent except in extreme situations.

You assume that it is somehow a dirty trick to eliminate abortion instead of a genuine attempt to make life better for all and prevent death.

 

Arguable. Not worth the cost though. We should stop.

 

"""""...and NONE of that requires taking away women's right to their own bodies."""
Meaning, in English, that all the good things you mentioned do not require banning abortion as you and others want to do.

I am sorry if, in Norway, there is no word for "none".....or "against"...

 

So you basically want someone to be able to forgo free birth control and contraceptives and choose to use abortion as birth control even when everything is so available that you don't get pregnant unless you want to.

 

So you basically do not want to read my posts and discuss what's in them but want to use your imagination so they say what you want them to say.

Well, you already said you didn't like facts...

 

For clarification.....I NEVER said I was against any of those things.....AND YOU HAVE NEVER PROVEN I DID.

BUT having those things is NOT a reason to ban abortion and thus take away women's right to their own bodies.

Now, I explained and if you want to drift off to" Imagination Land" and claim I said something I didn't than an honest discussion with you is impossible.

 

You are the one who said you don't want abortion to be restricted, even if all I said above was implemented. So please enlighten us as to WHAT reason people would have to abortion that does not involve the life of the mother?

 

If those policies were in place, why would we need abortion to still be 100% legal on demand? Why not give people the ability to get an abortion if their life is at risk, or they were raped and leave it at that? This way its up to the individual to take the steps to prevent pregnancy when they don't want it and allow them to end it if they need to or their individual right to not be violated aka raped was infringed?

 

Not really.

 

,


This is getting really annoying and boring....you claim I say things that I never say....can you explain why you think that's honest and how that advances your cause ????

I could ask you to prove I said I don't want abortion to be restricted but of coutrse you won't because you can't.


You are the one who said you don't want abortion restricted...

You are the one who said you don't want Norway spending all that money on services...