Freeda Womb

[crossfire]

Harris's record is opposing any restrictions on abortions. Can you show me where she supports any restrictions? Ask most democrats if they support any restrictions and most of them say it is between them and their doctor. So no restrictions.

I'm not a democrat, but I'm perfectly fine with the restrictions from Roe v Wade. Anything more restrictive is bound to have undesirable side effects, such as the ones we are currently witnessing.

I'm not fine with people other than the pregnant woman who are non-healthcare professionals having a "say" in it, as they are not healthcare professionals, and women's bodies are not public property, nor are women's bodies subject to public vote.

<edit to add> Unless the woman is serving as a surrogate, there is no contract involved regarding her pregnancy.

 

[Clizby Wampuscat]

Yeah, that is the freedom and liberty you were just harping about in the last post of yours I responded too.
What can we say, hypocrisy is your motto.

You don't have the freedom or liberty to kill a human life. This is consistent with my other views.

 

[Clizby Wampuscat]

I'm not a democrat, but I'm perfectly fine with the restrictions from Roe v Wade. Anything more restrictive is bound to have undesirable side effects, such as the ones we are currently witnessing.

I'm not fine with people other than the pregnant woman who are non-healthcare professionals having a "say" in it, as they are not healthcare professionals, and women's bodies are not public property, nor are women's bodies subject to public vote.

How can you hold both of these views? Roe said states could restrict abortion after viability.

 

[Revoltingest]

I am not a MAGA, I am voting for Trump.

I am not a poster here.
I just post here.

I am not for #2, Can you show me where Vance said this? If he said it I disagree with him.

Good.

MSN

 

[Ignatius A]

MSN

View attachment 95998

Free abortions and vasectomies at the DNC and meet Freeda Womb! Clown show.

They've made baby killing an art form

 

[Kathryn]

I am not a MAGA, I am voting for Trump.

I am not for #2, Can you show me where Vance said this? If he said it I disagree with him.

I am not voting for either of them so there's that.

 

[Subduction Zone]

They've made baby killing an art form

No, if anyone is "killing babies" that would be the Republicans. Do you even know what a baby is?

 

[crossfire]

How can you hold both of these views? Roe said states could restrict abortion after viability.

It is putting a much needed restraint on the States in the pre-viability phase while allowing doctors to properly practice appropriate medicine as needed. Doctors are not lawyers. Most people in lawmaking are not OB/Gyn professionals. You don't have to be a rocket scientist to understand that non-healthcare professionals dictating to doctors that they cannot provide needed healthcare is going to result in great harm. Open your eyes and see the harm that state interference has caused already. Doctors are leaving states that are passing these harmful laws, and pregnant women in medical distress are being turned away from ERs. It's like those states want to make pregnancy and childbirth third-world dangerous again.

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

Can you show me ...

To be honest,I do not believe that I can show you much of anything.

 

[Quintessence]

I'm not a democrat, but I'm perfectly fine with the restrictions from Roe v Wade.

Yeah, I think most of us were. Roe v Wade was the compromise and it was a darned sensible one - point of viability. Nonviable biological organisms in no instance should be prioritized over viable ones. The only reasonable exception to that I can imagine is for a threatened or endangered species where scientists need to harvest the gametes of the adults aggressively to preserve the entire species from extinction... survival and comfort of the adults bedamned. This situation doesn't even remotely describe humans, nor will it at any point in any of our lifetimes.

Not only is there no justification for enslaving pregnant women to the state, it's a level of gross human rights violation that there are no words for. It's in denial of biological reality too - abortions occur routinely with or without any intervention and complications happen that require intervention to save the life of the woman in question. If anyone was actually serious about solving the abortion issue they'd be investing in genetic engineering to fix humans so they lay eggs instead.

 

[crossfire]

Yeah, I think most of us were. Roe v Wade was the compromise and it was a darned sensible one - point of viability. Nonviable biological organisms in no instance should be prioritized over viable ones. The only reasonable exception to that I can imagine is for a threatened or endangered species where scientists need to harvest the gametes of the adults aggressively to preserve the entire species from extinction... survival and comfort of the adults bedamned. This situation doesn't even remotely describe humans, nor will it at any point in any of our lifetimes.

Not only is there no justification for enslaving pregnant women to the state, it's a level of gross human rights violation that there are no words for. It's in denial of biological reality too - abortions occur routinely with or without any intervention and complications happen that require intervention to save the life of the woman in question. If anyone was actually serious about solving the abortion issue they'd be investing in genetic engineering to fix humans so they lay eggs instead.

The state having interest in viable fetuses is a protection against such scenarios as people bribing doctors or midwives to kill a particular fetus, such as an heir to an estate. Yeah, these scenarios are rare, but I do feel that the state does need to have the power to mete out punishment in such cases.
Also tagging @Clizby Wampuscat

 

[Quintessence]

The state having interest in viable fetuses is a protection against such scenarios as people bribing doctors or midwives to kill a particular fetus, such as an heir to an estate. Yeah, these scenarios are rare, but I do feel that the state does need to have the power to mete out punishment in such cases.

Ouch, fair. This sort of thing probably happened a bit more historically than today, but maybe that's being naive.

 

[crossfire]

Ouch, fair. This sort of thing probably happened a bit more historically than today, but maybe that's being naive.

Literature is full of such stories.

 

[F1fan]

You don't have the freedom or liberty to kill a human life. This is consistent with my other views.

Except war. Oh, and stand your ground. Oh, and if someone breaks into your house and threatens you. Oh, and if someone puts your kids life in danger. Oh, and if you work for a state that executes prisoners. Oh, and if you are a cop and there's a deadly situation.

Otherwise you are correct.

Of course medical personel terminating a pregnancy isn't killing a human life within the law.

 

[Quintessence]

Literature is full of such stories.

Not the kind I read... haha.

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

Harris's record is opposing any restrictions on abortions.

Is that based on evidence that you're willing to share or Truth Social that you're anxious to echo?

 

[crossfire]

Harris's record is opposing any restrictions on abortions. Can you show me where she supports any restrictions? Ask most democrats if they support any restrictions and most of them say it is between them and their doctor. So no restrictions.

She has stated that she wants to codify Roe v Wade, so yes, she is for some restrictions post-viability.

Where VP-Elect Kamala Harris Stands on Abortion and Reproductive Rights

Breaking down the vice president-elect's policy.

www.harpersbazaar.com

 

[Clizby Wampuscat]

They've made baby killing an art form

Yes, it is a celebration of killing at the DNC this week.

 

[Clizby Wampuscat]

It is putting a much needed restraint on the States in the pre-viability phase while allowing doctors to properly practice appropriate medicine as needed. Doctors are not lawyers. Most people in lawmaking are not OB/Gyn professionals. You don't have to be a rocket scientist to understand that non-healthcare professionals dictating to doctors that they cannot provide needed healthcare is going to result in great harm. Open your eyes and see the harm that state interference has caused already. Doctors are leaving states that are passing these harmful laws, and pregnant women in medical distress are being turned away from ERs. It's like those states want to make pregnancy and childbirth third-world dangerous again.

So you want no restrictions on abortion then? That is what you are saying.

 

[Clizby Wampuscat]

To be honest,I do not believe that I can show you much of anything.

Nice dodge, go to insults rather than defend your position. Have a nice day.