Missouri Republicans Introduce Bills to Charge Women Who Receive Abortions With Murder

[Heyo]

What restrictions do you think should be on abortion if any?

You didn't ask me but I have a suspicion there are still misunderstandings between us. I'm not an extremist on the abortion question. I'm OK with regulating the ending of a human life even when it isn't a person. I draw the line at the ability to suffer, i.e. about 20 to 24 weeks into the pregnancy - for voluntary abortions. It has to be clear that medical abortions are still allowed and that the decision what is medically necessary is made by medical professionals (plural, just to be sure), not by politicians.
I'm fully aware that that infringes on the woman's right to bodily autonomy but I think that that is compromise that is fair to both sides. That is the law here and in most countries that have that restriction and it works fine and very few people complain.

It gets controversial when people aren't willing to compromise on anything because of dogma. And while I have ruled you out, I can't say that for republican lawmakers. In fact, I have a strong suspicion that their actions can't be explained by stupidity and that those who don't see that are naïve. Texas and Missouri pubs are misogynist and you are supporting them by your stance on abortion - which kind of makes you a misogynist by proxy, maybe unwilling but effectively you are.

 

[Clizby Wampuscat]

Ok, fine. Go back to the thought experiment. You are connected to the violinist though tubes keeping her alive. Remember that?

So you are connected by tubes to this virtuoso violinist. If you get up an leave she will die. So you get up and leave and she dies. You didn't kill her, she died because she was not capable of living.

Now if you choose (there is that word again) to stay for nine months and you are disconnected, then you leave. And the violinist is cured and capable of surviving on her own. You can't turn around and shoot the violinist.


Does that make sense to you know?

No, because an 8 month fetus is viable outside the womb. Your violinist is not. So why is it ok to abort an 8 month fetus and not a 1 month old baby?

Also, in this scenario I did not do anything to make the situation occur, in a pregnancy most people made decisions that lead to the situation. I think that gives them a deeper moral responsibility.

 

[fantome profane]

No, because an 8 month fetus is viable outside the womb. Your violinist is not. So why is it ok to abort an 8 month fetus and not a 1 month old baby?

Because of the separation. Why are you working so hard not to see the obvious?

I don't care about some theoretical concept of viability. This has no impact unless it is something that is actually going to happen. So, if a woman who is 8 months pregnant can go to a facility, and have the fetus removed from her, for no reason other than she wants it removed, and then she can leave, I have no objection.

But even that situation, the decision us up to the woman and her doctor, and the government should not be involved.

But don't tell me this is theoretically possible, show me this is real.

Also, in this scenario I did not do anything to make the situation occur, in a pregnancy most people made decisions that lead to the situation. I think that gives them a deeper moral responsibility.

Again, the things you say show what you are thinking, and it is clear that you are blaming the woman for her actions.

 

[Clizby Wampuscat]

Because it is not my decision to make.
Nor is it yours.
Nor is it the governments.

Why? A government's business is to help the helpless. An 8 month old fetus is viable outside the womb and you are ok with a mother to decide to kill it if her doctor agrees. I think at this point it is the governments and my business. I am a conservative and believe in limited government but that does not mean that government has no place. I think the place of the government is to protect an 8 month old fetus from death when there is not a good reason to kill it.

 

[Clizby Wampuscat]

You didn't ask me but I have a suspicion there are still misunderstandings between us. I'm not an extremist on the abortion question. I'm OK with regulating the ending of a human life even when it isn't a person. I draw the line at the ability to suffer, i.e. about 20 to 24 weeks into the pregnancy - for voluntary abortions. It has to be clear that medical abortions are still allowed and that the decision what is medically necessary is made by medical professionals (plural, just to be sure), not by politicians.
I'm fully aware that that infringes on the woman's right to bodily autonomy but I think that that is compromise that is fair to both sides. That is the law here and in most countries that have that restriction and it works fine and very few people complain.

It gets controversial when people aren't willing to compromise on anything because of dogma. And while I have ruled you out, I can't say that for republican lawmakers. In fact, I have a strong suspicion that their actions can't be explained by stupidity and that those who don't see that are naïve. Texas and Missouri pubs are misogynist and you are supporting them by your stance on abortion - which kind of makes you a misogynist by proxy, maybe unwilling but effectively you are.

I am not a misogynist. I do not dislike or despise women. This is just a name to call me to stop the conversation. Have I called you or anyone on here a name like "babykiller" or say you have "misopedia". No I have not. I believe everyone's motivations for what they believe, I don't think most prochoice people think they are killing a baby or want to kill a baby.

 

[Clizby Wampuscat]

Because of the separation. Why are you working so hard not to see the obvious?

I don't care about some theoretical concept of viability. This has no impact unless it is something that is actually going to happen. So, if a woman who is 8 months pregnant can go to a facility, and have the fetus removed from her, for no reason other than she wants it removed, and then she can leave, I have no objection.

But even that situation, the decision us up to the woman and her doctor, and the government should not be involved.

But don't tell me this is theoretically possible, show me this is real.

My son was induced at week 31 due to complications with my wife's pregnancy. We chose to have this done, he is doing just fine. I don't think an 8 month old fetus viability is controversial or theoretical.

Again, the things you say show what you are thinking, and it is clear that you are blaming the woman for her actions.

Nope. I hold the mother and father responsible for their actions.

I bet you would hold a drunk driver responsible if they killed someone, even though they did not choose to kill someone. They chose actions that lead to the consequence. They are responsible for what happens with the choices they made whether the outcome was what they chose or not.

 

[fantome profane]

due to complications

That is the key phrase. What if there were no complications? What if someone just wanted to be induced? Would that actually happen? And if the woman chose to be induced at 8 months, and then the baby died as a result of that decision. Would there be any repercussions from that?

I bet you would hold a drunk driver responsible if they killed someone, even though they did not choose to kill someone. They chose actions that lead to the consequence. They are responsible for what happens with the choices they made whether the outcome was what they chose or not.

Horribly bad comparison. Drunk driving is illegal, and unethical.

You are still trying to imply that the mother has done something wrong and should be punished.

You need to look at this as a self-defence situation. If somebody is doing something that is harming you, something that might even cost you your life, do you agree that you have a right to stop them? Do agree with using lethal force to protect yourself?

 

[Clizby Wampuscat]

That is the key phrase. What if there were no complications? What if someone just wanted to be induced? Would that actually happen? And if the woman chose to be induced at 8 months, and then the baby died as a result of that decision. Would there be any repercussions from that?

I don't think that a voluntary abortion at 8 months should be allowed. I have already said that.

Horribly bad comparison. Drunk driving is illegal, and unethical.

You are still trying to imply that the mother has done something wrong and should be punished.

Nope, it is a comparison that has nothing to do with the illegality of the situation. It has to do with the consequences you are responsible for when you make decisions.

You need to look at this as a self-defence situation. If somebody is doing something that is harming you, something that might even cost you your life, do you agree that you have a right to stop them? Do agree with using lethal force to protect yourself?

I do agree, and I have also agreed that if a fetus is causing harm to the mother an abortion may be the best option. But that is not your stance. You said that an 8 month fetus could be aborted if the mother and doctor agree.

 

[fantome profane]

I do agree, and I have also agreed that if a fetus is causing harm to the mother an abortion may be the best option. But that is not your stance. You said that an 8 month fetus could be aborted if the mother and doctor agree.

It is up to the mother and doctor to decide whether or not the fetus is causing harm. Do you agree with that?

 

[Clizby Wampuscat]

It is up to the mother and doctor to decide whether or not the fetus is causing harm. Do you agree with that?

They have to give evidence to another medical doctor that the fetus is causing harm. If it is that should not be a problem.

 

[fantome profane]

They have to give evidence to another medical doctor that the fetus is causing harm. If it is that should not be a problem.

Ok, so not just one doctor. If two doctors agree then a woman can get an abortion. Fine.

I just don't want the government to get involved.

 

[F1fan]

And I have disagreed how Texas has handled the situation, I think they should have allowed Mrs.Cox to have the abortion.

Good for you showing signs of moral life.

Why? Even if the reason is the mother does not want the baby anymore?

The Roe v Wade decision (by a consrvative court) allowed abortion in the first 6 months, and then limits after that. States were allowed to make decisions about these limts. If the USA had better healthcare access there would be more consistent reproductive care as well, and women would rely less on abortion. Of course there is less demand for abortion services to correct poor judgment or failed contraception, but right wing politics has made access harder, and put women's life and well being into higher risk. It would be nice if conservatives would acknowledge women's needs in their politics, but as we see in Texas they are turning the screw. These republicans are morally unfit, and need to be voted out.

 

[McBell]

Why?

Why what?

A government's business is to help the helpless.

Since when?

An 8 month old fetus is viable outside the womb and you are ok with a mother to decide to kill it if her doctor agrees.

Yes.
Of course, I am ok with it even if there was no doctor in the picture.

I think at this point it is the governments and my business.

Perhaps you should check your ego at the door?
Who are you that it is any of your business?

I am a conservative and believe in limited government but that does not mean that government has no place. I think the place of the government is to protect an 8 month old fetus from death when there is not a good reason to kill it.

Who gets to decide what is and what is not a good reason?
You?
The government?

Thus far it appears neither you nor the government have much of any medical training.
So why is it you feel you should have the authority to interfere with a complete strangers decision that has absolutely no effect on you?

 

[SkepticThinker]

None, the government should not be involved at all. It should be up to the woman and her doctor.

That is how it is in my country, and it works pretty well.

Works very well here also.

 

[fantome profane]

Works very well here also.

(I am from Ontario too)

 

[Clizby Wampuscat]

Good for you showing signs of moral life.

Why this comment? I have not insulated anyone here that I know of.

The Roe v Wade decision (by a consrvative court) allowed abortion in the first 6 months, and then limits after that. States were allowed to make decisions about these limts. If the USA had better healthcare access there would be more consistent reproductive care as well, and women would rely less on abortion. Of course there is less demand for abortion services to correct poor judgment or failed contraception, but right wing politics has made access harder, and put women's life and well being into higher risk. It would be nice if conservatives would acknowledge women's needs in their politics, but as we see in Texas they are turning the screw. These republicans are morally unfit, and need to be voted out.

The religious conservatives have different motivations than I do in Texas. This is why I disagreed on the Cox case with them.

 

[SkepticThinker]

(I am from Ontario too)

Of course you are! I totally knew that.

 

[fantome profane]

Of course you are! I totally knew that.

Your post made me wonder if there was another place like this, so I checked your profile and saw you were here.

I deliberately don't include a lot of details in my profile for ... um ... reasons. So I don't expect people to know.



(I just started a thread about this issue intentionally. Question about Abortion laws for anyone who does not live in America. )

 

[SkepticThinker]

Your post made me wonder if there was another place like this, so I checked your profile and saw you were here.

LOL I just checked my own profile because I have no idea what it says. You're right!
(Wow, I've been here since 2013???)

I deliberately don't include a lot of details in my profile for ... um ... reasons. So I don't expect people to know.

Me too. Same .... ummm..... reasons.

(I just started a thread about this issue intentionally. Question about Abortion laws for anyone who does not live in America. )

Sweet! I'll be checking it out.

 

[Clizby Wampuscat]

Ok, so not just one doctor. If two doctors agree then a woman can get an abortion. Fine.

I just don't want the government to get involved.

Well if the government makes the law that allows for the exception then the government has an obligation to make sure a medical exception is real. The government is involved.