Senate Republicans oppose Reproductive Freedom for Women.

[It Aint Necessarily So]

Donald Trump is now, of course, saying "leave it to the states to decide." But I don't understand why that is somehow a solution.

It's not a solution for people who would be forced to go out of state for their abortions, but you know to not believe Trump or any of the Christian nationalists. Look at how many Christian Supreme Court justices lied in their confirmation hearings. But with Trump, it's constant. These people want authoritarian control and intend to inflict their version of Gilead (Handmaid's Tale) on Americans.

Abortion - the killing of the unborn - is not "healthcare."

Not your call. Many disagree with you.

What is always missing from such 'arguments' is the total lack of regard for the life extinguished by an abortion.

Yes. A fetus is a potential independent sentient creature, but it isn't regarded or treated as one until it is. It's not life that makes killing immoral. It's mind. We don't mind killing a fly or a mango (by picking it), and that wouldn't change if we had the technology to transform such things into sentient creatures giving them the potential to become children. Potential is not enough.

What's always missing from your side of the argument is respect for the mother's bodily autonomy and freedom to decide when she will have children, which includes cases of sex resulting in an unplanned, unwanted pregnancy. You would likely feel the same if not for your religion, which manufactured outrage over abortion, which the Republicans capitalized upon and used to get votes.

We get it. Many Abrahamists care more about what they think their god wants than what people want, and they don't mind imposing their prejudices and superstitions on everybody. That, along with the bigotries and the continual lying (creationist apologetics) is what makes that religion so loathsome to so many, and why so many are turning away from it in America. People are tired of the mindless, hateful selfishness.

Please correct me if I am wrong. Murder is always wrong. IMHO

If by murder you mean unlawful, deliberate homicide, then yes, that's illegal, but one can just go to a state where abortion is legal and it's not murder or illegal.

Immoral is another question. Would it be illegal to shoot somebody threatening one's democracy who is in striking distance of doing that? It would be murder, but would it be immoral. Many would say no. Many would call such a person a hero and a martyr of sorts.

Women are still free to reproduce.

Not the issue, although the ones that need IVF may not be free to reproduce under Christo-nationalist rule.

Maybe you should save your false statements that "Republicans are anti-woman"

That message is being disseminated by the Biden campaign and others and appears to have become a wedge issue for the Democrats now.

Are you now going to claim 44% of American women are against themselves?

Anybody who votes Republican is voting against his own interests if he or she is not among the oligarchs and billionaires.

 

[Evangelicalhumanist]

What is always missing from such 'arguments' is the total lack of regard for the life extinguished by an abortion. That is why the two sides on this issue keep talking past each other, IMHO.

Yes, I've heard that many times. Just as I'm sure (or I hope) the other side's argument ignores absolutely everything about the issues a woman might face, including financial, psychological, legal, or how a pregnancy might have occurred, like rape, incest (or incestuous rape). The natural assumption seems to be that there is no psychological issue with carrying and delivering the child of your rapist -- but I wonder if anybody is asking HER that?

Look, nature (which I'm sure you would agree is instituted by God) sees to it that between 30 and 50% of all successful fertilizations end in some form of miscarriage -- no abortion services required. So why isn't nature as concerned with all those "extinguished" lives?

Oh sure, you could say, "we have to obey nature!" But that's not what God told you, is it? Right there in Genesis 1:28 28 "And God blessed them, and God said unto them, Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth, and subdue it: and have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over every living thing that moveth upon the earth."

In God's own words, you might say, we are told to control nature to suit our own purposes.

But that aside: I've written here many times that I am not in favour of abortion -- I'm in favour of good sex education, healthy minds making healthy choices, contraception and all of that sort of thing. But humans aren't perfect; we make mistakes. And sometimes those mistakes lead to unwanted pregnancies, or pregnancies that will endanger the mother's life. I don't think the world needs more unwanted children -- trust me, I was one of them, and never adopted, hidden from family (and family hidden from me so that I only found them when I turned 70 years old). There's no urgent requirement nor great social good to be achieved by having many more of them.

And so, while I do care about life, and individual lives, I must also care about the woman who must carry that life, and potentially care for and nurture it, at whatever cost and danger to her. Mostly, they want to, and that's a good thing. Sometimes they don't, and while that may not be a good thing in and of itself, that woman's freedom to make her own choices about her own life are more important to me than saving the "life" of a fetus that could not survive outside of the womb.

And even then, when (and only when) a woman's life is in danger from continuing to carry and deliver, that might tragically have to include in the last trimester. And I'm betting you that the majority of women who get that far did so because they really wanted that baby, which is what makes it tragic.

 

[Evangelicalhumanist]

Abortion - the killing of the unborn - is not "healthcare." Hence, your poll is garbage.

Not even when carrying might kill the mother? I call that garbage.

 

[Subduction Zone]

None of the female House and Senate Republican members got that memo, nor did those who voted for them.

Maybe you should save your false statements that "Republicans are anti-woman" as a way to get people to vote for Big Mike Obama or VP Kamel Hair, assuming you can't get the race card to work.

What? Are you trying to not make any sense at all on purpose now? You appear to be mixing up totally unrelated topics.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Bleh, standard anti-life BS. Abortions have killed MILLIONS more lives than abortion. From what I have read, we are talking about ~1% of such cases.

No, being pro-choice is not being "anti-life".

What Percentage of Abortions Are Medically Necessary? | HLI

What percentage of abortions are medically necessary? In the US, cases of true medical necessity are exceedingly rare or nonexistent...

www.hli.org

Please correct me if I am wrong.

Murder is always wrong. IMHO

Of course you are wrong. Abortion is not murder. Even the Bible agrees with that.

 

[Regiomontanus]

It's not a solution for people who would be forced to go out of state for their abortions, but you know to not believe Trump or any of the Christian nationalists. Look at how many Christian Supreme Court justices lied in their confirmation hearings. But with Trump, it's constant. These people want authoritarian control and intend to inflict their version of Gilead (Handmaid's Tale) on Americans.

Not your call. Many disagree with you.

Yes. A fetus is a potential independent sentient creature, but it isn't regarded or treated as one until it is. It's not life that makes killing immoral. It's mind. We don't mind killing a fly or a mango (by picking it), and that wouldn't change if we had the technology to transform such things into sentient creatures giving them the potential to become children. Potential is not enough.

What's always missing from your side of the argument is respect for the mother's bodily autonomy and freedom to decide when she will have children, which includes cases of sex resulting in an unplanned, unwanted pregnancy. You would likely feel the same if not for your religion, which manufactured outrage over abortion, which the Republicans capitalized upon and used to get votes.

We get it. Many Abrahamists care more about what they think their god wants than what people want, and they don't mind imposing their prejudices and superstitions on everybody. That, along with the bigotries and the continual lying (creationist apologetics) is what makes that religion so loathsome to so many, and why so many are turning away from it in America. People are tired of the mindless, hateful selfishness.

If by murder you mean unlawful, deliberate homicide, then yes, that's illegal, but one can just go to a state where abortion is legal and it's not murder or illegal.

Immoral is another question. Would it be illegal to shoot somebody threatening one's democracy who is in striking distance of doing that? It would be murder, but would it be immoral. Many would say no. Many would call such a person a hero and a martyr of sorts.

Not the issue, although the ones that need IVF may not be free to reproduce under Christo-nationalist rule.

That message is being disseminated by the Biden campaign and others and appears to have become a wedge issue for the Democrats now.

Anybody who votes Republican is voting against his own interests if he or she is not among the oligarchs and billionaires.

That 'many disagree' does not mean that I am wrong. That anyone would argue that killing an unborn child is healthcare is shocking and disgusting. Yes, a tiny minority of cases where the mother's life is at risk: a separate issue. I am talking about the 99% of actual cases. Didn't you take an oath to do no harm?

 

[Regiomontanus]

No, being pro-choice is not being "anti-life".

Of course you are wrong. Abortion is not murder. Even the Bible agrees with that.

I have heard your ridiculous arguments on this before.

 

[Regiomontanus]

Not even when carrying might kill the mother? I call that garbage.

<yawn>

So, outside of those EXTREMELY rare cases, do we agree? LOL, not holding my breath. Some people care about innocent human life, others do not. I get it.

 

[Subduction Zone]

I have heard your ridiculous arguments on this before.

If it is "ridiculous" then why couldn't you refute it?

 

[Subduction Zone]

That 'many disagree' does not mean that I am wrong. That anyone would argue that killing an unborn child is healthcare is shocking and disgusting. Yes, a tiny minority of cases where the mother's life is at risk: a separate issue. I am talking about the 99% of actual cases. Didn't you take an oath to do no harm?

No one is advocating killing unborn children. In fact, I doubt if there is such a thing.

 

[fantome profane]

Oh, calm down.

@Revoltingest, see what you started? Are you proud of yourself?

 

[Evangelicalhumanist]

<yawn>

So, outside of those EXTREMELY rare cases, do we agree? LOL, not holding my breath. Some people care about innocent human life, others do not. I get it.

I gave you my full feeling on the matter in post #42.

 

[Subduction Zone]

<yawn>

So, outside of those EXTREMELY rare cases, do we agree? LOL, not holding my breath. Some people care about innocent human life, others do not. I get it.

If you truly cared about "innocent human life" then you would support Planned Parenthood.

 

[wellwisher]

Senate Republicans block Democratic bill codifying Roe v. Wade abortion protections

The legislation, which states that “protections for access to abortion rights ... should be supported," was blocked by Republicans who panned it as a "show vote."

www.nbcnews.com

This was a messaging bill, that should be understood. But the Republican Senators have sent their message to American women. They do not support reproductive rights for women. Don't forget that. This is an issue that the Republican Party really cares about, they want to take away rights from women. You can see this in project 2025, you can see it in Agenda 47, you can see it in the RNC platform. And you can see it in the vote on this bill.

Republicans are for reproductive freedom. They are against killing the unborn and ending reproduction. Abortion has nothing to with reproduction. It is the opposite of reproduction.

Technically, the freedom not to reproduce, has been preserved, since it can be done in ways without killing babies. That freedom is still there and was never touched. Nobody has the right to kill the defenseless. Even in war, where you have the right and duty to kill, killing the defenseless is taboo and can get indicted on charges for crimes against humanity.

That is why back to the States was the compromise. If Liberals are adamant then just the Liberal states can be the killing fields. I would prefer they do a better job showing the ladies there is more than one hostile option for practicing your right not to reproduce. If a woman wishes to practice her right to reproduce the Republicans have your back.

Liberal word games tend to misrepresent what they are selling. Where is the consumer protection agency when you need it. Project 2025 may have to restructure all the hack agencies the Left has created that tend to play favorites; NPR or national public radio.

The DNC strategy is Project 2025 fear mongering using misrepresentations and word games. They have nothing good to report or sell. I will try to translate their deceptions as they do.

The DNC's next fear mongering installment may be how Project 2025 will take away Social Security. Didn't the DNC already do that by giving Social Security to the illegal aliens, thereby reducing the SS solvency even more? Project 2025 wants to protect SS, by making it so the DNC can not keep using it like it is their own slush fund. The Seniors should be mad at the DNC for sticking it to them.

 

[tytlyf]

But that's just it -- far too many on the right, and the religious, are absolutely certain that they should have the right to make such decisions for other people. Their ultimate justification is their own knowledge that they are holier-than-thou -- better and wiser than everybody else.

A religious attack on America's secular government and founding. If it were Muslims, these same people would be up in arms.
Zero reflection on what they're doing. The 2016 election unleased this Christian tyranny on the country unlike anything seen in America's past.

 

[tytlyf]

They are against killing the unborn and ending reproduction.

No one is forcing conservatives to have an abortion.
They need to mind their own business and keep their religion to themselves.

 

[Laniakea]

What? Are you trying to not make any sense at all on purpose now? You appear to be mixing up totally unrelated topics.

If it is "ridiculous" then why couldn't you refute it?

 

[metis]

What is always missing from such 'arguments' is the total lack of regard for the life extinguished by an abortion. That is why the two sides on this issue keep talking past each other, IMHO.

Have you ever been to a funeral for a miscarriage? Why do you think this is the case? If God supposedly plans all lives, then why are there miscarriages?

 

[Laniakea]

Have you ever been to a funeral for a miscarriage? Why do you think this is the case? If God supposedly plans all lives, then why did He have miscarriages aborted?

I have a friend who did. The miscarriage still haunts the mother many years later. She understood she was carrying a real human being.

 

[metis]

Murder is always wrong. IMHO

So, if a woman has an abortion, she should be put on trial and given the death penalty in a state that has executions for 1st degree murder?

BTW, are you opposed to capital punishment?