Dilettante said:

---

Life doesn't begin at conception.

---

Why not? It has it's own unique human DNA at that point

Macarthur said:

---

Joe Boudain said:

---

Macarthur said:

---

You are denying bodily autonomy of the woman if she does not want to have the child.

And it's not a win/win/win. That is a fundamental flaw of your example.

---

She's denying her own bodily autonomy in the overwhelming majority of cases, she got pregnant. If she does not want to have the child she should not be having sex. Children are a wholly foreseeable consequence of having children.

You autonomy ends where another life begins.

---

Nope. You could not be more wrong. I love the argument that she shouldn't have sex...It's pretty much only made by a man, who of course, doesn't have to carry and deliver the child.

---

no, just has to pay for them for 18 years if he decides not to be a parent (which I also think is wrong).

Quote:

---

You autonomy ends where another life begins.

---

Oh man, I'm not wanting to derail, but the mind-boggling irony of this comment given what else they've advocated is just beyond surreal.

Solo Tetherball Champ said:

---

larry culpepper said:

---

dermdoc said:

---

larry culpepper said:

---

dermdoc said:

---

Again with all due respect, they can still get an bottom until the heartbeat which I believe is six months, correct?

However horrid rape is, that is not what this is about.

This is about limiting abortion for convenience which is the vast majority of abortions. And consensual sex not rape.

---

Because of how extreme the new law is, yes it absolutely is about these extreme circumstances. Rape, incest, fetal deformities where the mother knows the baby wont survive outside the womb. Extreme situations that no one ever wants to be put in, that cause a world of pain for the mother. This is why I believe abortion should be legal. And it's why I think laws that completely disregard these situations and add to the pain, are evil.

Yes I am aware people get abortions for convenience. If you don't like that, fine. I don't like it either. But I have read up enough on this to know that making them self-administer illegal abortions isn't the answer either. I have always advocated for solutions that actually lower unplanned pregnancies and therefore abortions, such as comprehensive education and wider access to contraceptives that have PROVEN to work in other states and countries that have taken that approach.

But for some reason we keep harping on making abortion illegal, which when it all boils down to it just makes it illegal for low income women. Rich Republican men will always find a way to get their girlfriends, wives, and mistresses an abortion.

---

Really man. Bad bull.

There are so many straw men in your post it is difficult to discuss. We have rape victims and congenital problems which are a minuscule part of the abortion equation as you know.

Then the "rich, Republican card? C'mon man. No need for stooping to this kind of caricature.

It all comes down to whether you believe abortion is murder as I do. If you do not think it is murder then everything becomes relative.

---

I don't feel bad about pulling the rich Republican card because it's true. I'm not saying you are included in that group, but if their woman needs an abortion they'll get it for them as they always have. This affects low and middle income women. And I'm picking on Republicans because they vote for and pass these types of laws.

Abortion is by far the most controversial subject in American political discourse and will continue to be for a long time. I do not believe that it is murder in the first trimester. I am not sure about the early stages of the second. And I think society agrees with me on that. We do not count them on the census, we do not have funerals for miscarriages, and we do not arrest and prosecute women who miscarry or have a period that contains fertilized eggs (though with Greg Abbott as governor this can never be ruled out).

We can downplay these "rare" situations all you want but they are absolutely relevant when the laws we pass do not provide exceptions for them.

---

As a man who has suffered that loss, seen his brothers and sister go through that, and watched close friends go through the pain of miscarriages you can go **** yourself.

There is a difference between a tragic and accidental loss of life and deliberately killing your own children for the sake of convenience.

If you don't have the moral clarity nor the intelligence to recognize the difference, you are a monster.

---

And this law opens the door to cruel civil litigation against people who suffer such a horrible loss by others who simply have a hunch it was done intentionally.

Of course I recognize the difference. I acknowledge that pregnancy is a deeply personal situation for all involved parties and everyone has different experiences. And it pisses me off when the government intervenes in that.

Joe Boudain said:

---

Macarthur said:

---

Joe Boudain said:

---

Macarthur said:

---

You are denying bodily autonomy of the woman if she does not want to have the child.

And it's not a win/win/win. That is a fundamental flaw of your example.

---

She's denying her own bodily autonomy in the overwhelming majority of cases, she got pregnant. If she does not want to have the child she should not be having sex. Children are a wholly foreseeable consequence of having children.

You autonomy ends where another life begins.

---

Nope. You could not be more wrong. I love the argument that she shouldn't have sex...It's pretty much only made by a man, who of course, doesn't have to carry and deliver the child.

---

no, just has to pay for them for 18 years if he decides not to be a parent (which I also think is wrong).

---

Couldn't care less. It's insanely flawed to claim that a woman gives up bodily autonomy when she decides to have sex.

RebelE Infantry said:

---

You will not convince me that an outright ban on abortion will magically increase the number of abortions performed.

And yes, I think people who commit murder should be punished. Wouldn't expect that to be controversial but it's 2021 and everything is stupid so here we are.

---

The numbers are there. Look at them. States with the strictest abortion laws have the highest abortion rates. States and countries with more liberal laws have lower abortion rates because they focus on the right things.

I won't convince you to change your position, I know. I'm just saying the data isn't on your side and these laws are less designed to lower abortions and more designed to punish and to satisfy people's anger

larry culpepper said:

---

Solo Tetherball Champ said:

---

larry culpepper said:

---

dermdoc said:

---

larry culpepper said:

---

dermdoc said:

---

Again with all due respect, they can still get an bottom until the heartbeat which I believe is six months, correct?

However horrid rape is, that is not what this is about.

This is about limiting abortion for convenience which is the vast majority of abortions. And consensual sex not rape.

---

Because of how extreme the new law is, yes it absolutely is about these extreme circumstances. Rape, incest, fetal deformities where the mother knows the baby wont survive outside the womb. Extreme situations that no one ever wants to be put in, that cause a world of pain for the mother. This is why I believe abortion should be legal. And it's why I think laws that completely disregard these situations and add to the pain, are evil.

Yes I am aware people get abortions for convenience. If you don't like that, fine. I don't like it either. But I have read up enough on this to know that making them self-administer illegal abortions isn't the answer either. I have always advocated for solutions that actually lower unplanned pregnancies and therefore abortions, such as comprehensive education and wider access to contraceptives that have PROVEN to work in other states and countries that have taken that approach.

But for some reason we keep harping on making abortion illegal, which when it all boils down to it just makes it illegal for low income women. Rich Republican men will always find a way to get their girlfriends, wives, and mistresses an abortion.

---

Really man. Bad bull.

There are so many straw men in your post it is difficult to discuss. We have rape victims and congenital problems which are a minuscule part of the abortion equation as you know.

Then the "rich, Republican card? C'mon man. No need for stooping to this kind of caricature.

It all comes down to whether you believe abortion is murder as I do. If you do not think it is murder then everything becomes relative.

---

I don't feel bad about pulling the rich Republican card because it's true. I'm not saying you are included in that group, but if their woman needs an abortion they'll get it for them as they always have. This affects low and middle income women. And I'm picking on Republicans because they vote for and pass these types of laws.

Abortion is by far the most controversial subject in American political discourse and will continue to be for a long time. I do not believe that it is murder in the first trimester. I am not sure about the early stages of the second. And I think society agrees with me on that. We do not count them on the census, we do not have funerals for miscarriages, and we do not arrest and prosecute women who miscarry or have a period that contains fertilized eggs (though with Greg Abbott as governor this can never be ruled out).

We can downplay these "rare" situations all you want but they are absolutely relevant when the laws we pass do not provide exceptions for them.

---

As a man who has suffered that loss, seen his brothers and sister go through that, and watched close friends go through the pain of miscarriages you can go **** yourself.

There is a difference between a tragic and accidental loss of life and deliberately killing your own children for the sake of convenience.

If you don't have the moral clarity nor the intelligence to recognize the difference, you are a monster.

---

And this law opens the door to cruel civil litigation against people who suffer such a horrible loss by others who simply have a hunch it was done intentionally.

Of course I recognize the difference. I acknowledge that pregnancy is a deeply personal situation for all involved parties and everyone has different experiences. And it pisses me off when the government intervenes in that.

---

Don't pretend to be concerned about the "muh slippery slope".

You're only pissed off because the government set limits on peoples abilities to kill their own offspring in the name of convenience.

You have the moral consistency of quicksand.

747Ag said:

---

Fornication.

---

If I were unwed I would say your thumb icon is pointing the wrong way.

747Ag said:

---

747Ag said:

---

Fornication.

---

Mortal sin.

---

Those are the best kind of sin, though.

747Ag said:

---

747Ag said:

---

747Ag said:

---

Fornication.

---

Mortal sin.

---

Spiritual death.

---

The spirits agree with me. I asked.

Joe Boudain said:

---

Dilettante said:

---

Life doesn't begin at conception.

---

Why not? It has it's own unique human DNA at that point

---

The phrase "unique human DNA" don't appear in any definitions of life as far as I know. The sperm and egg are alive.

Solo Tetherball Champ said:

---

larry culpepper said:

---

Solo Tetherball Champ said:

---

larry culpepper said:

---

dermdoc said:

---

larry culpepper said:

---

dermdoc said:

---

Again with all due respect, they can still get an bottom until the heartbeat which I believe is six months, correct?

However horrid rape is, that is not what this is about.

This is about limiting abortion for convenience which is the vast majority of abortions. And consensual sex not rape.

---

Because of how extreme the new law is, yes it absolutely is about these extreme circumstances. Rape, incest, fetal deformities where the mother knows the baby wont survive outside the womb. Extreme situations that no one ever wants to be put in, that cause a world of pain for the mother. This is why I believe abortion should be legal. And it's why I think laws that completely disregard these situations and add to the pain, are evil.

Yes I am aware people get abortions for convenience. If you don't like that, fine. I don't like it either. But I have read up enough on this to know that making them self-administer illegal abortions isn't the answer either. I have always advocated for solutions that actually lower unplanned pregnancies and therefore abortions, such as comprehensive education and wider access to contraceptives that have PROVEN to work in other states and countries that have taken that approach.

But for some reason we keep harping on making abortion illegal, which when it all boils down to it just makes it illegal for low income women. Rich Republican men will always find a way to get their girlfriends, wives, and mistresses an abortion.

---

Really man. Bad bull.

There are so many straw men in your post it is difficult to discuss. We have rape victims and congenital problems which are a minuscule part of the abortion equation as you know.

Then the "rich, Republican card? C'mon man. No need for stooping to this kind of caricature.

It all comes down to whether you believe abortion is murder as I do. If you do not think it is murder then everything becomes relative.

---

I don't feel bad about pulling the rich Republican card because it's true. I'm not saying you are included in that group, but if their woman needs an abortion they'll get it for them as they always have. This affects low and middle income women. And I'm picking on Republicans because they vote for and pass these types of laws.

Abortion is by far the most controversial subject in American political discourse and will continue to be for a long time. I do not believe that it is murder in the first trimester. I am not sure about the early stages of the second. And I think society agrees with me on that. We do not count them on the census, we do not have funerals for miscarriages, and we do not arrest and prosecute women who miscarry or have a period that contains fertilized eggs (though with Greg Abbott as governor this can never be ruled out).

We can downplay these "rare" situations all you want but they are absolutely relevant when the laws we pass do not provide exceptions for them.

---

As a man who has suffered that loss, seen his brothers and sister go through that, and watched close friends go through the pain of miscarriages you can go **** yourself.

There is a difference between a tragic and accidental loss of life and deliberately killing your own children for the sake of convenience.

If you don't have the moral clarity nor the intelligence to recognize the difference, you are a monster.

---

And this law opens the door to cruel civil litigation against people who suffer such a horrible loss by others who simply have a hunch it was done intentionally.

Of course I recognize the difference. I acknowledge that pregnancy is a deeply personal situation for all involved parties and everyone has different experiences. And it pisses me off when the government intervenes in that.

---

Don't pretend to be concerned about the "muh slippery slope".

You're only pissed off because the government set limits on peoples abilities to kill their own offspring in the name of convenience.

You have the moral consistency of quicksand.

---

If you bothered to read any of my posts, i'm also very angry that the law shows complete disregard to the constitutional principle of legal standing which allows complete, unfettered ability to file frivolous lawsuits by anyone, with zero risk to them and a lot of risk to the defendant.

Also, I'm fine with limits. We already had them. I am not fine with extreme limits like this, or forcing rape victims to carry babies and provide for them.

747Ag said:

---

747Ag said:

---

747Ag said:

---

Fornication.

---

Mortal sin.

---

Spiritual death.

---

Physical death while spiritually dead merits damnation.

Too late, already damned.

larry culpepper said:

---

Solo Tetherball Champ said:

---

larry culpepper said:

---

Solo Tetherball Champ said:

---

larry culpepper said:

---

dermdoc said:

---

larry culpepper said:

---

dermdoc said:

---

Again with all due respect, they can still get an bottom until the heartbeat which I believe is six months, correct?

However horrid rape is, that is not what this is about.

This is about limiting abortion for convenience which is the vast majority of abortions. And consensual sex not rape.

---

Because of how extreme the new law is, yes it absolutely is about these extreme circumstances. Rape, incest, fetal deformities where the mother knows the baby wont survive outside the womb. Extreme situations that no one ever wants to be put in, that cause a world of pain for the mother. This is why I believe abortion should be legal. And it's why I think laws that completely disregard these situations and add to the pain, are evil.

Yes I am aware people get abortions for convenience. If you don't like that, fine. I don't like it either. But I have read up enough on this to know that making them self-administer illegal abortions isn't the answer either. I have always advocated for solutions that actually lower unplanned pregnancies and therefore abortions, such as comprehensive education and wider access to contraceptives that have PROVEN to work in other states and countries that have taken that approach.

But for some reason we keep harping on making abortion illegal, which when it all boils down to it just makes it illegal for low income women. Rich Republican men will always find a way to get their girlfriends, wives, and mistresses an abortion.

---

Really man. Bad bull.

There are so many straw men in your post it is difficult to discuss. We have rape victims and congenital problems which are a minuscule part of the abortion equation as you know.

Then the "rich, Republican card? C'mon man. No need for stooping to this kind of caricature.

It all comes down to whether you believe abortion is murder as I do. If you do not think it is murder then everything becomes relative.

---

I don't feel bad about pulling the rich Republican card because it's true. I'm not saying you are included in that group, but if their woman needs an abortion they'll get it for them as they always have. This affects low and middle income women. And I'm picking on Republicans because they vote for and pass these types of laws.

Abortion is by far the most controversial subject in American political discourse and will continue to be for a long time. I do not believe that it is murder in the first trimester. I am not sure about the early stages of the second. And I think society agrees with me on that. We do not count them on the census, we do not have funerals for miscarriages, and we do not arrest and prosecute women who miscarry or have a period that contains fertilized eggs (though with Greg Abbott as governor this can never be ruled out).

We can downplay these "rare" situations all you want but they are absolutely relevant when the laws we pass do not provide exceptions for them.

---

As a man who has suffered that loss, seen his brothers and sister go through that, and watched close friends go through the pain of miscarriages you can go **** yourself.

There is a difference between a tragic and accidental loss of life and deliberately killing your own children for the sake of convenience.

If you don't have the moral clarity nor the intelligence to recognize the difference, you are a monster.

---

And this law opens the door to cruel civil litigation against people who suffer such a horrible loss by others who simply have a hunch it was done intentionally.

Of course I recognize the difference. I acknowledge that pregnancy is a deeply personal situation for all involved parties and everyone has different experiences. And it pisses me off when the government intervenes in that.

---

Don't pretend to be concerned about the "muh slippery slope".

You're only pissed off because the government set limits on peoples abilities to kill their own offspring in the name of convenience.

You have the moral consistency of quicksand.

---

If you bothered to read any of my posts, i'm also very angry that the law shows complete disregard to the constitutional principle of legal standing which allows complete, unfettered ability to file frivolous lawsuits by anyone, with zero risk to them and a lot of risk to the defendant.

Also, I'm fine with limits. We already had them. I am not fine with extreme limits like this, or forcing rape victims to carry babies and provide for them.

---

Sure you are, kid.

When the crux of your argument is about the less than 1% of all situations per planned parenthoods own stats, it doesn't appear at all like you're upset you may be responsible for your action.

Joe Boudain said:

---

Dilettante said:

---

Life doesn't begin at conception.

---

Why not? It has it's own unique human DNA at that point

---

So do your cells. DNA varies from cell to cell in your body.

Jmiller said:

---

Joe Boudain said:

---

Dilettante said:

---

Life doesn't begin at conception.

---

Why not? It has it's own unique human DNA at that point

---

So do your cells. DNA varies from cell to cell in your body.

---

And I still think personhood, while a worthwhile discussion, still doesn't have bearing on a women's right.

I stand by my gif.

Solo Tetherball Champ said:

---

larry culpepper said:

---

Solo Tetherball Champ said:

---

larry culpepper said:

---

Solo Tetherball Champ said:

---

larry culpepper said:

---

dermdoc said:

---

larry culpepper said:

---

dermdoc said:

---

Again with all due respect, they can still get an bottom until the heartbeat which I believe is six months, correct?

However horrid rape is, that is not what this is about.

This is about limiting abortion for convenience which is the vast majority of abortions. And consensual sex not rape.

---

Because of how extreme the new law is, yes it absolutely is about these extreme circumstances. Rape, incest, fetal deformities where the mother knows the baby wont survive outside the womb. Extreme situations that no one ever wants to be put in, that cause a world of pain for the mother. This is why I believe abortion should be legal. And it's why I think laws that completely disregard these situations and add to the pain, are evil.

Yes I am aware people get abortions for convenience. If you don't like that, fine. I don't like it either. But I have read up enough on this to know that making them self-administer illegal abortions isn't the answer either. I have always advocated for solutions that actually lower unplanned pregnancies and therefore abortions, such as comprehensive education and wider access to contraceptives that have PROVEN to work in other states and countries that have taken that approach.

But for some reason we keep harping on making abortion illegal, which when it all boils down to it just makes it illegal for low income women. Rich Republican men will always find a way to get their girlfriends, wives, and mistresses an abortion.

---

Really man. Bad bull.

There are so many straw men in your post it is difficult to discuss. We have rape victims and congenital problems which are a minuscule part of the abortion equation as you know.

Then the "rich, Republican card? C'mon man. No need for stooping to this kind of caricature.

It all comes down to whether you believe abortion is murder as I do. If you do not think it is murder then everything becomes relative.

---

I don't feel bad about pulling the rich Republican card because it's true. I'm not saying you are included in that group, but if their woman needs an abortion they'll get it for them as they always have. This affects low and middle income women. And I'm picking on Republicans because they vote for and pass these types of laws.

Abortion is by far the most controversial subject in American political discourse and will continue to be for a long time. I do not believe that it is murder in the first trimester. I am not sure about the early stages of the second. And I think society agrees with me on that. We do not count them on the census, we do not have funerals for miscarriages, and we do not arrest and prosecute women who miscarry or have a period that contains fertilized eggs (though with Greg Abbott as governor this can never be ruled out).

We can downplay these "rare" situations all you want but they are absolutely relevant when the laws we pass do not provide exceptions for them.

---

As a man who has suffered that loss, seen his brothers and sister go through that, and watched close friends go through the pain of miscarriages you can go **** yourself.

There is a difference between a tragic and accidental loss of life and deliberately killing your own children for the sake of convenience.

If you don't have the moral clarity nor the intelligence to recognize the difference, you are a monster.

---

And this law opens the door to cruel civil litigation against people who suffer such a horrible loss by others who simply have a hunch it was done intentionally.

Of course I recognize the difference. I acknowledge that pregnancy is a deeply personal situation for all involved parties and everyone has different experiences. And it pisses me off when the government intervenes in that.

---

Don't pretend to be concerned about the "muh slippery slope".

You're only pissed off because the government set limits on peoples abilities to kill their own offspring in the name of convenience.

You have the moral consistency of quicksand.

---

If you bothered to read any of my posts, i'm also very angry that the law shows complete disregard to the constitutional principle of legal standing which allows complete, unfettered ability to file frivolous lawsuits by anyone, with zero risk to them and a lot of risk to the defendant.

Also, I'm fine with limits. We already had them. I am not fine with extreme limits like this, or forcing rape victims to carry babies and provide for them.

---

Sure you are, kid.

When the crux of your argument is about the less than 1% of all situations per planned parenthoods own stats, it doesn't appear at all like you're upset you may be responsible for your action.

---

Like I said earlier, these rare extenuating circumstances are absolutely relevant when it comes to this new law being passed, as there are no exceptions made for them.

This isn't about me. I never once made this personal.

747Ag said:

---

747Ag said:

---

747Ag said:

---

747Ag said:

---

747Ag said:

---

Fornication.

---

Mortal sin.

---

Spiritual death.

---

Physical death while spiritually dead merits damnation.

---

---

Sounds boring.

dargscisyhp said:

---

747Ag said:

---

747Ag said:

---

747Ag said:

---

747Ag said:

---

747Ag said:

---

Fornication.

---

Mortal sin.

---

Spiritual death.

---

Physical death while spiritually dead merits damnation.

---

---

Sounds boring.

---

I generally try to avoid the abortion debates because no one ever changes their minds in them and what you believe on the subject is simply a function of what assumptions you bring into it.

If you assume that abortion is murder then of course you're going to be against it. While there might be some wiggle room when things like the health of the mother is involved or if there are developmental issues which mean the baby has no chance of living anyway I wouldn't expect a person that believes abortion is murder to change their mind.

But likewise many people in our society don't believe abortion is murder and no amount of incessant yelling that it is will change that. With that assumption, why wouldn't we have discussions on when and how it is allowed?

It'd be nice if people would take a moment to consider the topic from another point of view before they start screaming. Just my two cents.

People can and do change their minds on these things. It's not usually instantaneous and not everyone does it, but it happens in both directions.