larry culpepper said:

---

sorry, couldnt resist on the whataboutism. it was just so ridiculous I had to point it out.

I get it, there's no right to abortion in the constitution. There's also no right to marriage, having kids, sex, having a job, or living in College Station, Texas. But these are all things we treat as "rights" we have under personal freedom and privacy.

And my position is abortion should be protected as a privacy right, under the same logic contraceptives are protected.

As for your "if you dont like it vote for someone else." oh trust me, I will and I already do.

---

You are all over the place here.

I agree with you there is not a right to marriage and I think that was for a reason.

The feds, imho, should have never had anything to do with "marriage" as that should be a religious ceremony while every other relationship should be a civil union with equal rights as provided by the Constitution.

To my knowledge, no one has brought up a case that restricts where I live, or have kids, or any of the other things you mentioned.

But I assume some one could and the Court could rule on those.

And you and I can "believe" whatever we want. It is the rule of law that matters. That is all this is about.

And if you start to say that the SC should not be able to make impartial rulings based on their interpretation of the Constitution, then that is an awfully slippery slope.

Your fight is at the state leg level which is where it should have been all along legally.


.

Sapper Redux said:

---

AGC said:

---

Sapper Redux said:

---

dermdoc said:

---

Sapper Redux said:

---

dermdoc said:

---

Sapper Redux said:

---

swimmerbabe11 said:

---

Sapper Redux said:

---

Zobel said:

---

I reject the entire premise of your argument, why would I bother answering? People are open to discuss exceptions for the exceptions.

Pro-abortion people on this thread won't talk about anything except the fact that because the exceptions exist and cover "thousands" we can't even begin to deal with the 600,000+ that were happening every year.

---

I'm asking if under your new antiabortion regime if women who are capable of bearing children should be denied certain treatments and drugs that would harm any potential fetus. You're ignoring that. Also, you're demanding I accept that a zygote is the same as an adult human. It isn't.

---

I'm losing my mind.

No one has or was or will be asking for that.
No one is telling women of child bearing age to stop drinking alcohol, smoking cigarettes, eating tuna either.


If you are doing things that might get you pregnant, you should be hyper aware of whether or not you are pregnant. It is not that expensive to pee on a stick every once in a while and if you do something irresponsible Plan B is still legal in all 50 states.

The law in Missouri is poorly written, but in no way is anyone going to actually get in trouble for removing an ectopic pregnancy. In fact, they had wording that was ectopic pregnancy related and removed it because it was stupid.

---

The wording from the Attorney General's letter has caused a lot of problems for ED and OBGYN docs in Missouri. Sorry you want to think it's cut and dry, but it really, really isn't. And based on the definitions used by people like Zobel and Derm, Plan B is an abortion that kills a human with full rights. We're already seeing states make moves to make things like Plan B illegal.

---

If it is not cut and dry, that is the fault of the states as it is their responsibility now. If the people of Missouri or any other state want to change the laws, they can vote for people who will do so.

Wonderful concept envisioned by the Founders and the Constitution.

---

Never mind those harmed in the meantime.

---

At least they are not "snuffed out" like those poor babies.

What a twisted, evil view.

---

If I don't agree that a zygote is a baby, and don't agree with the very premise of your complaint, I'm evil and twisted. Got it. Good to know. I'll go on being evil and twisted, I guess. You keep minimizing the lives of women.

---

Human is a social construct again.

---

Claiming personhood starts at conception is a philosophical opinion. One not shared by a large number of people and religions. Your position is a belief, not a fact.

---

The word "person" is a philosophical opinion in itself. One rooted in the Trinity.

Sapper Redux said:

---

AGC said:

---

Sapper Redux said:

---

dermdoc said:

---

Sapper Redux said:

---

dermdoc said:

---

Sapper Redux said:

---

swimmerbabe11 said:

---

Sapper Redux said:

---

Zobel said:

---

I reject the entire premise of your argument, why would I bother answering? People are open to discuss exceptions for the exceptions.

Pro-abortion people on this thread won't talk about anything except the fact that because the exceptions exist and cover "thousands" we can't even begin to deal with the 600,000+ that were happening every year.

---

I'm asking if under your new antiabortion regime if women who are capable of bearing children should be denied certain treatments and drugs that would harm any potential fetus. You're ignoring that. Also, you're demanding I accept that a zygote is the same as an adult human. It isn't.

---

I'm losing my mind.

No one has or was or will be asking for that.
No one is telling women of child bearing age to stop drinking alcohol, smoking cigarettes, eating tuna either.


If you are doing things that might get you pregnant, you should be hyper aware of whether or not you are pregnant. It is not that expensive to pee on a stick every once in a while and if you do something irresponsible Plan B is still legal in all 50 states.

The law in Missouri is poorly written, but in no way is anyone going to actually get in trouble for removing an ectopic pregnancy. In fact, they had wording that was ectopic pregnancy related and removed it because it was stupid.

---

The wording from the Attorney General's letter has caused a lot of problems for ED and OBGYN docs in Missouri. Sorry you want to think it's cut and dry, but it really, really isn't. And based on the definitions used by people like Zobel and Derm, Plan B is an abortion that kills a human with full rights. We're already seeing states make moves to make things like Plan B illegal.

---

If it is not cut and dry, that is the fault of the states as it is their responsibility now. If the people of Missouri or any other state want to change the laws, they can vote for people who will do so.

Wonderful concept envisioned by the Founders and the Constitution.

---

Never mind those harmed in the meantime.

---

At least they are not "snuffed out" like those poor babies.

What a twisted, evil view.

---

If I don't agree that a zygote is a baby, and don't agree with the very premise of your complaint, I'm evil and twisted. Got it. Good to know. I'll go on being evil and twisted, I guess. You keep minimizing the lives of women.

---

Human is a social construct again.

---

Claiming personhood starts at conception is a philosophical opinion. One not shared by a large number of people and religions. Your position is a belief, not a fact.

---

So when is personhood a fact lol? Your "facts" completely depend on philosophy. Once again the materialist entering a domain that he has no business being in.

nortex97 said:

---

diehard03 said:

---

Quote:

---

Killing kids is morally wrong; further, it's unjustified, disgusting, not in/protected by the US constitution, and there's no reason to tap dance around that for someone else's obtuse sensibilities, especially now.

---

What you don't get is that pro-choice people 100% agree with you on this point.

They just don't agree on that they are kids. So invoking baby killing is literally useless. Stop being shocked by this.

---

Useless to what end? I'm not trying to persuade people like MacArthur/larry/sapper etc, and I think it's funny some well-intentioned/bright posters still try to engage in discussion with them about serious matters. They are dishonest at best and largely just argumentative message board posters/outcasts who can't handle the rejection of their views elsewhere.

If God chooses to draw them nearer to Him some day, fine/great, but I will continue to laugh at them, and post here so it isn't just the G&A board, and try to share some philosophy/religion as I see fit. Killing babies is fine by many of their ilk. Yes, that even includes kids born alive.

---

Sounds like you aren't here to discuss but get your snarky comments and insults in. And while you believe you're on the side of righteousness, I know I speak for many posters when I say you come off as absolutely insufferable when you engage with people you don't agree with. You respond to serious posts with laugh/cry and insults and think it makes you sound smarter. Mocking isn't funny, it's just annoying and off putting. Why even do it?

Quote:

---

I am still shocked at the banal depravity a total separation from God can lead to, and while sometimes it is tragic/sad, it is also sometimes funny to read, which is part of the reason I do come back to this board. They live in their own make believe worlds, with their own moralities, legal systems, privacy 'rights' etc.;

---

This is an incredibly ironic paragraph here for reasons I wont get into. But maybe ponder this for a second. Morality and the law are complex subjects. You are speaking from a viewpoint that there's only one correct philosophy and it just happens to be yours. This goes back to my earlier comments about how the right attempts to force its morality on the country (and I'm not just talking about abortion), because they are convinced they are right and God is on their side. Throughout history, lots of people thought God was on their side and used that to justify some pretty awful things.

If you think I'm banal and depraved because I'm not religious, fine. I don't really care. But I'll push back on the notion that "separation from God" leads to complete lack of morality and "make believe worlds." I have a strong sense of morality and integrity. It just happens to not align with your beliefs.

dermdoc said:

---

Sapper Redux said:

---

AGC said:

---

Sapper Redux said:

---

dermdoc said:

---

Sapper Redux said:

---

dermdoc said:

---

Sapper Redux said:

---

swimmerbabe11 said:

---

Sapper Redux said:

---

Zobel said:

---

I reject the entire premise of your argument, why would I bother answering? People are open to discuss exceptions for the exceptions.

Pro-abortion people on this thread won't talk about anything except the fact that because the exceptions exist and cover "thousands" we can't even begin to deal with the 600,000+ that were happening every year.

---

I'm asking if under your new antiabortion regime if women who are capable of bearing children should be denied certain treatments and drugs that would harm any potential fetus. You're ignoring that. Also, you're demanding I accept that a zygote is the same as an adult human. It isn't.

---

I'm losing my mind.

No one has or was or will be asking for that.
No one is telling women of child bearing age to stop drinking alcohol, smoking cigarettes, eating tuna either.


If you are doing things that might get you pregnant, you should be hyper aware of whether or not you are pregnant. It is not that expensive to pee on a stick every once in a while and if you do something irresponsible Plan B is still legal in all 50 states.

The law in Missouri is poorly written, but in no way is anyone going to actually get in trouble for removing an ectopic pregnancy. In fact, they had wording that was ectopic pregnancy related and removed it because it was stupid.

---

The wording from the Attorney General's letter has caused a lot of problems for ED and OBGYN docs in Missouri. Sorry you want to think it's cut and dry, but it really, really isn't. And based on the definitions used by people like Zobel and Derm, Plan B is an abortion that kills a human with full rights. We're already seeing states make moves to make things like Plan B illegal.

---

If it is not cut and dry, that is the fault of the states as it is their responsibility now. If the people of Missouri or any other state want to change the laws, they can vote for people who will do so.

Wonderful concept envisioned by the Founders and the Constitution.

---

Never mind those harmed in the meantime.

---

At least they are not "snuffed out" like those poor babies.

What a twisted, evil view.

---

If I don't agree that a zygote is a baby, and don't agree with the very premise of your complaint, I'm evil and twisted. Got it. Good to know. I'll go on being evil and twisted, I guess. You keep minimizing the lives of women.

---

Human is a social construct again.

---

Claiming personhood starts at conception is a philosophical opinion. One not shared by a large number of people and religions. Your position is a belief, not a fact.

---

Fair enough. I disagree. Let the voters decide.

Isn't that fair? And legal?

Because people who think like you and people who think like me will never agree on when life starts.

That is what courts are for. If not we have complete chaos. Mad Max.

---

Sure. Let the voters decide.

And then the GOP legislature and SOS will overturn any election that doesn't go their way.

but that's a different conversation for a different day

dermdoc said:

---

Gerrymandering in 1,2,3…

You guys are so predictable.

---

I notice the Illinois nor NY gerrymanders were referenced.

larry culpepper said:

---

Sure.

Have a referendum on it. I bet legalization (to some degree) passes in most states.

Our leaders don't represent the people anyway.

---

You do understand that is exactly what the SC just decided?

The states can do exactly what you want.

nortex97 said:

---

diehard03 said:

---

it shouldn't be. They don't believe its infanticide and they don't think they are killing babies. Making baby killing statements misses the point entirely.

---

Killing babies is the entire point, which you evidently missed.

I don't agree to play by other people's verbal/rhetorical gymnastic rules, whether it is special pronouns or make believe gender speech/worlds etc. Killing kids is morally wrong; further, it's unjustified, disgusting, not in/protected by the US constitution, and there's no reason to tap dance around that for someone else's obtuse sensibilities, especially now.

As stated above, if people don't like their states criminal laws, they can vote for people to in office to change them, or move.

---

PREACH!

Yes and I'd put money on it if it came down to it. There are a sizeable number of conservatives who think abortion should be legal to SOME degree. Polling consistently shows a majority of people (60%+) agrees with this position. Complete outlaw of abortion is an extreme position. The overton window has shifted far right because the GOP is very far right now.

Texas is red shifting purple. Trump won by 5 points in 2020. For comparison's sake, Biden won California by 29. While I predict an Abbott win this year, I think this trend continues over the long term.

Orthodox Texan said:

---

Sapper Redux said:

---

AGC said:

---

Sapper Redux said:

---

dermdoc said:

---

Sapper Redux said:

---

dermdoc said:

---

Sapper Redux said:

---

swimmerbabe11 said:

---

Sapper Redux said:

---

Zobel said:

---

I reject the entire premise of your argument, why would I bother answering? People are open to discuss exceptions for the exceptions.

Pro-abortion people on this thread won't talk about anything except the fact that because the exceptions exist and cover "thousands" we can't even begin to deal with the 600,000+ that were happening every year.

---

I'm asking if under your new antiabortion regime if women who are capable of bearing children should be denied certain treatments and drugs that would harm any potential fetus. You're ignoring that. Also, you're demanding I accept that a zygote is the same as an adult human. It isn't.

---

I'm losing my mind.

No one has or was or will be asking for that.
No one is telling women of child bearing age to stop drinking alcohol, smoking cigarettes, eating tuna either.


If you are doing things that might get you pregnant, you should be hyper aware of whether or not you are pregnant. It is not that expensive to pee on a stick every once in a while and if you do something irresponsible Plan B is still legal in all 50 states.

The law in Missouri is poorly written, but in no way is anyone going to actually get in trouble for removing an ectopic pregnancy. In fact, they had wording that was ectopic pregnancy related and removed it because it was stupid.

---

The wording from the Attorney General's letter has caused a lot of problems for ED and OBGYN docs in Missouri. Sorry you want to think it's cut and dry, but it really, really isn't. And based on the definitions used by people like Zobel and Derm, Plan B is an abortion that kills a human with full rights. We're already seeing states make moves to make things like Plan B illegal.

---

If it is not cut and dry, that is the fault of the states as it is their responsibility now. If the people of Missouri or any other state want to change the laws, they can vote for people who will do so.

Wonderful concept envisioned by the Founders and the Constitution.

---

Never mind those harmed in the meantime.

---

At least they are not "snuffed out" like those poor babies.

What a twisted, evil view.

---

If I don't agree that a zygote is a baby, and don't agree with the very premise of your complaint, I'm evil and twisted. Got it. Good to know. I'll go on being evil and twisted, I guess. You keep minimizing the lives of women.

---

Human is a social construct again.

---

Claiming personhood starts at conception is a philosophical opinion. One not shared by a large number of people and religions. Your position is a belief, not a fact.

---

So when is personhood a fact lol? Your "facts" completely depend on philosophy. Once again the materialist entering a domain that he has no business being in.

---

Hate to break it to you, but materialists have been involved in philosophy for a long, long time.

dermdoc said:

---

Aggrad08 said:

---

nortex97 said:

---

dermdoc said:

---

Gerrymandering in 1,2,3…

You guys are so predictable.

---

I notice the Illinois nor NY gerrymanders were referenced.

---

I'd gladly kill all gerrymandering, would you? I know derm wouldn't, we've discussed that before.

---

You do understand that gerrymandering occurs in democratic states also?

---

Yes I do, we've discussed this before, you didn't do well then, do you have something new? Support for gerrymandering regardless of the party doing it is absurd

dermdoc said:

---

Sapper Redux said:

---

dermdoc said:

---

And do you really want big cities deciding everything in the US?

If you can afford it, where are you sending your kids to get an education?

And where do rich libs send their kids to school?

Do not be stupid.

---

Do big cities in Texas decide who the governor is? Or who the senators are?

---

Sure hope not. I am not a totalitarian like you.

---

The point is a genuinely representative government with a popular vote does not cede all power to the cities.

Sapper Redux said:

---

dermdoc said:

---

Sapper Redux said:

---

dermdoc said:

---

And do you really want big cities deciding everything in the US?

If you can afford it, where are you sending your kids to get an education?

And where do rich libs send their kids to school?

Do not be stupid.

---

Do big cities in Texas decide who the governor is? Or who the senators are?

---

Sure hope not. I am not a totalitarian like you.

---

The point is a genuinely representative government with a popular vote does not cede all power to the cities.

---

Depends on which state you live in.

Look at a red/blue voter county map from California.

It is not really red/blue stares anymore. It is cities vs everybody else.

Aggrad08 said:

---

dermdoc said:

---

Aggrad08 said:

---

nortex97 said:

---

dermdoc said:

---

Gerrymandering in 1,2,3…

You guys are so predictable.

---

I notice the Illinois nor NY gerrymanders were referenced.

---

I'd gladly kill all gerrymandering, would you? I know derm wouldn't, we've discussed that before.

---

You do understand that gerrymandering occurs in democratic states also?

---

Yes I do, we've discussed this before, you didn't do well then, do you have something new? Support for gerrymandering regardless of the party doing it is absurd

---

You might add "in your judgement" I did not do well. The snarky arrogance is not a good look.

But then it seems to be a very strong character trait of atheist/agnostic liberals. Read through this very thread. I was like that also until I was saved. Thanks be to God!