The right to choose

@missyann [i]My[/i] arrogance? This from a woman who presumes to be of such flawless moral character as to tell millions of American women what they are permitted to do with their own bodies.

[@CorvusBlackthornere] I never claimed to have a flawless moral character. This must be what you think of me. Thank you.

No one in the pro life movement cares what a woman does with her body, we care what she does to another innocent body. Unless she has 4 arms and legs, 4 ears, 2 noses, 2 1brains, 2 hearts 2 unique sets of DNA ect. This IS a unique human being we are talking about. If it is the development of this human being that justifies your pro abortion stance, no, a 6 week fetus as developed as a 21 week fetus but a 2 yr old isn't as developed as a 6 yr old. I don't think she should be able to kill the 2 yr old either.

Why is it considered a " woman's right " to intentionally murder innocent unborn human lives when she has no right to murder any other innocent life ? This seems like a civil rights violation since men aren't granted the same right. Would women fight for my right to murder an innocent human being ? If not, then this is discrimination. They must hate women. Well, certain women anyway

Simple. NO ONE has the right to INTENTIONALLY end the development of innocent life.

@SW-User ? Yes, I believe in saving innocent lives. These aren't just words, they are action. Don't you remember ? roe v wade was overturned in june

@missyann believe..

@SW-User Yes

@Lila15 A man and a woman consent to have sex then this means they consent to accept the responsibility of their choice. Rape is a horrible violent crime against a woman WITHOUT her consent. This no way is the same thing.

I have ALWAYS said if a woman life is in jeopardy, her life always comes first. But if the life of the baby can be saved ( sometimes it can't be ) also everything that can be done, should be done to save it also. Why would she ever be opposed to trying to save her unborn child also?

Why is so hard for adults to understand that they are responsible for the choices that they consent to make make ?? They ARE responsible for the risks that comes with having sex.

Maybe we need a law that says that women and men need to sign a consent when they have sex. Then they are saying that they accept the responsibility. Great idea. The life they created didn't give consent to be conceived, She ( an adult ) shouldn't be forced to give birth but this new life who is completely innocent is tried, convicted and sentenced to be ripped apart

We demand human rights for prisoners on death row who are guilty of heinous crimes against humanity get painless deaths but support ripping the MOST INNOCENT of human beings apart. WOW if this is going to remain a women's right I'll be ashamed to be a woman if I don't fight to guarantee the lives of the unborn are protected from being condemned to torture

@missyann How is a rape baby different from a baby from consensual sex?

Why should the woman's life come first? If she had sex, she agreed to any potential risks, including death. I'm talking about situations where either the mother or the fetus can be saved, not both.

Your position is what's referred to as a moral bandaid. You support these exceptions because they make you look more reasonable than someone who says no abortion ever for any reason.

Eleven states have passed abortion restrictions that don't allow abortion for rape. I assume you oppose this. But your opposition is meaningless if you support those politicians anyway. This is why it's a moral bandaid. You're taking what you think is a reasonable position, but when given a binary choice, you're not going to vote for a pro-choice candidate, even if their opponent opposes abortion in cases of rape. Or am I wrong and you wouldn't go that far?

As for your last paragraph, 93% of abortions are in the first trimester where the ZEF cannot feel pain, and later abortions are tragic situations where the mother wanted the baby but couldn't continue the pregnancy for her own health reasons or because the fetus had severe abnormalities. The reason PC like me think PL don't care about women is because you don't take the mother's suffering into account, even when the ZEF wouldn't suffer at all.

@Lila15 A child conceived from rape is NO different from a baby conceived wanted. I don't SUPPORT abortion for any reason but I understand why victims of rape and incest consider abortion. I just can't stand and say yes, I support it. If I said anything to the contrary I made a mistake typing my words

I think I support more liberal ideas than conservative. But when given a choice I ALWAYS choose the one who is more pro life. It has always be what I consider first and foremost.

I have ALWAYS said if both live can't be saved when a mother will die, her life comes first. But everything should be done to save both.

A 21 wk fetus has fine hair, fingernails, toenails, eyebrows the eyelashes have formed. The baby is able hear and swallow. The baby is active and can be felt moving. There is a universal agreement in the scientific community that fetus experiences fetal pain by 20 wks.

Most womens health issues in pregnancy are due to a lack of healthcare and proper nutrition in this country. Pro life needs to demand these changes. I'm not sure what kind of suffering that a mother might have that you are talking about, but. But babies have survived outside the womb as early as 21 wks. There have been surgeries preformed on fetus in the womb. Dr Ben Carson has been one of the surgeons. Some of these babies would have been considered for abortion. Every life has a purpose wether they live 1 minute or for life.

Don't want to see any women sci-fi but I also don't want an innocent baby to have to die needlessly

@Ryderbike Lol

@SinlessOnslaught [quote]I'm saying all you do is insult people and my evidence is that you started arguments here by insulting people right off the bat.[/quote]
So literally because I started arguments with what you consider to be insults one day, you extrapolate that that's all I ever do, ever.
@Ryderbike
[quote]I bet lord shadow fire never going ever recover from your vicious onslaught[/quote]
No, I'm pretty resilient when it comes to recovering from lies.

@SW-User How does it improve society to force women who don't want to give birth to do it anyway? And don't say "they can just give the kid up for adoption." If giving birth was a job, it would be one of the most dangerous in America. Telling a woman that because she had sex, she must risk permanent medical issues and even death is sadism.

How do you plan to actually stop abortion, considering how popular it is? A police state? The way we're headed, every miscarriage will be investigated by the police.

@TheOneyouwerewarnedabout only the lowest of intelligence would compare the right to spread a deadly disease with a woman’s dominion over her own body.

Mind numbing ignorance,

@Ryderbike Forget it, he's just an unhappy edgelord who enjoys provoking people on here.

@Lila15 He's never provoked me.

@SumKindaMunster Are you suggesting that the Democrats should have sat this election out?

The Democrats aren't responsible for unqualified nincompoops like Walker, Vance, Oz, Bolduc, Mastriano, Masters, or Lake. Those people are all on you guys.

@LeopoldBloom No, I'm asking if the Dems making abortion the central issue, and then ignoring the larger economic issues was a good strategy. I'm wondering if them spending a lot of time and effort demonizing the Republican candidates isn't blowing up in their faces.

[quote]The Democrats aren't responsible for unqualified nincompoops like Walker, Vance, Oz, Bolduc, Mastriano, Masters, or Lake. Those people are all on you guys[/quote]

Hmm, I can't speak for all of these candidates, but I know for a fact that both Oz and Mastriano benefited from your aforementioned "ratfucking" as in, the Dems gave their campaigns money and this helped them secure the Republican nominations. So that is on "you" in this scenario.

You think that was a good strategy? It looks like we are going to have some new Republican senators who are coming in on a platform of pro-life. You think that's going to work out for securing abortion rights?

@SumKindaMunster Both sides were demonizing the other side. And if you think the economy is bad here, it's worse in Europe. Abortion is a great issue to motivate young people to vote. Whether it's enough to get pro-choice conservatives to vote for Democrats is the question.

Mastriano is too extreme for Pennsylvania. He would have had a better chance in West Virginia. We're talking about a guy who openly says he's a Christian nationalist.

Oz has the advantage that everyone already knows who he is. I wouldn't blame the Democrats for him being the nominee. Trump's endorsement didn't hurt.

Even if the Democrats hang on to Congress, they won't be able to get rid of the filibuster to legalize abortion nationwide.

@Lila15 If you know that the birth control you are using doesn't prevent pregnancy just implantation then you are intentionally choosing to end the development of a life

@missyann And if you know that someone will fie unless you donate one of your kidneys to them, you are intentionally ending their life.

@missyann [quote]I'm not going to fight with you and call names like children on a.play ground.[/quote]
You're right. You're not going to do that stuff. You're going to twist people's words, distort the facts, and never actually flat out lie, but at the same time, you're absolutely lying.

@MrBrownstone He's asking a question. Two actually.

@MrBrownstone if you had proof you wouldn’t need faith.

@Ryderbike As long as you believe that.

@Ryderbike You DO have the right. I suppose if rock climbing is illegal I will need to go to a " back ally " Dr to treat my injuries

@Ryderbike Can you be " logical " in just one post ? Why you believe what you believe. Like why being pro life means authoritarian ? Or what you mean by forced birthing ? Instead of insulting everyone explain why you think that you are right.

You may not like or agree with my explanation but I do explain my reasoning

@missyann my answer is Freedom,

There is no more fundamental freedom than dominion over your own body. No other freedom comes close.


It’s not complicated to me at all.

If a woman chooses abortion and it’s morally wrong then that would be between her and her God.

@CestManan Post-vaccines, the excess death rate gap between Republicans and Democrats widened from 1.6 pp (22% of the Democrat excess death rate) to 10.4 pp (153% of the Democrat excess death rate). The gap in excess death rates between Republicans and Democrats is concentrated in counties with low vaccination rates and only materializes after vaccines became widely available.

@Ryderbike I think what really happened is back in Dec/Jan when they tried to mandate vaccines for companies with 100 or more employees, the big bosses figured, "We have a hard enough time finding and keeping help, we do not need more obstacles" so that whole mess got ditched.

That plus the whole pandemic was wildly blown out of proportion.

@CestManan I remembered a time before the right wing fascist movement when 6 million dying was called a Holocaust,

@missyann I have never called anyone a troll because they disagree with me. I am a grownup I don't have to respond To hateful remarks With hateful remarks back. No 1 forces anyone to answer or response to their post.

@OggggO I have to apologize once again I don't believe that it was him who called me a troll it was someone else

@missyann Baby is the word for after it’s born. This is why pregnant women say “I’m going to have a baby,” not “I have a baby right now.” And any woman with a toddler who said “I’m pregnant” referring to the toddler would sound insane.

Calling ZEFs “babies” is just emotional manipulation. If you’re going to do that, you can’t complain if PC call unwanted pregnancy “slavery” or “forced birth.”

@SumKindaMunster Republicans tend to campaign to the right in primaries, and tack to the center in the general. It's going to be hard for DeSantis to sign a 6-week ban in Florida, then say that he's "open to compromise" later. Democrats will hammer him as an extremist and Republicans will call him a flip-flopper. His best bet is to stay consistent and hope that Biden is unpopular enough to allow him to win with the Republican base (assuming, of course, that he's the nominee). With his positions on "wokeness" and opposition to trans rights, he might as well stay an anti-abortion extremist.

I disagree that the Democrats have dropped the abortion issue. It's front and center in the Wisconsin judicial election on April 4. Janet Protasiewicz, a pro-choice liberal, is facing Daniel Kelly, a pro-life conservative, and the winner will determine the balance of the Wisconsin Supreme Court. The race just isn't making the national news, so most people outside of Wisconsin aren't aware of it. As the 2024 election approaches, you'll hear more Democrats talking about abortion. In Pennsylvania, Doug Mastriano is reportedly contemplating a Senate run against Bob Casey. I'm sure I don't have to tell you who they are and what positions they have. Abortion will be a major issue in that race.

@Lila15 [quote]Republicans tend to campaign to the right in primaries, and tack to the center in the general. It's going to be hard for DeSantis to sign a 6-week ban in Florida, then say that he's "open to compromise" later. Democrats will hammer him as an extremist and Republicans will call him a flip-flopper. His best bet is to stay consistent and hope that Biden is unpopular enough to allow him to win with the Republican base (assuming, of course, that he's the nominee). With his positions on "wokeness" and opposition to trans rights, he might as well stay an anti-abortion extremist.[/quote]

Yeah. I don't think DeSantis gets the nomination, the culture is aligning against him, I think someone else sneaks under the radar.

[quote]I disagree that the Democrats have dropped the abortion issue. It's front and center in the Wisconsin judicial election on April 4. Janet Protasiewicz, a pro-choice liberal, is facing Daniel Kelly, a pro-life conservative, and the winner will determine the balance of the Wisconsin Supreme Court. The race just isn't making the national news, so most people outside of Wisconsin aren't aware of it. As the 2024 election approaches, you'll hear more Democrats talking about abortion. In Pennsylvania, Doug Mastriano is reportedly contemplating a Senate run against Bob Casey. I'm sure I don't have to tell you who they are and what positions they have. Abortion will be a major issue in that race.[/quote]

Hm, see I think this goes to proving my point, which is Congress and the Democrats have washed their hands of abortion as an issue. All of this that you cited is at the state and judicial level and my point was that abortion has been dropped at the [i]legislative[/i] level. They haven't fulfilled the promise implied, that they would protect abortion rights. They manipulated you for your vote, then cast you aside when no longer needed.

@SumKindaMunster I don't think DeSantis will be nominated either. If Trump is still viable, he wins the plurality in each state, and the non-Trump vote gets split among a dozen candidates, same as in 2016. The Republican primaries are winner-take-all for whoever gets the most votes. If Trump isn't viable, then I agree, DeSantis still doesn't get nominated. I think he's peaking too early, and many of the people supporting him now just want a younger version of Trump, and they've decided he's it even though they know almost nothing about him.

There is no legislative solution to abortion right now, because some magical Abortion Rights Protection Act will never get past the House or survive a Senate filibuster. Even if some Republicans are secretly pro-choice or couldn't care less, they know abortion is a hot issue and aren't going to tank their careers over it. Look what happened to McCain, just for voting to preserve the ACA, not because he liked the law, but because he thought it hadn't been debated enough. There's no point in the Democrats proposing performative legislation now. They should wait until it gets closer to the election so it's fresh in everyone's mind.

Meanwhile, a judge in Texas is about to rule that the FDA erred when it approved mifepristone 22 years ago. Biden should pull an Andrew Jackson and say "Judge Kacsmaryk has his decision, now let him enforce it."

@missyann [quote]Perhaps I'm too intelligent.[/quote]
Not from where I am perched.

@CorvusBlackthorne Pitch me facts. !!!!!!

@missyann I have done so. You choose to twist them, or question them. I provide links to articles, and you dismiss them. In the meantime, you give me nothing to support your positive claims.

@missyann I am all for a law forcing women to watch a video of abortion.

And a law forcing Americans to look at the bodies of children slain by American gun owners.

I want the sandy hook children's pictures of the carnage an AR15 does to a child.

I want them to see what an innocent child looks like with their face blown off.

Do we agree?

@Ryderbike It is no longer just her body. I consider someone with it own DNA different from the 2 people who created it different from anyone who has ever been or ever will be constitutes a unique human being. Which means that it is no longer just her body.

@missyann it’s always her body, no matter how you try to define it.

It’s her body . The fetus is not separate unless she decides to stay pregnant.

It’s very survival depends solely on her body .

Her freedom supersedes a “potential “ life

@bijouxbroussard agreed

@LordShadowfire No one is oppressing women. The only right that they are losing is the right to end the development of a life at any stage From conception to birth. Men don't have that right. Should someone have the right a 12 yr 3 mo old because their not 14 yrs old ? That is a stage of development.

@missyann I see. Okay. So the fact that women are being denied vital chemotherapy for their cancer treatment doesn't count as oppression. Got it. Also, when did we move to opposite world?

@LordShadowfire Can you show me Where you got this information.? Where a woman was actually denied and abortion and needed vital chemo chemotherapy ? If I am wrong And I certainly could be I will apologize. Once again I have never heard of a case where a woman was denied life saving treatment

@missyann Not everyone believes in God or thinks a benevolent God would allow a ten year old to become pregnant. Bad things can happen. A merciful God would not allow children to get leukemia either. Bringing religion into the discussion sidetracks it and implies that you think your religion should be imposed by force.

@LeopoldBloom I realize that not everybody believes in God and even those who don't believe that a merciful God would allow something horrific happen to child. I'm not saying that he does or doesn't. I have never met God to personally ask.

I have been taught and believe that without suffering we would not know love and compassion. I believe that Love and compassion n to help someone we don't know is one of the greatest loves there is. It has always been asked " why would a loving,merciful God allow a child to suffer. Suffering sometime brings some closer to God. Sometimes it turns them away. I believe.in this case, it should bring people together and surround this child and love her not matter what her choice was.

I would NEVER expect this now, i would expect it to take years and would never mention it to her for a long time, but eventually forgive him. She and her family have every right to hate this man and wish nothing but suffering on him. He should absolutely still receive the death penalty and I would advocate for her for this. Forgiving not to help that person. Forgiving will be for her.

I don't expect for anyone to agree with me on anything that I have said but this is what I believe

@missyann Suffering is only meaningful if someone voluntarily takes it onto themselves. There is nothing to be gained by a supposedly benevolent diety allowing a child to suffer when they have the abilty to end it. Saying "God has a purpose" is just making excuses. And if a child is raped and wants an abortion, it shouldn't even be a matter of discussion; she should just have one without having to jump through hoops or endure further humiliation. The potential life of the ZEF should not take precedence over the actual life of the child.

I'm far more comforted by the belief that as living creatures in physical bodies, suffering is part of life but should be avoided as much as possible. It has no meaning beyond that. Forcing people to suffer needlessly when it could easily be alleviated is sadism.