sicandtiredTXN said:

---

If you listened to the oral arguments today the liberals listed their reasons to murder innocent children in plain language:

• unwanted weight gain
• financial inconvenience
• unwanted interruption to their professional life
• occupational change
• unwanted child
• Change of plans
• spouse or partner doesn't want child
• life change
• couldn't afford contraception
• body integrity
• possible birth defect
• possible difficult pregnancy
• family illness
• unemployment
• divorce or separation
• ability to attend college or vocational school
If you think I'm making any of this up just do a word search of the word "change" on today's transcript and it will take you five minutes to find what I listed

https://www.supremecourt.gov/oral_arguments/argument_transcripts/2021/19-1392_5if6.pdf

If you killed a human being south of the birth canal for any of those reasons you'd be doing life in prison. But because the left doesn't recognize life north of the birth canal they think murder is okay.

---

WEIGHT GAIN?

Abortion as after- the- fact birth control?

WTF is "body integrity"?

Financial INCONVENIENCE???

CHANGE OF PLANS????

combat wombat said:

---

Jason C. said:

---

combat wombat said:

---

My BIL would not be here today I'd my MIL had listened to her doctors. They wanted her to have an abortion. They were 100% wrong about him being born abnormal. It happens.

---

Same! 8 years ago they said one of ours had all these markers for Downs and sent us to "genetic counseling." We said to go F yourselves. Nothing wrong with the kid other than being raised by me.

Abortion is the devil. Can't wait for it to be illegal in all but the most insane states.

---

We refused the test for down syndrome and other genetic abnormalities. It wouldn't have changed our choice with regard to the pregnancy. We weren't going to abort the baby if it had down syndrome.

---

My wife and I tried for 10 years to have a child with no luck. Tried invitro one more time and it took. We wer both 37 at the time. It was strongly advised that we do the tests for downs etc. We were both sitting in the room waiting on the test and looked at each other and agreed that God had blessed us with a child and we would deal with whatever he gave us. I watched that 13 year old hit two game winning free throws tonight and wept at Gods grace.

JB!98 said:

---

combat wombat said:

---

Jason C. said:

---

combat wombat said:

---

My BIL would not be here today I'd my MIL had listened to her doctors. They wanted her to have an abortion. They were 100% wrong about him being born abnormal. It happens.

---

Same! 8 years ago they said one of ours had all these markers for Downs and sent us to "genetic counseling." We said to go F yourselves. Nothing wrong with the kid other than being raised by me.

Abortion is the devil. Can't wait for it to be illegal in all but the most insane states.

---

We refused the test for down syndrome and other genetic abnormalities. It wouldn't have changed our choice with regard to the pregnancy. We weren't going to abort the baby if it had down syndrome.

---

My wife and I tried for 10 years to have a child with no luck. Tried invitro one more time and it took. We wer both 37 at the time. It was strongly advised that we do the tests for downs etc. We were both sitting in the room waiting on the test and looked at each other and agreed that God had blessed us with a child and we would deal with whatever he gave us. I watched that 13 year old hit two game winning free throws tonight and wept at Gods grace.

---

Yessir!

Convenience is about right

Kyle04 said:

---

Let's look at this like the gun debate. Banning guns won't accomplish anything except making all that own guns criminals. The guns don't vanish. The same with abortion. People will have them anyway. Make abortion illegal and they will be done in shady places, performed in dangerous situations by shady characters. They won't stop. Not to mention the dangerous black market morning after pills that will emerge.

I wonder how much of this argument is based on religion. I would guess people of faith believe you are killing person with a "soul" or "spirit". And nonbelievers don't see it that way. If you remove faith from this argument, where does that leave us? When does the fetus transition from a ball of cells to a person? When it becomes conscious? When it can feel pain? When it can survive in its own?

If it cannot feel or think, how is killing a fetus worse killing than any insect or animal?

---

What an asinine comparison

No abortions won't go away but they will be drastically reduced by the millions

Not based on religion it's based on science, there's a detectable heartbeat you have a human being

Insects don't have heartbeats

And to compare the life of a human being to that of just any animal shows where you stand and you will deal with the consequences of those decisions on your own.

Nothing left to discuss

Kyle04 said:

---

Let's look at this like the gun debate. Banning guns won't accomplish anything except making all that own guns criminals. The guns don't vanish. The same with abortion. People will have them anyway. Make abortion illegal and they will be done in shady places, performed in dangerous situations by shady characters. They won't stop. Not to mention the dangerous black market morning after pills that will emerge.

---

True. This is one of the main reasons I don't think a ban would be beneficial overall. That said, owning and bearing arms is a fundamental liberty, having an abortion is not. Don't try to compare the two, it's ridiculous.

Quote:

---

I wonder how much of this argument is based on religion. I would guess people of faith believe you are killing person with a "soul" or "spirit". And nonbelievers don't see it that way. If you remove faith from this argument, where does that leave us? When does the fetus transition from a ball of cells to a person? When it becomes conscious? When it can feel pain? When it can survive in its own?

If it cannot feel or think, how is killing a fetus worse killing than any insect or animal?

---

If you think the opposition is based on religion, you haven't tried to understand what pro-lifers have to say. What you should have said is "pro-life people believe abortion is killing a person". That is the conflict here. Pro-choice people don't consider the baby a person until birth. Pro-life people consider the baby a person much sooner.

You're starting to understand the real debate in the minds of many. When is the baby a person? The extremes are the magic sperm idea (when conception happens) and the magic vagina idea (when the baby is born). There are many leftists who support post-birth abortion, so keep that in mind when you look at the full range of positions on this. The heartbeat is one milestone, a fully developed baby is another. When you look at statistics about when the baby is likely to survive, delivery at 24 weeks gives him/her a reasonable chance of survival.

My opinion is that nothing in the Constitution or any amendment gives the federal government the authority to dictate one way or the other. This is a state level issue.

Unbridled fornication perhaps?

Bag said:

---

pdc093 said:

---

cisgenderedAggie said:

---

Bag said:

---

waitwhat? said:

---

Go…

---

Ok, I will play, but first, YOU provide a justification FOR abortion in the first 15 weeks. New flash, You wont do it because your goal is to eliminate ALL abortions, not just late stage abortions. At least own it.

---

Wut

---

+1
Not understanding your reply there, Bag.

---

Sorry if it was confusing, my reply was, more simply, that any of these arguments around late term abortion are so intellectually dishonest that they dont deserve a response. This has nothing to do with banning late stage abortion, this everything to do with banning ALL abortion, and I would ask that people that start conversations like this to at least state true intentions.

The OP likes to imply he is in favor of abortion in the first 15 weeks, I simply would ask him to tell me why he is in favor of abortion in the first 15 weeks

---

I don't know that the OP is actually in favor of abortion before 15 weeks. He didn't say so. This post by me, isn't intended to argue the merits and motivations of certain pieces of legislature and how they picked a certain number of weeks. So I'll leave that part alone.

What I really wanted to say was this: You have a point.

Let me tell you a short, and probably boring story.

When I was young, a teenager I think, somehow the topic of abortion came up in between baseball or football games in the yard. I stated my position that I was against abortion except for rape and incest. The other guy was the son of the Democratic county chairman or something, so he disagreed, and that was that. Later I was talking with someone else, an adult I respected. Told them the same thing, I'm against abortion except for rape and incest. They asked me a simple question: Why? I didn't have a good answer.

If a human life begins at conception, then abortion is murder. Full stop. It took someone to challenge me and force me to think about my position. I realized I was inserting stuff into my thinking (politics, or whatever) that had no right to be there. It's an important lesson for me, you, and everyone.

kb2001 said:

---

Kyle04 said:

---

Let's look at this like the gun debate. Banning guns won't accomplish anything except making all that own guns criminals. The guns don't vanish. The same with abortion. People will have them anyway. Make abortion illegal and they will be done in shady places, performed in dangerous situations by shady characters. They won't stop. Not to mention the dangerous black market morning after pills that will emerge.

---

True. This is one of the main reasons I don't think a ban would be beneficial overall. That said, owning and bearing arms is a fundamental liberty, having an abortion is not. Don't try to compare the two, it's ridiculous.

Quote:

---

I wonder how much of this argument is based on religion. I would guess people of faith believe you are killing person with a "soul" or "spirit". And nonbelievers don't see it that way. If you remove faith from this argument, where does that leave us? When does the fetus transition from a ball of cells to a person? When it becomes conscious? When it can feel pain? When it can survive in its own?

If it cannot feel or think, how is killing a fetus worse killing than any insect or animal?

---

If you think the opposition is based on religion, you haven't tried to understand what pro-lifers have to say. What you should have said is "pro-life people believe abortion is killing a person". That is the conflict here. Pro-choice people don't consider the baby a person until birth. Pro-life people consider the baby a person much sooner.

You're starting to understand the real debate in the minds of many. When is the baby a person? The extremes are the magic sperm idea (when conception happens) and the magic vagina idea (when the baby is born). There are many leftists who support post-birth abortion, so keep that in mind when you look at the full range of positions on this. The heartbeat is one milestone, a fully developed baby is another. When you look at statistics about when the baby is likely to survive, delivery at 24 weeks gives him/her a reasonable chance of survival.

My opinion is that nothing in the Constitution or any amendment gives the federal government the authority to dictate one way or the other. This is a state level issue.

---

I can see it becoming a state issue, which is a good compromise. The pro choice can still drive to a nearby state and kill their unwanted child, and the pro life can say they won, even if it doesn't actually stop women who really want to kill their baby from doing it, be it from having the hassle of going out of state or by coat hanger.

aggiebq03+ said:

---

Bag said:

---

If a pregnant mother dies, without intervention from a third party, that fetus also dies. It is that simple.

I have two amazing children that I would not trade for the world and I would give my life up for them 1000 times out of 1000. However, at the end of the day I Chose to bring them into this world, no one forced me to do anything.

I do not believe the government has the right to force people to have children they dont want. sorry, not sorry

---

First, if your children are young and you and their other parent died, without intervention from a third party those kids die. A 3 year old can't manage to hunt and gather for themselves. Is it okay to "abort" a 3 year old?

Second, as far as I am aware government isn't forcing people to have sex.

Third, what's really at stake in the court currently isn't wether all abortion should be banned. What is at stake is if the Federal court had overreached in the past and "found" something hidden in the constitution that limits the freedom of the citizens of each state to decide how they are governed. Things not in the constitution are reserved by the States and People to decide for themselves. If people want Federal level abortion-right or abortion-bans, they should be working on an Amendment to the Constitution.

---

Cannot blue star this post enough. Bravo!

No Spin Ag said:

---

kb2001 said:

---

Kyle04 said:

---

Let's look at this like the gun debate. Banning guns won't accomplish anything except making all that own guns criminals. The guns don't vanish. The same with abortion. People will have them anyway. Make abortion illegal and they will be done in shady places, performed in dangerous situations by shady characters. They won't stop. Not to mention the dangerous black market morning after pills that will emerge.

---

True. This is one of the main reasons I don't think a ban would be beneficial overall. That said, owning and bearing arms is a fundamental liberty, having an abortion is not. Don't try to compare the two, it's ridiculous.

Quote:

---

I wonder how much of this argument is based on religion. I would guess people of faith believe you are killing person with a "soul" or "spirit". And nonbelievers don't see it that way. If you remove faith from this argument, where does that leave us? When does the fetus transition from a ball of cells to a person? When it becomes conscious? When it can feel pain? When it can survive in its own?

If it cannot feel or think, how is killing a fetus worse killing than any insect or animal?

---

If you think the opposition is based on religion, you haven't tried to understand what pro-lifers have to say. What you should have said is "pro-life people believe abortion is killing a person". That is the conflict here. Pro-choice people don't consider the baby a person until birth. Pro-life people consider the baby a person much sooner.

You're starting to understand the real debate in the minds of many. When is the baby a person? The extremes are the magic sperm idea (when conception happens) and the magic vagina idea (when the baby is born). There are many leftists who support post-birth abortion, so keep that in mind when you look at the full range of positions on this. The heartbeat is one milestone, a fully developed baby is another. When you look at statistics about when the baby is likely to survive, delivery at 24 weeks gives him/her a reasonable chance of survival.

My opinion is that nothing in the Constitution or any amendment gives the federal government the authority to dictate one way or the other. This is a state level issue.

---

I can see it becoming a state issue, which is a good compromise. The pro choice can still drive to a nearby state and kill their unwanted child, and the pro life can say they won, even if it doesn't actually stop women who really want to kill their baby from doing it, be it from having the hassle of going out of state or by coat hanger.

---

You obviously missed today's hearings.

The Liberals made the argument that abortion was absolutely necessary because there are women that don't have the means to travel or afford to get contraceptives.

This is a true story check the transcripts on the link I posted above.

Alido shot back that if they didn't have the means for contraceptives how is it they have the means to get to and from an abortion or afford the procedure.

The argument was weak.

You can literally walk a block in any direction in the city to a convenience store to get a condom. and Planned Parenthood where they go to murder their kid also has contraception but they don't push it because there's no real money in it like selling body parts

So traveling to the next state would be devastating, however they always have a way to travel to states with legal weed to score their high, they always have money for dope, and booze and their cell phones,

sicandtiredTXN said:

---

No Spin Ag said:

---

kb2001 said:

---

Kyle04 said:

---

Let's look at this like the gun debate. Banning guns won't accomplish anything except making all that own guns criminals. The guns don't vanish. The same with abortion. People will have them anyway. Make abortion illegal and they will be done in shady places, performed in dangerous situations by shady characters. They won't stop. Not to mention the dangerous black market morning after pills that will emerge.

---

True. This is one of the main reasons I don't think a ban would be beneficial overall. That said, owning and bearing arms is a fundamental liberty, having an abortion is not. Don't try to compare the two, it's ridiculous.

Quote:

---

I wonder how much of this argument is based on religion. I would guess people of faith believe you are killing person with a "soul" or "spirit". And nonbelievers don't see it that way. If you remove faith from this argument, where does that leave us? When does the fetus transition from a ball of cells to a person? When it becomes conscious? When it can feel pain? When it can survive in its own?

If it cannot feel or think, how is killing a fetus worse killing than any insect or animal?

---

If you think the opposition is based on religion, you haven't tried to understand what pro-lifers have to say. What you should have said is "pro-life people believe abortion is killing a person". That is the conflict here. Pro-choice people don't consider the baby a person until birth. Pro-life people consider the baby a person much sooner.

You're starting to understand the real debate in the minds of many. When is the baby a person? The extremes are the magic sperm idea (when conception happens) and the magic vagina idea (when the baby is born). There are many leftists who support post-birth abortion, so keep that in mind when you look at the full range of positions on this. The heartbeat is one milestone, a fully developed baby is another. When you look at statistics about when the baby is likely to survive, delivery at 24 weeks gives him/her a reasonable chance of survival.

My opinion is that nothing in the Constitution or any amendment gives the federal government the authority to dictate one way or the other. This is a state level issue.

---

I can see it becoming a state issue, which is a good compromise. The pro choice can still drive to a nearby state and kill their unwanted child, and the pro life can say they won, even if it doesn't actually stop women who really want to kill their baby from doing it, be it from having the hassle of going out of state or by coat hanger.

---

You obviously missed today's hearings.

The Liberals made the argument that abortion was absolutely necessary because there are women that don't have the means to travel or afford to get contraceptives.

This is a true story check the transcripts on the link I posted above.

Alido shot back that if they didn't have the means for contraceptives how is it they have the means to get to and from an abortion or afford the procedure.

The argument was weak.

You can literally walk a block in any direction in the city to a convenience store to get a condom. and Planned Parenthood where they go to murder their kid also has contraception but they don't push it because there's no real money in it like selling body parts

So traveling to the next state would be devastating, however they always have a way to travel to states with legal weed to score their high, they always have money for dope, and booze and their cell phones,

---

Alido made an excellent point. As for the libs, that's the stupidest argument they could've made. As for the rest that can't afford to go across state lines, a coat hanger is all but free for the drug addicts, and for the poor, there's always a pay day loan that'll give them the cash they need to get it done.

Kyle04 said:

---

Let's look at this like the gun debate.

---

I agree. Please pull up the part of the Constitution that discusses Federal power in regards to abortion so we can discuss. After reading carefully, I think you may find it in the 10th Amendment and nowhere else.

Ok let's go down this idiotic path.

The right to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed. Can't ban guns.

All men are created equal and have the right to life, Liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. Can't legalize murder.

Got any more stupid takes for us? With no due respect your last one was pretty bad.

so, to be clear, after the radicals make all abortion illegal in Texas they will then prosecute any abortion done illegally or perhaps in another state for a Texan as premeditated murder, correct?

if they dont do this then they are in fact admitting they dont actually see abortion as murder

I would hope anyone found giving or receiving an abortion would be prosecuted. Not sure what kind of weird gotcha this is.

coolerguy12 said:

---

I would hope anyone found giving or receiving an abortion would be prosecuted. Not sure what kind of weird gotcha this is.

---

prosecuted for what, come on say it, prosecuted for murder correct?

What about the fact that a child cannot live outside the womb without 3rd party intervention either?

So obviously, using that rationale, the child is not simply part of the body, right? Now that you've been forced to drop that part as a rationale for abortion, does that change anything?

Bag said:

---

coolerguy12 said:

---

I would hope anyone found giving or receiving an abortion would be prosecuted. Not sure what kind of weird gotcha this is.

---

prosecuted for what, come on say it, prosecuted for murder correct?

---

So you are opposed to charging a perp for the crime of killing the baby of a pregnant female, if he killed the mom?

All, good, I just want everyone to understand what type of evil we are dealing with here.

These radicals are more than eager to charge any pregnant Texas woman who makes a decision to abort a pregnancy with premeditated murder, even if done legally in another state.

You are talking taliban meets the SS level lunacy.

Bag said:

---

coolerguy12 said:

---

I would hope anyone found giving or receiving an abortion would be prosecuted. Not sure what kind of weird gotcha this is.

---

prosecuted for what, come on say it, prosecuted for murder correct?

---

Yes. That is what a sane society would do. Abortion is murder. Abortion is eugenics. I'm not sure what you think you accomplish here.

Any woman who kills her own child is devoid of a particular type of morality that is required in the American experiment. They have been conditioned that it isn't a moral decision through Roe. Bring down Roe, make it illegal, and that moral decision returns, in many places. I'm ok with prosecuting every single one of them.

You are Texan, and want an abortion after Texas has made it illegal? If it's that important to you, if you must do it, move to New York. That's your value system. If you stay in TX there are plenty of churches and pregnancy centers who will give you more help than you need. I know as I sit on the Board of one in a poor, rural community with Title 1 schools.

Bag said:

---

coolerguy12 said:

---

I would hope anyone found giving or receiving an abortion would be prosecuted. Not sure what kind of weird gotcha this is.

---

prosecuted for what, come on say it, prosecuted for murder correct?

---

Your continued attempts to call pro lifers radicals and to justify killing babies is absolutely sick.

Just admit YOUR stance. You support baby killing. The end.

So to be clear, killing a pregnant female should not be double homicide. Also, if a pregnant female is punched in the stomach and loses the child, it would be simple assault against the female. If that is your take, at least you are consistent, even though I believe you are wrong.

zagman said:

---

Bag said:

---

coolerguy12 said:

---

I would hope anyone found giving or receiving an abortion would be prosecuted. Not sure what kind of weird gotcha this is.

---

prosecuted for what, come on say it, prosecuted for murder correct?

---

Your continued attempts to call pro lifers radicals and to justify killing babies is absolutely sick.

Just admit YOUR stance. You support baby killing. The end.

---

Anyone that supports charging a 14 year old girl faced with a decision like this, that goes to another state to have an abortion with premeditated murder is insane

Bag said:

---

zagman said:

---

Bag said:

---

coolerguy12 said:

---

I would hope anyone found giving or receiving an abortion would be prosecuted. Not sure what kind of weird gotcha this is.

---

prosecuted for what, come on say it, prosecuted for murder correct?

---

Your continued attempts to call pro lifers radicals and to justify killing babies is absolutely sick.

Just admit YOUR stance. You support baby killing. The end.

---

Anyone that supports charging a 14 year old girl faced with a decision like this, that goes to another state to have an abortion with premeditated murder is insane

---

How about forcing her to carry the child instead and give it up for adoption. Is that insane too?

CCP Joe Veggie said:

---

Bag said:

---

zagman said:

---

Bag said:

---

coolerguy12 said:

---

I would hope anyone found giving or receiving an abortion would be prosecuted. Not sure what kind of weird gotcha this is.

---

prosecuted for what, come on say it, prosecuted for murder correct?

---

Your continued attempts to call pro lifers radicals and to justify killing babies is absolutely sick.

Just admit YOUR stance. You support baby killing. The end.

---

Anyone that supports charging a 14 year old girl faced with a decision like this, that goes to another state to have an abortion with premeditated murder is insane

---

How about forcing her to carry the child instead and give it up for adoption. Is that insane too?

---

reread what you just wrote, twice, slowly, if you dont see it as insane...

Bonfire1996 said:

---

Bag said:

---

coolerguy12 said:

---

I would hope anyone found giving or receiving an abortion would be prosecuted. Not sure what kind of weird gotcha this is.

---

prosecuted for what, come on say it, prosecuted for murder correct?

---

Yes. That is what a sane society would do. Abortion is murder. Abortion is eugenics. I'm not sure what you think you accomplish here.

Any woman who kills her own child is devoid of a particular type of morality that is required in the American experiment. They have been conditioned that it isn't a moral decision through Roe. Bring down Roe, make it illegal, and that moral decision returns, in many places. I'm ok with prosecuting every single one of them.

You are Texan, and want an abortion after Texas has made it illegal? If it's that important to you, if you must do it, move to New York. That's your value system. If you stay in TX there are plenty of churches and pregnancy centers who will give you more help than you need. I know as I sit on the Board of one in a poor, rural community with Title 1 schools.

---

glad its just that black and white for you. dozens of girls I knew in HS had one, they have now grown up and pretty much all of them have become really great members of society, but according to you they are devoid of any morality required for the American experiment, pretty sure hey have proven you wrong 10 times out of 10

This statement about devoid of morality is so sickening and so judgmental is needs further explanation. Can you ever imagine Jesus saying something like this?

THere are no doubt 100s of woman on this board that have had an abortion, I wonder if they believe they should have been removed from the American experiment?

Bag said:

---

coolerguy12 said:

---

I would hope anyone found giving or receiving an abortion would be prosecuted. Not sure what kind of weird gotcha this is.

---

prosecuted for what, come on say it, prosecuted for murder correct?

---

Yes prosecuted for murder.

Why are you so opposed to personal responsibility?

Want to have sex and not get pregnant? Use birth control. Your side literally uses abortion as a form of birth control. There is no denying that, and you support it.

coolerguy12 said:

---

Bag said:

---

coolerguy12 said:

---

I would hope anyone found giving or receiving an abortion would be prosecuted. Not sure what kind of weird gotcha this is.

---

prosecuted for what, come on say it, prosecuted for murder correct?

---

Yes prosecuted for murder.

Why are you so opposed to personal responsibility?

Want to have sex and not get pregnant? Use birth control. Your side literally uses abortion as a form of birth control. There is no denying that, and you support it.

---

and if that birth control fails, we are now going to force you to bring a child into this crazy world or we will throw you in jail for life.


Yea, that scales.

No one is forcing anyone to have a child. That decision was made when they decided to have sex knowing the potential consequences of that. Just requiring that you don't kill it.

Again, why is your side so opposed to personal responsibility?

coolerguy12 said:

---

No one is forcing anyone to have a child. That decision was made when they decided to have sex knowing the potential consequences of that. Just requiring that you don't kill it.

Again, why is your side so opposed to personal responsibility?

---

I m in favor of personal responsibility, I am against the state locking up girls for life for making a decision that quite frankly in none of your ****ing business

Bag said:

---

coolerguy12 said:

---

No one is forcing anyone to have a child. That decision was made when they decided to have sex knowing the potential consequences of that. Just requiring that you don't kill it.

Again, why is your side so opposed to personal responsibility?

---

I m in favor of personal responsibility, I am against the state locking up girls for life for making a decision that quite frankly in none of your ****ing business

---

Just to make sure everyone is on the same page. Eugenics, and specifically eliminating minorities, is the entire foundation of abortion in the United States. Planned Parenthood even recently admitted that their entire founding was for the purpose of ridding the country of minorities.

You cannot be anti-racist and also support abortion. So feel free to continue your insane argument, and we will all know that you are a racist.

You say you're in favor of personal responsibility but all your posts indicate that you are not in favor of people being responsible for decisions that they make.

Let's just lock up the abortion providers. The mom won't be prosecuted. Deal?

gig em 02 said:

---

Bag said:

---

coolerguy12 said:

---

No one is forcing anyone to have a child. That decision was made when they decided to have sex knowing the potential consequences of that. Just requiring that you don't kill it.

Again, why is your side so opposed to personal responsibility?

---

I m in favor of personal responsibility, I am against the state locking up girls for life for making a decision that quite frankly in none of your ****ing business

---

Just to make sure everyone is on the same page. Eugenics, and specifically eliminating minorities, is the entire foundation of abortion in the United States. Planned Parenthood even recently admitted that their entire founding was for the purpose of ridding the country of minorities.

You cannot be anti-racist and also support abortion. So feel free to continue your insane argument, and we will all know that you are a racist.

---

i give you exhibit A,

literally insane

Bag said:

---

coolerguy12 said:

---

No one is forcing anyone to have a child. That decision was made when they decided to have sex knowing the potential consequences of that. Just requiring that you don't kill it.

Again, why is your side so opposed to personal responsibility?

---

I m in favor of personal responsibility, I am against the state locking up girls for life for making a decision that quite frankly in none of your ****ing business

---

Is it my business when somebody I don't know gets murdered by somebody else I don't know in my neighborhood? Should we simply let that slide?