peabay
Prolific Pea
Posts: 9,940
Jun 25, 2014 19:50:41 GMT
|
Post by peabay on Sept 3, 2021 12:55:32 GMT
I know there are pro life peas on this board, I would be curious to hear their thoughts on this new law. I understand they might be reluctant to come forward, but I am genuinely curious to hear their thoughts and perspective. Are they celebrating? Is this law considered a victory? And here's something I struggle with. I know some people are opposed to abortion for moral or religious grounds. And that's perfectly OK, everyone is entitled to their own opinions. But how do you justify imposing your moral or religious values on someone else? And if you're Republican and support smaller government, are against universal health care because you don't want the government involved, how do you justify the government interfering a health care decision that should be strictly between a woman and her doctor? If you're opposed to mask and vaccine mandates because my body, my choice, why are women not allowed the same freedoms? I can understand why white male politicians are pro life but have difficulty understanding why women are. I know these are probably rhetorical questions, but I really would like to hear someone try to explain the contradictions and hypocrisy. Pssssstttt: they can't. |
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Nov 23, 2024 18:46:18 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 3, 2021 13:08:09 GMT
It’s not the job of the Supreme Court to make law It is the job of SCOTUS to interpret whether laws are constitutional. Which is what they did w/Roe. I don't have anything against Congress legislating, but this SCOTUS "making law" shit has got to stop. It is BS. |
|
|
|
Post by aj2hall on Sept 3, 2021 13:42:08 GMT
Another reason to be concerned about the Supreme Court decision, beyond abortion. And time for the Democrats to stack the court. www.npr.org/2021/09/03/1033733918/the-supreme-court-heads-toward-reversing-abortion-rights"We've seen the court 19 times already this term change the status quo from what the lower courts had done in every context, in a way that either allowed a state or federal policy to go into effect or that blocked it from doing so," he says. Indeed, without full briefing or argument and without much explanation, the court has decided cases involving everything from the eviction moratorium to the "Remain in Mexico" policy to state COVID-19 restrictions to the reinstitution of the federal death penalty. "These cases are massively important," Vladeck says, adding that "the extent to which the court is handing them down through a truncated and deeply invisible process really ought to concern even the people who think the court is getting [the result] right." |
|
|
|
Post by lucyg on Sept 3, 2021 13:59:19 GMT
It’s not the job of the Supreme Court to make law It is the job of SCOTUS to interpret whether laws are constitutional. Which is what they did w/Roe. I don't have anything against Congress legislating, but this SCOTUS "making law" shit has got to stop. It is BS. I agree with you 100% on that. But even RBG said Roe v. Wade was a mistake, not legally, but because it was the court “forcing” the decision on the country. That it should have been decided legislatively by our representative government instead. My words, not hers exactly, but that was the gist. |
|
lindas
Pearl Clutcher
Posts: 4,305 
|
Post by lindas on Sept 3, 2021 15:02:18 GMT
I know there are pro life peas on this board, I would be curious to hear their thoughts on this new law. I understand they might be reluctant to come forward, but I am genuinely curious to hear their thoughts and perspective. Are they celebrating? Is this law considered a victory? And here's something I struggle with. I know some people are opposed to abortion for moral or religious grounds. And that's perfectly OK, everyone is entitled to their own opinions. But how do you justify imposing your moral or religious values on someone else? And if you're Republican and support smaller government, are against universal health care because you don't want the government involved, how do you justify the government interfering a health care decision that should be strictly between a woman and her doctor? If you're opposed to mask and vaccine mandates because my body, my choice, why are women not allowed the same freedoms? I can understand why white male politicians are pro life but have difficulty understanding why women are. I know these are probably rhetorical questions, but I really would like to hear someone try to explain the contradictions and hypocrisy. I’ll bite. I’m pro-life and I think the Texas law is disgusting so no, I’m not celebrating. I don’t think the government should be involved in my personal medical decisions. As far as mandates go the opposition is largely fueled by politics. If you could take the politics out of it I think most people, with the exception of a small minority, would comply. You said “ I can understand why white male politicians are pro life but have difficulty understanding why women are.” What about women who can’t have children but desperately want them. You don’t think they are pro-life? |
|
pinklady
Drama Llama
Posts: 6,066
|
Post by pinklady on Sept 3, 2021 15:06:50 GMT
I truly hope this happens
|
|
|
|
Post by iamkristinl16 on Sept 3, 2021 15:20:05 GMT
I know there are pro life peas on this board, I would be curious to hear their thoughts on this new law. I understand they might be reluctant to come forward, but I am genuinely curious to hear their thoughts and perspective. Are they celebrating? Is this law considered a victory? And here's something I struggle with. I know some people are opposed to abortion for moral or religious grounds. And that's perfectly OK, everyone is entitled to their own opinions. But how do you justify imposing your moral or religious values on someone else? And if you're Republican and support smaller government, are against universal health care because you don't want the government involved, how do you justify the government interfering a health care decision that should be strictly between a woman and her doctor? If you're opposed to mask and vaccine mandates because my body, my choice, why are women not allowed the same freedoms? I can understand why white male politicians are pro life but have difficulty understanding why women are. I know these are probably rhetorical questions, but I really would like to hear someone try to explain the contradictions and hypocrisy. I’ll bite. I’m pro-life and I think the Texas law is disgusting so no, I’m not celebrating. I don’t think the government should be involved in my personal medical decisions. As far as mandates go the opposition is largely fueled by politics. If you could take the politics out of it I think most people, with the exception of a small minority, would comply. You said “ I can understand why white male politicians are pro life but have difficulty understanding why women are.” What about women who can’t have children but desperately want them. You don’t think they are pro-life? How do you take the politics out of mandates and mask wearing at this point? IMO, the Biden administration (and some--mostly blue--states) has been trying to do that but since Trump and the Republican governors made it political, that ship has sailed. |
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Nov 23, 2024 18:46:18 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 3, 2021 15:23:44 GMT
It is the job of SCOTUS to interpret whether laws are constitutional. Which is what they did w/Roe. I don't have anything against Congress legislating, but this SCOTUS "making law" shit has got to stop. It is BS. I agree with you 100% on that. But even RBG said Roe v. Wade was a mistake, not legally, but because it was the court “forcing” the decision on the country. That it should have been decided legislatively by our representative government instead. My words, not hers exactly, but that was the gist. I love RBG. I disagree w/her on this. They were asked to rule on the Constitutionality of a TEXAS law. They ruled it unconstitutional. Determining Constitutionality of laws (even those enacted by majorities) is the very essence of the Supreme Court. If the majority of voters (in a region, a State House, the country, etc) vote to kill all those w/blue eyes - and SCOTUS rules that UNCONSTITUTIONAL, they have not "made law" - they have struck down a law. |
|
|
|
Post by dewryce on Sept 3, 2021 15:38:10 GMT
I know there are pro life peas on this board, I would be curious to hear their thoughts on this new law. I understand they might be reluctant to come forward, but I am genuinely curious to hear their thoughts and perspective. Are they celebrating? Is this law considered a victory? And here's something I struggle with. I know some people are opposed to abortion for moral or religious grounds. And that's perfectly OK, everyone is entitled to their own opinions. But how do you justify imposing your moral or religious values on someone else? And if you're Republican and support smaller government, are against universal health care because you don't want the government involved, how do you justify the government interfering a health care decision that should be strictly between a woman and her doctor? If you're opposed to mask and vaccine mandates because my body, my choice, why are women not allowed the same freedoms? I can understand why white male politicians are pro life but have difficulty understanding why women are. I know these are probably rhetorical questions, but I really would like to hear someone try to explain the contradictions and hypocrisy. I’ll bite. I’m pro-life and I think the Texas law is disgusting so no, I’m not celebrating. I don’t think the government should be involved in my personal medical decisions. As far as mandates go the opposition is largely fueled by politics. If you could take the politics out of it I think most people, with the exception of a small minority, would comply. You said “ I can understand why white male politicians are pro life but have difficulty understanding why women are.” What about women who can’t have children but desperately want them. You don’t think they are pro-life? Woman here who has had one child born too soon in the 2nd trimester, can’t have children but desperately wants them, and is very soundly pro-choice. |
|
lindas
Pearl Clutcher
Posts: 4,305
|
Post by lindas on Sept 3, 2021 15:49:48 GMT
I’ll bite. I’m pro-life and I think the Texas law is disgusting so no, I’m not celebrating. I don’t think the government should be involved in my personal medical decisions. As far as mandates go the opposition is largely fueled by politics. If you could take the politics out of it I think most people, with the exception of a small minority, would comply. You said “ I can understand why white male politicians are pro life but have difficulty understanding why women are.” What about women who can’t have children but desperately want them. You don’t think they are pro-life? How do you take the politics out of mandates and mask wearing at this point? IMO, the Biden administration (and some--mostly blue--states) has been trying to do that but since Trump and the Republican governors made it political, that ship has sailed. You can’t, that ship has definitely sailed. I’m afraid we’ll have to disagree on it being only republicans that made it political, Democrats played a part in this too. The states have gone from one extreme to the other on mandates. Let’s face it, the mask thing has been all over the place. Wear a mask, no wear 2 masks, no you need a N95 mask. Get vaccinated and you don’t need to mask. Get the vaccine but still wear a mask. You don’t need a mask outdoors if you maintain 6 ft apart. No wait, you do need to mask outdoors even if you stay 6 ft apart. It’s not hard to understand why people are so frustrated. |
|
|
|
Post by dewryce on Sept 3, 2021 16:21:51 GMT
How do you take the politics out of mandates and mask wearing at this point? IMO, the Biden administration (and some--mostly blue--states) has been trying to do that but since Trump and the Republican governors made it political, that ship has sailed. You can’t, that ship has definitely sailed. I’m afraid we’ll have to disagree on it being only republicans that made it political, Democrats played a part in this too. The states have gone from one extreme to the other on mandates. Let’s face it, the mask thing has been all over the place. Wear a mask, no wear 2 masks, no you need a N95 mask. Get vaccinated and you don’t need to mask. Get the vaccine but still wear a mask. You don’t need a mask outdoors if you maintain 6 ft apart. No wait, you do need to mask outdoors even if you stay 6 ft apart. It’s not hard to understand why people are so frustrated. It is also hard to understand that people refuse to see/acknowledge that that is how science works, and also that there are different protocols needed because this Delta variant is so different than the others we have been dealing with. And frustrated or not, they should still do the right thing and mask up to protect others in their community. |
|
|
|
Post by powderhorngreen on Sept 3, 2021 16:31:31 GMT
I am pro-choice. I HATE the Texas law. However, on the legal merits of the issue presented to the Court, I agree with the outcome. The substantive issues of the Texas law (which includes novel, and totally bizarre, citizen enforcement clause) will be before the Court and then it will be weighed with respect to Roe v. Wade. Monday's ruling did NOT address any Roe v. Wade issues. I believe that in the sort-term, Traces women are dealt a raw deal. But, the decision was legally correct and the Court made it clear that it was NOT addressing the Roe v. Wade issues. The petitioner "sued" the wrong party for the Court to hear the request for the stay. If the Court had taken the case and ruled, it would have been improper and in violation of the separation of powers clause of the Constitution.
I have always thought that abortion rights should be codified federally. The Court has wanted that since 1973. Many groups have fought for it over the years. Congress has never acted. It is time for Congress to do so and to take this issue out of the court system. I view this as short-term pain for long-term gain. Unfortunately, I have little faith in Congress to step up and make it happen.
The petitioners need to amend their request and resubmit to the Court to correct the flaws so the Court can rule on the merits. I do not believe, even with its current make-up, the Court will overturn Roe v. Wade. Roe v. Wade's finding of a penumbra a rights is so imbedded in so much of the jurisprudence of the last 50 years, overturning it would be extremely problematic/almost impossible. However, this Court make-up is likely to look at state restrictions more favorably. therefore, Congress needs to act to reduce/eliminate state action that creates a patchwork of abortion rights across the country.
|
|
|
|
Post by padresfan619 on Sept 3, 2021 17:09:30 GMT
So I’m guessing all of the Texas peas who are in favor of this law are going to start adopting and becoming foster parents? Congrats!!!
|
|
|
|
Post by aj2hall on Sept 3, 2021 17:46:22 GMT
I know there are pro life peas on this board, I would be curious to hear their thoughts on this new law. I understand they might be reluctant to come forward, but I am genuinely curious to hear their thoughts and perspective. Are they celebrating? Is this law considered a victory? And here's something I struggle with. I know some people are opposed to abortion for moral or religious grounds. And that's perfectly OK, everyone is entitled to their own opinions. But how do you justify imposing your moral or religious values on someone else? And if you're Republican and support smaller government, are against universal health care because you don't want the government involved, how do you justify the government interfering a health care decision that should be strictly between a woman and her doctor? If you're opposed to mask and vaccine mandates because my body, my choice, why are women not allowed the same freedoms? I can understand why white male politicians are pro life but have difficulty understanding why women are. I know these are probably rhetorical questions, but I really would like to hear someone try to explain the contradictions and hypocrisy. I’ll bite. I’m pro-life and I think the Texas law is disgusting so no, I’m not celebrating. I don’t think the government should be involved in my personal medical decisions. As far as mandates go the opposition is largely fueled by politics. If you could take the politics out of it I think most people, with the exception of a small minority, would comply. You said “ I can understand why white male politicians are pro life but have difficulty understanding why women are.” What about women who can’t have children but desperately want them. You don’t think they are pro-life? By pro-life do you support other women’s choice to have an abortion? Personally, I don’t think I could have an abortion, but recognize that I am privileged and never had to face that decision. I fully support the choice for other women. Also privileged and never had to face infertility. And I recognize that it’s another situation you probably can’t know what you would do unless you were in those shoes. If I was unable to have children but wanted them, I think or hope that I would recognize that there are many ways to create families. As sad as I might be about abortions, I would hope that I would not impose my choice, my values, my morals on other women. |
|
|
|
Post by agengr2004 on Sept 3, 2021 17:50:34 GMT
I know there are pro life peas on this board, I would be curious to hear their thoughts on this new law. I understand they might be reluctant to come forward, but I am genuinely curious to hear their thoughts and perspective. Are they celebrating? Is this law considered a victory? And here's something I struggle with. I know some people are opposed to abortion for moral or religious grounds. And that's perfectly OK, everyone is entitled to their own opinions. But how do you justify imposing your moral or religious values on someone else? And if you're Republican and support smaller government, are against universal health care because you don't want the government involved, how do you justify the government interfering a health care decision that should be strictly between a woman and her doctor? If you're opposed to mask and vaccine mandates because my body, my choice, why are women not allowed the same freedoms? I can understand why white male politicians are pro life but have difficulty understanding why women are. I know these are probably rhetorical questions, but I really would like to hear someone try to explain the contradictions and hypocrisy. I’ll bite. I’m pro-life and I think the Texas law is disgusting so no, I’m not celebrating. I don’t think the government should be involved in my personal medical decisions. As far as mandates go the opposition is largely fueled by politics. If you could take the politics out of it I think most people, with the exception of a small minority, would comply. You said “ I can understand why white male politicians are pro life but have difficulty understanding why women are.” What about women who can’t have children but desperately want them. You don’t think they are pro-life? Infertile woman checking in here (two children in 10 years thanks to amazing modern medicine) and it is none of my business what anyone else does with their body. |
|
|
|
Post by aj2hall on Sept 3, 2021 17:51:06 GMT
How do you take the politics out of mandates and mask wearing at this point? IMO, the Biden administration (and some--mostly blue--states) has been trying to do that but since Trump and the Republican governors made it political, that ship has sailed. You can’t, that ship has definitely sailed. I’m afraid we’ll have to disagree on it being only republicans that made it political, Democrats played a part in this too. The states have gone from one extreme to the other on mandates. Let’s face it, the mask thing has been all over the place. Wear a mask, no wear 2 masks, no you need a N95 mask. Get vaccinated and you don’t need to mask. Get the vaccine but still wear a mask. You don’t need a mask outdoors if you maintain 6 ft apart. No wait, you do need to mask outdoors even if you stay 6 ft apart. It’s not hard to understand why people are so frustrated. The recommendation on masks has changed as the science changed and as the virus changed. Exactly how did Democrats play a role in making masks political? If you think Democratic governors made it political by requiring masks for everyone, masks in schools or requiring vaccines for certain employees, I’m not going to blame them for doing the right thing for their state and trying to protect people. If more governors did the right thing and required them in schools, we wouldn’t have the mask fights that are happening now at the school board level. |
|
|
|
Post by snowsilver on Sept 3, 2021 17:54:46 GMT
I know there are pro life peas on this board, I would be curious to hear their thoughts on this new law. I understand they might be reluctant to come forward, but I am genuinely curious to hear their thoughts and perspective. Are they celebrating? Is this law considered a victory? And here's something I struggle with. I know some people are opposed to abortion for moral or religious grounds. And that's perfectly OK, everyone is entitled to their own opinions. But how do you justify imposing your moral or religious values on someone else? And if you're Republican and support smaller government, are against universal health care because you don't want the government involved, how do you justify the government interfering a health care decision that should be strictly between a woman and her doctor? If you're opposed to mask and vaccine mandates because my body, my choice, why are women not allowed the same freedoms? I can understand why white male politicians are pro life but have difficulty understanding why women are. I know these are probably rhetorical questions, but I really would like to hear someone try to explain the contradictions and hypocrisy. Apparently I must take joy in being called most of the vicious names in the dictionary because that is almost certainly what will happen if I respond to you her aj2hall. But I'll give your questions a go. I am pro life. How do I justify imposing my moral or religious views on others? Because to ME, abortion is murder. This is NOT simply a woman's right to her own body. There is another life involved here as well. A very innocent life that had absolutely nothing to do with the situation the mother finds herself in. I believe the state has a right to legislate laws against murder. For me, it was bad enough when abortion was mostly confined to the early stages of pregnancy. But when it became legal to destroy a fully formed baby practically up to the moment of birth, I stopped wavering (as I had for a long time) on whether a woman has a right to determine for herself if she is going to get an abortion or not. That settled it once and for all for me. And for many, many others. You ask how anyone who is opposed to mask and vaccine mandates can refuse to allow women the same choice. For me there is a huge difference: There is a viable, provable act of murder taking place in an abortion. Government has a right (even a duty) to protect the innocent victims. There is no use tossing the usual "whatabouts" at me (what about rape, incest, etc.) because I freely admit I do NOT know the answer to those. I just don't. And I don't pretend I do. I do believe that there are answers and humane ones, and I think we would come up with them if we needed to. I think for ME, I would not decry some very limited abortions. If that makes me a hypocrite, so be it. I said I don't have the answers and I'm just being as honest with you as I can be. I am old. When I was young, abortion was illegal. And yes, women did take desperate measures. But not nearly as many women as you would be led to believe if you read many of the posts here. First, women were careful then as they KNEW they couldn't legally get an abortion. And it was not uncommon if someone get pregnant, for the family to ship her off to Aunt Ida in Idaho (or wherever) for a bit stating that it was a bit of a visit. The girl would come back and live her life as if she had never been pregnant. The baby would be adopted (there were--and still are--thousands of families longing to adopt in infant). And that brings me to another point. This endless canard that conservatives only care about the baby up til birth but have no interest in helping them or the family after the baby is born is just that--a canard. First---if abortion were illegal, I promise you there would be many, many less such babies being born. Remember, I lived in a time when abortion was illegal. Secondly, you have no idea how many conservative people are strongly involved in programs to help young mothers. And just to respond to another untrue statement which is a constant theme here: MOST OF US ARE IN FAVOR OF BIRTH CONTROL PILLS--even FREE BIRTH CONTROL PILLS if the woman cannot afford them. I'd even go and help hand them out! Now onto this Texas bill and how this anti-abortion Pea feels about it. Obviously, I am glad that little babies will have a chance to grow up and live the lives they deserve. But I --and let me be very, VERY clear on this---I am astonished and appalled at the provisions in it. There is no way I am in favor of anyone having the right to turn anyone else in over abortion. To me that is simply abhorrent. In every possible way. Do I want abortion to be made illegal? Yes, I do. I think someday in the future we will look back on the millions of little ones lost to abortion and be revolted that we ever, ever thought this was not a crime. But that said, it would be enough for me (and many others like me) to change the law to make abortion illegal and THEN it becomes the woman's decision as to whether she is going to flout that law or not. I am most certainly not in favor of this Nazi-type law Texas has passed where neighbors are spying on neighbors. I've done my best to respond to you honestly. And please keep in mind that I didn't have to put myself out there to the commentary that is almost certain to come back at me. But sometimes, I think a conservative should just suck it up and present the other side. |
|
|
|
Post by crimsoncat05 on Sept 3, 2021 17:55:34 GMT
By pro-life do you support other women’s choice to have an abortion? this is the question... is someone pro-life (in which case, they should donate money to charities, volunteer to foster children, advocate for free health care for all, adopt, etc.) or are they just anti-abortion, anti-women ('just keep your legs shut'), and anti- bodily autonomy (we know better than you what you should do)? They're two very different things. And the hypocritical part is something that sails right over all those yahoo's heads (not you, lindas) who yell and stomp their feet about things like 'no killing babies' but yet don't want to wear masks or get vaccinated in order to protect someone else's already-born child, etc. etc. eta: it's like Beau said in his video (VERY good video, by the way)... people ask him 'if you're not anti-abortion, why do you have so many kids?' (or however they worded it.) It's NOT about what someone's views are for THEIR individual life-- it's about whether you think OTHERS should be FORCED to live according to YOUR beliefs. Again, they're two very different things. And one these radical evangelical pro-lifers don't seem to be able to grasp. |
|
|
|
Post by papercrafteradvocate on Sept 3, 2021 18:02:07 GMT
How do you take the politics out of mandates and mask wearing at this point? IMO, the Biden administration (and some--mostly blue--states) has been trying to do that but since Trump and the Republican governors made it political, that ship has sailed. You can’t, that ship has definitely sailed. I’m afraid we’ll have to disagree on it being only republicans that made it political, Democrats played a part in this too. The states have gone from one extreme to the other on mandates. Let’s face it, the mask thing has been all over the place. Wear a mask, no wear 2 masks, no you need a N95 mask. Get vaccinated and you don’t need to mask. Get the vaccine but still wear a mask. You don’t need a mask outdoors if you maintain 6 ft apart. No wait, you do need to mask outdoors even if you stay 6 ft apart. It’s not hard to understand why people are so frustrated. Which party is aggressively passing laws that is literally going to kill women? Which party is aggressively and actively taking women’s rights away? Which party screams “pro-life” yet passes legislation allowing guns everywhere? Which party screams “pro-life” yet refuses healthcare to women, children, and the poor? Which party screams “pro-life” yet is all for capital punishment? Which party screams “pro-life” yet allows organs to be harvested when a person is declared “brain dead” but has a heartbeat? Which party screams “pro-life” yet passes legislation to eradicate LBGTQ, adding to the detriment and demise of their mental health and well being, and feel suicide is the only answer after being told their not worth anything? Republicans and conservatives that’s what party. (Answered for you because I knew you’d never own it) You ARE NOT “all for a women’s choice” as you claim. Your VOTING makes what happened Texas clearly NOT in favor of a woman’s choice. |
|
|
|
Post by aj2hall on Sept 3, 2021 18:02:17 GMT
I know there are pro life peas on this board, I would be curious to hear their thoughts on this new law. I understand they might be reluctant to come forward, but I am genuinely curious to hear their thoughts and perspective. Are they celebrating? Is this law considered a victory? And here's something I struggle with. I know some people are opposed to abortion for moral or religious grounds. And that's perfectly OK, everyone is entitled to their own opinions. But how do you justify imposing your moral or religious values on someone else? And if you're Republican and support smaller government, are against universal health care because you don't want the government involved, how do you justify the government interfering a health care decision that should be strictly between a woman and her doctor? If you're opposed to mask and vaccine mandates because my body, my choice, why are women not allowed the same freedoms? I can understand why white male politicians are pro life but have difficulty understanding why women are. I know these are probably rhetorical questions, but I really would like to hear someone try to explain the contradictions and hypocrisy. Apparently I must take joy in being called most of the vicious names in the dictionary because that is almost certainly what will happen if I respond to you her aj2hall. But I'll give your questions a go. I am pro life. How do I justify imposing my moral or religious views on others? Because to ME, abortion is murder. This is NOT simply a woman's right to her own body. There is another life involved here as well. A very innocent life that had absolutely nothing to do with the situation the mother finds herself in. I believe the state has a right to legislate laws against murder. For me, it was bad enough when abortion was mostly confined to the early stages of pregnancy. But when it became legal to destroy a fully formed baby practically up to the moment of birth, I stopped wavering (as I had for a long time) on whether a woman has a right to determine for herself if she is going to get an abortion or not. That settled it once and for all for me. And for many, many others. You ask how anyone who is opposed to mask and vaccine mandates can refuse to allow women the same choice. For me there is a huge difference: There is a viable, provable act of murder taking place in an abortion. Government has a right (even a duty) to protect the innocent victims. There is no use tossing the usual "whatabouts" at me (what about rape, incest, etc.) because I freely admit I do NOT know the answer to those. I just don't. And I don't pretend I do. I do believe that there are answers and humane ones, and I think we would come up with them if we needed to. I think for ME, I would not decry some very limited abortions. If that makes me a hypocrite, so be it. I said I don't have the answers and I'm just being as honest with you as I can be. I am old. When I was young, abortion was illegal. And yes, women did take desperate measures. But not nearly as many women as you would be led to believe if you read many of the posts here. First, women were careful then as they KNEW they couldn't legally get an abortion. And it was not uncommon if someone get pregnant, for the family to ship her off to Aunt Ida in Idaho (or wherever) for a bit stating that it was a bit of a visit. The girl would come back and live her life as if she had never been pregnant. The baby would be adopted (there were--and still are--thousands of families longing to adopt in infant). And that brings me to another point. This endless canard that conservatives only care about the baby up til birth but have no interest in helping them or the family after the baby is born is just that--a canard. First---if abortion were illegal, I promise you there would be many, many less such babies being born. Remember, I lived in a time when abortion was illegal. Secondly, you have no idea how many conservative people are strongly involved in programs to help young mothers. And just to respond to another untrue statement which is a constant theme here: MOST OF US ARE IN FAVOR OF BIRTH CONTROL PILLS--even FREE BIRTH CONTROL PILLS if the woman cannot afford them. I'd even go and help hand them out! Now onto this Texas bill and how this anti-abortion Pea feels about it. Obviously, I am glad that little babies will have a chance to grow up and live the lives they deserve. But I --and let me be very, VERY clear on this---I am astonished and appalled at the provisions in it. There is no way I am in favor of anyone having the right to turn anyone else in over abortion. To me that is simply abhorrent. In every possible way. Do I want abortion to be made illegal? Yes, I do. I think someday in the future we will look back on the millions of little ones lost to abortion and be revolted that we ever, ever thought this was not a crime. But that said, it would be enough for me (and many others like me) to change the law to make abortion illegal and THEN it becomes the woman's decision as to whether she is going to flout that law or not. I am most certainly not in favor of this Nazi-type law Texas has passed where neighbors are spying on neighbors. I've done my best to respond to you honestly. And please keep in mind that I didn't have to put myself out there to the commentary that is almost certain to come back at me. But sometimes, I think a conservative should just suck it up and present the other side. Thank you for being brave and responding. I genuinely appreciate your input. Just a couple of thoughts. Roe v Wade was 50 years ago. Society has changed. I don’t think we can accurately predict what will happen if abortion becomes illegal in certain states. I do think that if women have no other choice, there will be back alley abortions. Also, where is it legal to have an abortion at nearly full term? Most states make it illegal after about 6 months unless the fetus dies or the mother's life is in danger. Third, the reason many of us believe Republican politicians are only pro birth is a direct result of their voting record. They voted against the child tax credit to lift children out of poverty. They voted against funding for child care, against funding for preschool. Every chance they have, they vote against funding for education, for children and families. How is it OK to put the life of an unborn baby above the rights of a woman? I understand the moral objection to abortion, but anyone imposing their values is not the one that has to carry that baby to term and possibly care for it. Making abortion illegal will not put an end to unwanted pregnancies. They only way to reduce unwanted pregnancies is readily available free birth control and better, more accessible health care for women. And birth control should include other methods like condoms, not just the pill which has unwanted side effects. For the record, Republicans have voted against these exact provisions in the Affordable Care Act for years and tried to overturn it countless times. They also objected to the free birth control provision to the point of shaming and humiliating young women in hearings. Also, we need sex education that involves more than teaching abstinence. Anyone who has raised teenagers knows that by telling them not to do something, you are only encouraging them. I'm still unclear how its OK to support no masks and no vaccines because my body my choice but deny women the same choice. If you're justifying it because by making abortion illegal protects innocent babies, masks and vaccines also protect innocent babies who are already here. One final note, if abortion is made illegal, no I don't think we will look back on and regret millions of unborn children. I think we will regret forcing women to carry a child to term, taking away her choice and her control over her body. |
|
|
|
Post by papercrafteradvocate on Sept 3, 2021 18:05:04 GMT
I know there are pro life peas on this board, I would be curious to hear their thoughts on this new law. I understand they might be reluctant to come forward, but I am genuinely curious to hear their thoughts and perspective. Are they celebrating? Is this law considered a victory? And here's something I struggle with. I know some people are opposed to abortion for moral or religious grounds. And that's perfectly OK, everyone is entitled to their own opinions. But how do you justify imposing your moral or religious values on someone else? And if you're Republican and support smaller government, are against universal health care because you don't want the government involved, how do you justify the government interfering a health care decision that should be strictly between a woman and her doctor? If you're opposed to mask and vaccine mandates because my body, my choice, why are women not allowed the same freedoms? I can understand why white male politicians are pro life but have difficulty understanding why women are. I know these are probably rhetorical questions, but I really would like to hear someone try to explain the contradictions and hypocrisy. Apparently I must take joy in being called most of the vicious names in the dictionary because that is almost certainly what will happen if I respond to you her aj2hall. But I'll give your questions a go. I am pro life. How do I justify imposing my moral or religious views on others? Because to ME, abortion is murder. This is NOT simply a woman's right to her own body. There is another life involved here as well. A very innocent life that had absolutely nothing to do with the situation the mother finds herself in. I believe the state has a right to legislate laws against murder. For me, it was bad enough when abortion was mostly confined to the early stages of pregnancy. But when it became legal to destroy a fully formed baby practically up to the moment of birth, I stopped wavering (as I had for a long time) on whether a woman has a right to determine for herself if she is going to get an abortion or not. That settled it once and for all for me. And for many, many others. You ask how anyone who is opposed to mask and vaccine mandates can refuse to allow women the same choice. For me there is a huge difference: There is a viable, provable act of murder taking place in an abortion. Government has a right (even a duty) to protect the innocent victims. There is no use tossing the usual "whatabouts" at me (what about rape, incest, etc.) because I freely admit I do NOT know the answer to those. I just don't. And I don't pretend I do. I do believe that there are answers and humane ones, and I think we would come up with them if we needed to. I think for ME, I would not decry some very limited abortions. If that makes me a hypocrite, so be it. I said I don't have the answers and I'm just being as honest with you as I can be. I am old. When I was young, abortion was illegal. And yes, women did take desperate measures. But not nearly as many women as you would be led to believe if you read many of the posts here. First, women were careful then as they KNEW they couldn't legally get an abortion. And it was not uncommon if someone get pregnant, for the family to ship her off to Aunt Ida in Idaho (or wherever) for a bit stating that it was a bit of a visit. The girl would come back and live her life as if she had never been pregnant. The baby would be adopted (there were--and still are--thousands of families longing to adopt in infant). And that brings me to another point. This endless canard that conservatives only care about the baby up til birth but have no interest in helping them or the family after the baby is born is just that--a canard. First---if abortion were illegal, I promise you there would be many, many less such babies being born. Remember, I lived in a time when abortion was illegal. Secondly, you have no idea how many conservative people are strongly involved in programs to help young mothers. And just to respond to another untrue statement which is a constant theme here: MOST OF US ARE IN FAVOR OF BIRTH CONTROL PILLS--even FREE BIRTH CONTROL PILLS if the woman cannot afford them. I'd even go and help hand them out! Now onto this Texas bill and how this anti-abortion Pea feels about it. Obviously, I am glad that little babies will have a chance to grow up and live the lives they deserve. But I --and let me be very, VERY clear on this---I am astonished and appalled at the provisions in it. There is no way I am in favor of anyone having the right to turn anyone else in over abortion. To me that is simply abhorrent. In every possible way. Do I want abortion to be made illegal? Yes, I do. I think someday in the future we will look back on the millions of little ones lost to abortion and be revolted that we ever, ever thought this was not a crime. But that said, it would be enough for me (and many others like me) to change the law to make abortion illegal and THEN it becomes the woman's decision as to whether she is going to flout that law or not. I am most certainly not in favor of this Nazi-type law Texas has passed where neighbors are spying on neighbors. I've done my best to respond to you honestly. And please keep in mind that I didn't have to put myself out there to the commentary that is almost certain to come back at me. But sometimes, I think a conservative should just suck it up and present the other side. You’re the one starting off out of the gate, first post in a while, with negativity, per usual. Don’t you ever get tired telling the peas just how “victimized” you are BEFORE anyone has responded to you? YOU set the tone. YOU. |
|
|
|
Post by agengr2004 on Sept 3, 2021 18:05:16 GMT
By pro-life do you support other women’s choice to have an abortion? this is the question... is someone pro-life (in which case, they should donate money to charities, volunteer to foster children, advocate for free health care for all, adopt, etc.) or are they just anti-abortion, anti-women ('just keep your legs shut'), and anti- bodily autonomy (we know better than you what you should do)? They're two very different things. And the hypocritical part is something that sails right over all those yahoo's heads (not you, lindas) who yell and stomp their feet about things like 'no killing babies' but yet don't want to wear masks or get vaccinated in order to protect someone else's already-born child, etc. etc. eta: it's like Beau said in his video (VERY good video, by the way)... people ask him 'if you're not anti-abortion, why do you have so many kids?' (or however they worded it.) It's NOT about what someone's views are for THEIR individual life-- it's about whether you think OTHERS should be FORCED to live according to YOUR beliefs. Again, they're two very different things. And one these radical evangelical pro-lifers don't seem to be able to grasp. And the thing is, this has never and will never be about children. Children don’t vote and therefore politicians don’t care about them. They use them as pawns to play on our emotions to get our votes. Period. This is about controlling women. Telling us what we can and can’t do with our bodies. And yes, they are *our* bodies regardless of what’s inside them. Oh the women are getting out of line? They won’t take our harassment or belittlement anymore? Making serious political and political or economic moves? Let’s show them who’s still in charge. |
|
|
|
Post by papercrafteradvocate on Sept 3, 2021 18:10:17 GMT
The fact of the matter is legally, ABORTION IS NOT MURDER.
Just because some people THINK it is just does not make it so.
A person’s religious beliefs and OPINIONS are not laws that are used to regulate another persons health, body, medical, mental choices.
|
|
|
|
Post by pierogi on Sept 3, 2021 18:24:35 GMT
I know there are pro life peas on this board, I would be curious to hear their thoughts on this new law. I understand they might be reluctant to come forward, but I am genuinely curious to hear their thoughts and perspective. Are they celebrating? Is this law considered a victory? And here's something I struggle with. I know some people are opposed to abortion for moral or religious grounds. And that's perfectly OK, everyone is entitled to their own opinions. But how do you justify imposing your moral or religious values on someone else? And if you're Republican and support smaller government, are against universal health care because you don't want the government involved, how do you justify the government interfering a health care decision that should be strictly between a woman and her doctor? If you're opposed to mask and vaccine mandates because my body, my choice, why are women not allowed the same freedoms? I can understand why white male politicians are pro life but have difficulty understanding why women are. I know these are probably rhetorical questions, but I really would like to hear someone try to explain the contradictions and hypocrisy. Apparently I must take joy in being called most of the vicious names in the dictionary because that is almost certainly what will happen if I respond to you her aj2hall. But I'll give your questions a go. I am pro life. How do I justify imposing my moral or religious views on others? Because to ME, abortion is murder. This is NOT simply a woman's right to her own body. There is another life involved here as well. A very innocent life that had absolutely nothing to do with the situation the mother finds herself in. I believe the state has a right to legislate laws against murder. For me, it was bad enough when abortion was mostly confined to the early stages of pregnancy. But when it became legal to destroy a fully formed baby practically up to the moment of birth, I stopped wavering (as I had for a long time) on whether a woman has a right to determine for herself if she is going to get an abortion or not. That settled it once and for all for me. And for many, many others. You ask how anyone who is opposed to mask and vaccine mandates can refuse to allow women the same choice. For me there is a huge difference: There is a viable, provable act of murder taking place in an abortion. Government has a right (even a duty) to protect the innocent victims. There is no use tossing the usual "whatabouts" at me (what about rape, incest, etc.) because I freely admit I do NOT know the answer to those. I just don't. And I don't pretend I do. I do believe that there are answers and humane ones, and I think we would come up with them if we needed to. I think for ME, I would not decry some very limited abortions. If that makes me a hypocrite, so be it. I said I don't have the answers and I'm just being as honest with you as I can be. I am old. When I was young, abortion was illegal. And yes, women did take desperate measures. But not nearly as many women as you would be led to believe if you read many of the posts here. First, women were careful then as they KNEW they couldn't legally get an abortion. And it was not uncommon if someone get pregnant, for the family to ship her off to Aunt Ida in Idaho (or wherever) for a bit stating that it was a bit of a visit. The girl would come back and live her life as if she had never been pregnant. The baby would be adopted (there were--and still are--thousands of families longing to adopt in infant). And that brings me to another point. This endless canard that conservatives only care about the baby up til birth but have no interest in helping them or the family after the baby is born is just that--a canard. First---if abortion were illegal, I promise you there would be many, many less such babies being born. Remember, I lived in a time when abortion was illegal. Secondly, you have no idea how many conservative people are strongly involved in programs to help young mothers. And just to respond to another untrue statement which is a constant theme here: MOST OF US ARE IN FAVOR OF BIRTH CONTROL PILLS--even FREE BIRTH CONTROL PILLS if the woman cannot afford them. I'd even go and help hand them out! Now onto this Texas bill and how this anti-abortion Pea feels about it. Obviously, I am glad that little babies will have a chance to grow up and live the lives they deserve. But I --and let me be very, VERY clear on this---I am astonished and appalled at the provisions in it. There is no way I am in favor of anyone having the right to turn anyone else in over abortion. To me that is simply abhorrent. In every possible way. Do I want abortion to be made illegal? Yes, I do. I think someday in the future we will look back on the millions of little ones lost to abortion and be revolted that we ever, ever thought this was not a crime. But that said, it would be enough for me (and many others like me) to change the law to make abortion illegal and THEN it becomes the woman's decision as to whether she is going to flout that law or not. I am most certainly not in favor of this Nazi-type law Texas has passed where neighbors are spying on neighbors. I've done my best to respond to you honestly. And please keep in mind that I didn't have to put myself out there to the commentary that is almost certain to come back at me. But sometimes, I think a conservative should just suck it up and present the other side. For every woman that dies because of this law, and there will be quite a few, I’ll think about you. |
|
|
|
Post by snowsilver on Sept 3, 2021 18:25:38 GMT
The fact of the matter is legally, ABORTION IS NOT MURDER. Just because some people THINK it is just does not make it so. A person’s religious beliefs and OPINIONS are not laws that are used to regulate another persons health, body, medical, mental choices. How is it NOT murder? Isn't taking innocent life (and I doubt any of us would argue that that little baby isn't innocent) murder?? What on earth can it be? |
|
|
|
Post by aj2hall on Sept 3, 2021 18:32:05 GMT
The fact of the matter is legally, ABORTION IS NOT MURDER. Just because some people THINK it is just does not make it so. A person’s religious beliefs and OPINIONS are not laws that are used to regulate another persons health, body, medical, mental choices. How is it NOT murder? Isn't taking innocent life (and I doubt any of us would argue that that little baby isn't innocent) murder?? What on earth can it be? It depends on how you define life. Is it a life if it can't survive outside of a womb? Whose rights are more important here? |
|
Bridget in MD
Drama Llama
Posts: 6,718
Member is Online
Jun 25, 2014 20:40:00 GMT
|
Post by Bridget in MD on Sept 3, 2021 18:37:56 GMT
Apparently I must take joy in being called most of the vicious names in the dictionary because that is almost certainly what will happen if I respond to you her aj2hall. But I'll give your questions a go. I am pro life. How do I justify imposing my moral or religious views on others? Because to ME, abortion is murder. This is NOT simply a woman's right to her own body. There is another life involved here as well. A very innocent life that had absolutely nothing to do with the situation the mother finds herself in. I believe the state has a right to legislate laws against murder. For me, it was bad enough when abortion was mostly confined to the early stages of pregnancy. But when it became legal to destroy a fully formed baby practically up to the moment of birth, I stopped wavering (as I had for a long time) on whether a woman has a right to determine for herself if she is going to get an abortion or not. That settled it once and for all for me. And for many, many others. You ask how anyone who is opposed to mask and vaccine mandates can refuse to allow women the same choice. For me there is a huge difference: There is a viable, provable act of murder taking place in an abortion. Government has a right (even a duty) to protect the innocent victims. There is no use tossing the usual "whatabouts" at me (what about rape, incest, etc.) because I freely admit I do NOT know the answer to those. I just don't. And I don't pretend I do. I do believe that there are answers and humane ones, and I think we would come up with them if we needed to. I think for ME, I would not decry some very limited abortions. If that makes me a hypocrite, so be it. I said I don't have the answers and I'm just being as honest with you as I can be. I am old. When I was young, abortion was illegal. And yes, women did take desperate measures. But not nearly as many women as you would be led to believe if you read many of the posts here. First, women were careful then as they KNEW they couldn't legally get an abortion. And it was not uncommon if someone get pregnant, for the family to ship her off to Aunt Ida in Idaho (or wherever) for a bit stating that it was a bit of a visit. The girl would come back and live her life as if she had never been pregnant. The baby would be adopted (there were--and still are--thousands of families longing to adopt in infant). And that brings me to another point. This endless canard that conservatives only care about the baby up til birth but have no interest in helping them or the family after the baby is born is just that--a canard. First---if abortion were illegal, I promise you there would be many, many less such babies being born. Remember, I lived in a time when abortion was illegal. Secondly, you have no idea how many conservative people are strongly involved in programs to help young mothers. And just to respond to another untrue statement which is a constant theme here: MOST OF US ARE IN FAVOR OF BIRTH CONTROL PILLS--even FREE BIRTH CONTROL PILLS if the woman cannot afford them. I'd even go and help hand them out! Now onto this Texas bill and how this anti-abortion Pea feels about it. Obviously, I am glad that little babies will have a chance to grow up and live the lives they deserve. But I --and let me be very, VERY clear on this---I am astonished and appalled at the provisions in it. There is no way I am in favor of anyone having the right to turn anyone else in over abortion. To me that is simply abhorrent. In every possible way. Do I want abortion to be made illegal? Yes, I do. I think someday in the future we will look back on the millions of little ones lost to abortion and be revolted that we ever, ever thought this was not a crime. But that said, it would be enough for me (and many others like me) to change the law to make abortion illegal and THEN it becomes the woman's decision as to whether she is going to flout that law or not. I am most certainly not in favor of this Nazi-type law Texas has passed where neighbors are spying on neighbors. I've done my best to respond to you honestly. And please keep in mind that I didn't have to put myself out there to the commentary that is almost certain to come back at me. But sometimes, I think a conservative should just suck it up and present the other side. For every woman that dies because of this law, and there will be quite a few, I’ll think about you. Even if those lives consist of abuse and neglect? What about the ones starving? I guess they deserve that life?  |
|
|
|
Post by papercrafteradvocate on Sept 3, 2021 18:39:12 GMT
The fact of the matter is legally, ABORTION IS NOT MURDER. Just because some people THINK it is just does not make it so. A person’s religious beliefs and OPINIONS are not laws that are used to regulate another persons health, body, medical, mental choices. How is it NOT murder? Isn't taking innocent life (and I doubt any of us would argue that that little baby isn't innocent) murder?? What on earth can it be? Medical evidence has proven that fetuses cannot live, unsupported—even with a respirator before at least 20 weeks. Scientific evidence proves that fetuses cannot feel anything/have pain before at least 24 weeks, because the fetuses lack the brain connectivity to do so. So, despite medical and scientific evidence, pro-lifers can pretend/have the OPINION that a fetus is indistinguishable from a baby/child when science and medicine prove otherwise. Do you think every egg that has been fertilized in a woman’s body that doesn’t make it (not viable) to birth is abortion? Do you think that harvesting a legally brain dead persons organs for transplant is murder? It’s a human life, right? So that is why abortion is not murder. (Not to mention that legally, in addition to science and medicine it is not) |
|
|
|
Post by pierogi on Sept 3, 2021 18:39:53 GMT
For every woman that dies because of this law, and there will be quite a few, I’ll think about you. Even if those lives consist of abuse and neglect? What about the ones starving? I guess they deserve that life? I don’t think you’re responding to my post. |
|
|
|
Post by aj2hall on Sept 3, 2021 18:39:54 GMT
And here are some facts on late term abortion. A little outdated, but sill relevant I think. www.washingtonpost.com/us-policy/2019/02/06/tough-questions-answers-late-term-abortions-law-women-who-get-them/According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, about 1.3 percent of abortions were performed at or greater than 21 weeks of gestation in 2015. In contrast, 91.1 percent were performed at or before 13 weeks and 7.6 percent at 14 to 20 weeks. President Trump repeated the misleading assertion in his State of the Union address, stating, “New York cheered with delight upon the passage of legislation that would allow a baby to be ripped from the mother’s womb moments before birth.” The New York law allows for women after 24 weeks of pregnancy to get an abortion if “there is an absence of fetal viability, or the abortion is necessary to protect the patient’s life or health.”The United States today contains a patchwork of restrictions and prohibitions on abortions that occur later in pregnancy. According to Guttmacher, 43 states prohibit some abortions after a certain point in pregnancy. Some use fetal viability as the cutoff, others the third trimester (which begins in the 28th week), and others a certain number of weeks post-fertilization or after a woman’s last menstrual period or of gestation. States have imposed many other kinds of restrictions such as having a second physician attend the procedure or to have multiple doctors sign off that a later abortion is medically necessary. The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG) refuted that idea in a statement released this week, stating that pregnant women may experience conditions such as “premature rupture of membranes and infection, preeclampsia, placental abruption, and placenta accreta” late in pregnancy that may endanger their lives. “Women in these circumstances may risk extensive blood loss, stroke, and septic shock that could lead to maternal death. Politicians must never require a doctor to wait for a medical condition to worsen and become life-threatening before being able to provide evidence-based care to their patients, including an abortion,” the ACOG said. Jen Villavicencio, an obstetrician-gynecologist in the Midwest, explained that, in the vast majority of cases in which a woman becomes seriously ill late in pregnancy, doctors are working to save both the woman and the fetus. But in rare situations, it’s clear the fetus will not survive, and then the patients and their loved ones must make a decision about whether to put a sick woman at further risk with a delivery. “This is incredibly complex. This is not something that can be litigated on Twitter,” she said, adding that “one of the things I’m concerned in all the rhetoric is that we’re missing compassion and empathy for that patient and what she’s going through.” Jennifer Gunter, obstetrician and gynecologist practicing in California, offered this scenario on her blog: “A good example is a woman at 26 weeks who needs to be delivered for her blood pressure — that is the cure, delivery. However, because of her high-blood pressure fetal development has been affected and her fetus is estimated to weigh 300 g, which means it can not live after delivery. She will be offered an abortion if there is a skilled provider. This is safer for her and her uterus than a delivery.” Who is obtaining later abortions? There isn’t a lot of research on the subject, but the best information we have comes from a study from the University of California at San Francisco. It found women who got later abortions were similar in “race, ethnicity, number of live births or abortions, mental or physical health history or substance use” to women who got an abortion in the first trimester. They were mostly unmarried, and many were already mothers. |
|
