“Let the states decide.”

[SkepticThinker]

No I just got to read the actual law/ordinance in its official wording and capacity. Not some biased site trying to twist things around.

Well then, since you've read it, you can explain what you're talking about instead of continuing to dance around it and pretend like I don't know what I'm talking about.

I asked you to do that two posts ago. You made a joke instead.

For the record I'm against a ban on fully adult women to travel , that would be unconstitutional and for it fully if it addresses minors without parents or legal guardians permission which it would be constitutional.

I don't know about the second part but at least we can agree on the first part.

 

[Kathryn]

Sounds like we just leave it up to individuals to decide what's best for them then.
It works just fine where I come from. And it worked just fine until Roe v. Wade was overturned.

So you say.

 

[Twilight Hue]

It's alarming, is what it is.

Much more alarming and oppressive than banning plastic bags in grocery stores.

Anything that controls a person's freedom of choice under the Constitution should be alarming and oppressive, whether it be as benign as grocery bags or something a lot more serious like abortion.

As far as I'm concerned, what insignificant attempts at control today will become something very significant tomorrow.

 

[crossfire]

Anything that controls a person's freedom of choice under the Constitution should be alarming and oppressive, whether it be as benign as grocery bags or something a lot more serious like abortion.

As far as I'm concerned, what insignificant attempts at control today will become something very significant tomorrow.

Hey! We found common ground!

 

[fantome profane]

When they are point blank asked

How many women have you asked point blank? And have any of the women you asked just told you to **** off?

 

[SkepticThinker]

So you say.

Yes, I do say. And I say so based on the evidence.

We didn't see the kinds of problems we're seeing now, when Roe v. Wade protections were in place.

You don't think it's best left up to individuals to decide what's best for them? You'd rather the government or the citizenry make decisions for other people?

 

[wellwisher]

Slavery isn't a common cause either but it shouldn't be a states issue.
Abortion is healthcare and it shouldn't be a states issue. We the People do not want it to be a states issue and too many women have suffered and died from bad state laws as it is. And, of course, not everyone can afford to move amd no one knows if they'll need an abortion to save their life or not.

The issue of slavery, as does abortion, both has/had an underdog versus over dog dynamics; slave/unborn child versus slave owner/ body owner. Only the the Southern DNC in 1860 thought the country should allow legal slavery at the Federal level; favor the slave owners. Today they still take the side of the over dog. At least with the abortion issue, back to the states, this lowered the tension of a possible civil war. Slavery did not have that option and this led to slave states, wanting to leave the Union, which then led to lot of death, trying to keep the country whole. Had they let the states decide, only the DNC would still have slavery and abortion.

Interestingly, the pro-slave culture, did not see slaves as human, anymore than the modern DNC abortion culture sees the unborn as being human. It is almost like the DNC adapted the slavery playbook to the unborn; cross out the word slavery and write in the unborn. Slave owners liked to play god, having control over life or death. The same is now true of the unborn. Now these same demigods are trying to redefine male and female, even though this has a science base criteria objectified by DNA. We need to burn their playbook since it can still create injustice and underdogs.

 

[Kathryn]

Yes, I do say. And I say so based on the evidence.

We didn't see the kinds of problems we're seeing now, when Roe v. Wade protections were in place.

You don't think it's best left up to individuals to decide what's best for them? You'd rather the government or the citizenry make decisions for other people?

Like I have said over and over again, I believe that 1) people should protect our citizens and 2) pregnancy is a unique scenario.

 

[Kathryn]

How many women have you asked point blank? And have any of the women you asked just told you to **** off?

These were two very pro abortion sources asking the questions. They got answers on all of them except this one?

 

[SkepticThinker]

Like I have said over and over again, I believe that 1) people should protect our citizens and 2) pregnancy is a unique scenario.

This was in response to, "Yes, I do say. And I say so based on the evidence.

We didn't see the kinds of problems we're seeing now, when Roe v. Wade protections were in place.

You don't think it's best left up to individuals to decide what's best for them? You'd rather the government or the citizenry make decisions for other people?"

 

[Kathryn]

This was in response to, "Yes, I do say. And I say so based on the evidence.

We didn't see the kinds of problems we're seeing now, when Roe v. Wade protections were in place.

You don't think it's best left up to individuals to decide what's best for them? You'd rather the government or the citizenry make decisions for other people?"

Right, and it's still my response and probably all you will get from me. I will not allow you or anyone else to cram words into my mouth (or in this case, fingers).

 

[SkepticThinker]

Right, and it's still my response and probably all you will get from me. I will not allow you or anyone else to cram words into my mouth (or in this case, fingers).

Yes, I'm aware. You also seem to refuse to answer direct questions.
So here we are again.
Oh well.

 

[Kathryn]

Yes, I'm aware. You also seem to refuse to answer direct questions.
So here we are again.
Oh well.

Please ignore me. Meanwhile, no, I will not allow anyone to push words I am not saying at me.

 

[Copernicus]

Please ignore me. Meanwhile, no, I will not allow anyone to push words I am not saying at me.

If you wanted people to ignore you, you would not engage them in debate. Your replies have failed to satisfy me and others, because you do not answer questions directly and appear to evade admitting to positions that can only be inferred from what you write. For example, @SkepticThinker's post #446 was responded to with:

Like I have said over and over again, I believe that 1) people should protect our citizens and 2) pregnancy is a unique scenario.​

What does that even mean in the context of this discussion??? Everyone believes we should protect our citizens, and you leave unspecified what is so "unique" about pregnancy. It is impossible to get anything of substance from replies like this. When she tried to get clarification, you just doubled down and said flat out that she would get nothing more from you. We can only conclude that you do want the government to deprive women of control over their own bodies once they become pregnant, and you want that because of your own personal concept of the "personhood" status of what is in their womb. Not your womb. Theirs. You provide no explanation or justification for that concept or how it benefits society generally to have government control over women's pregnancies. And you cannot, or will not, explain why.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

At least with the abortion issue, back to the states, this lowered the tension of a possible civil war. Slavery did not have that option and this led to slave states, wanting to leave the Union, which then led to lot of death, trying to keep the country whole. Had they let the states decide, only the DNC would still have slavery and abortion.

Civil war averted? What fantasy world did you get that from?