Democrats are throwing an "abortion-palooza" in Chicago for the Democratic National Convention.
"They’re degrading human life and women for that matter. It's just absolutely disgusting. This continued celebration of abortion," Democrats For Life of America executive director Kristen Day told Fox News Digital.
Day is appalled that Planned Parenthood is offering free abortions inside a "mobile health clinic" parked in Chicago during the convention. Pro-abortion activists also marched through the streets of Chicago ahead of the convention.
"I think this convention is going to be abortion-palooza. In response to them providing abortions, we would provide actual support to women in need. So, we started a diaper drive," Day said.
You think I (or FoxNews) could possibly make up something so horrific?
About the only positive in this monstrous story is the fact that the mobile baby killing unit is preventing future welfare bums and Democrat Voters from being born. In some way, (using the logic of the Eugenics Mother of Planned Babykillinghood, Margaret Sanger) this company is indeed eliminating "human weeds."
And REMEMBER, HItlary admired this monster.
This page is a permanent link to the reply below and its nested replies. See all post replies »
It’s a good strategy because a large majority of Americans support abortion rights. People like you who want ten year old rape victims to give birth at gunpoint are fortunately in the minority.
The horrible Dobbs decision may have one positive outcome - electing Harris/Walz and a Democratic Congress, which can then pass a national law protecting the right to abortion. Congress can then strip the Supreme Court from having jurisdiction over any laws dealing with reproductive rights.
Democrats used to be afraid to bring up abortion. Not anymore. Now it’s Republicans who are equivocating. Even Cheeto Benito says he won’t sign a nationwide abortion ban if he’s elected.
@LeopoldBloom A) you seem confused on constitutionality vs jurisdiction. scotus already declared that this was a state issue, as it is NOT included in the constitution. Any fed law would be unconstitutional. B) why do pro-abortion ppl always gaslight with the 1% example? Do you really think any 10yo rape victims will come to the dnc for their abortion? 🤦🏼♂
@Vin53 the ability to understand nuance in analogies is an indicator of intelligence. The fact that you can't see the difference...or that you think there is a notable similarity is interesting. 🙄
Does the extremely small % of 10yo rape victims have any direct impact on the outcome of the 99% who are just inconvenient pregnancies? Answer is no.
You cant say there is zero impact of the trans athletes to other athletes...they literally impact EVERY other athlete. Men become national champs in college sports...and steal scholarships from actual women. Hell, the women's boxing finals were BOTH men. No actual woman represented the sex in the Olympic finals competition. Why can't you see the injustice to actual women with trans ppl??
What about ALL raped women? Do you think any raped woman should be mandated to carry their rapists child to term???
ANY woman who was raped should IMMEDIATELY call the police and go to the hospital for a rape kit. (Best way of providing evidence to lock up the perp.) And every hospital is equipped with the morning after pills, which will prevent conception.
NOBODY should be opposed to that sensible solution.
The only solution is to allow women to have abortions any time, for any reason. If you're against abortion, no one's forcing you to have one.
It also agrees with freedom of conscience--everyone determines their own path according to their own values, rather than violating the "Establishment" clause.
@SomeMichGuy When they say "let the states decide," why not take that to the next level and let individual counties or cities decide? Or individual women?
@trollslayer My point is that the rape exception is subject to interpretation, like [@unreasonable10] who would impose so many restrictions on it as to make it impossible for anyone to actually use it, or to find a doctor willing to risk going to prison if everything hasn't been done perfectly.
I'm predicting that the "October surprise" this year will be a horrific case of a woman dying needlessly because she couldn't get an abortion in a situation 90% of the country would have been OK with. Something similar to the Savita Halappanavar case in Ireland.
That "State" bs is what the older gal from WSJ spoke of when Roe was overturned, as a panel member on MTP--"It's back where it ought to be: the States."
HUH? The Federal government never had it; Roe gave this very intimate right to the PEOPLE. Overturning Roe wrested it from the hands of "the People" to give it back to the States...even though abortion had been declining...
The Republican Party loves to forget that the MAIN party to the Constitution is mentioned FIRST.
@SomeMichGuy That was one of the arguments against Roe for the last 50 years - that abortion should be decided by the states. But anyone who thinks it's going to stop there is deluded. The anti-abortion forces are already talking about using the Comstock Act to prohibit the interstate shipment of mifepristone and surgical tools used for abortions, which would effectively make it impossible to have an abortion, even in states where it's legal. If conservatives think Trump won't support this, they shouldn't vote for him.
