Page 11 of 14 FirstFirst ... 234567891011121314 LastLast
Results 201 to 220 of 273

Thread: Supreme court to overturn Roe vs Wade

  1. #201
    conon394's Avatar hoi polloi
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    Colfax WA, neat I have a barn and 49 acres - I have 2 horses, 15 chickens - but no more pigs
    Posts
    15,118

    Default Re: Supreme court to overturn Roe vs Wade

    Quote Originally Posted by Pontifex Maximus View Post
    Never thought I'd live to see it. The American holocaust has been put on pause for now, but I am sure California will soon pass laws legalizing infanticide up to six months or something similarly objectively evil and insane.

    What holocaust and the latter is just baiting to to be a bomb tosser.
    IN PATROCINIVM SVB Dromikaites

    'One day when I fly with my hands - up down the sky, like a bird'

    But if the cause be not good, the king himself hath a heavy reckoning to make, when all those legs and arms and heads, chopped off in battle, shall join together at the latter day and cry all 'We died at such a place; some swearing, some crying for surgeon, some upon their wives left poor behind them, some upon the debts they owe, some upon their children rawly left.

    Hyperides of Athens: We know, replied he, that Antipater is good, but we (the Demos of Athens) have no need of a master at present, even a good one.

  2. #202
    Vanoi's Avatar Dux Limitis
    Civitate

    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Myrtle Beach, South Carolina, USA
    Posts
    16,856

    Default Re: Supreme court to overturn Roe vs Wade

    https://www.yahoo.com/news/noem-defe...161637081.html

    Do Republicans just really hate women in general?

  3. #203

    Default Re: Supreme court to overturn Roe vs Wade

    Quote Originally Posted by Vanoi View Post
    https://www.yahoo.com/news/noem-defe...161637081.html

    Do Republicans just really hate women in general?
    You kidding? Most of them would probably prefer labor started at conception and lasted the entire nine months.

  4. #204
    Roma_Victrix's Avatar Call me Ishmael
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    Virginia, USA
    Posts
    14,875

    Default Re: Supreme court to overturn Roe vs Wade

    Quote Originally Posted by Lord Thesaurian View Post
    Around 1% of abortions are due to rape, incest, fetal abnormality or a threat to the life of the mother. This is based on a 2018 survey over 70,000 abortions in Florida. This is consistent with the national samples that are available. If Democrats must rely on an extreme minority of cases to justify abortion, they could have crafted federal legislation in the last 50 years protecting abortion under those circumstances - or frankly any circumstances they chose, given they had a supermajority in Congress as recently as 2008 and 1993.

    American conservatives would be very evil, backwards and hypocritical if they did advocate for the absolute right to euthanize human beings deemed a burden to their family or to society, or just because some people think the world is too y to be worth living in. That said, its a chilling yet common justification among abortion advocates.
    I'll tell you what's chilling, conservatives like you who don't give a damn if women with septic uterus or ectopic pregnancies die from those complications in a hospital bed while fiddling around with lawyers to see if what the doctors are doing is legal or not. There are multiple states right now after the fall of Roe V Wade that don't make exceptions for rape, incest, OR the health of the mother. My own mother had a miscarriage back in the 1980s, the first time she was pregnant. Evangelical Conservatives (and conservative Catholic allies) would rather have my mother DIE than give birth to me and my siblings later in her life.

    That's the sort of evil rotten horrific garbage you are peddling here. How nice of you! Conservatives also don't care about kids, they care about punishing women. It's very clear. Women are just incubators and the kids are just fodder, to be fed into abusive foster homes for all the GOP cares. Here's a fun little article detailing the trigger laws and laws that will soon come into effect state-by-state, and take notice how some states don't have exceptions for rape, incest, or even the health of the mother. That is the nightmare that SCOTUS has now unleashed.

  5. #205

    Default Re: Supreme court to overturn Roe vs Wade

    Quote Originally Posted by Roma_Victrix View Post
    I'll tell you what's chilling, conservatives like you who don't give a damn if women with septic uterus or ectopic pregnancies die from those complications in a hospital bed while fiddling around with lawyers to see if what the doctors are doing is legal or not. There are multiple states right now after the fall of Roe V Wade that don't make exceptions for rape, incest, OR the health of the mother. My own mother had a miscarriage back in the 1980s, the first time she was pregnant. Evangelical Conservatives (and conservative Catholic allies) would rather have my mother DIE than give birth to me and my siblings later in her life.
    A miscarriage is a spontaneous (rather than an artificial) abortion. I don't see how a woman suffering a miscarriage illustrates that "evangelical conservatives" want women to "die".

    That's the sort of evil rotten horrific garbage you are peddling here. How nice of you! Conservatives also don't care about kids, they care about punishing women. It's very clear. Women are just incubators and the kids are just fodder, to be fed into abusive foster homes for all the GOP cares. Here's a fun little article detailing the trigger laws and laws that will soon come into effect state-by-state, and take notice how some states don't have exceptions for rape, incest, or even the health of the mother. That is the nightmare that SCOTUS has now unleashed.
    Which states do not provide exceptions in cases of medical emergencies? So far as I could see, the cited article does not claim any state has denied such exceptions.
    Last edited by Cope; June 26, 2022 at 10:18 PM.



  6. #206
    Praeses
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    7,754

    Default Re: Supreme court to overturn Roe vs Wade

    Not my country of course, but seems a retrograde step when women can't end a pregnancy that will kill them. Is self defence not a valid argument anymore?

    Seems a perfect cause to divide US citizens. Compromise is needed, and consensus building. I hope our ally can navigate this.

    Some pretty vile trolling going on too.

    [Edit: geez Thomas lined up runs at contraception and marriage too, getting a bit dismal. Alito specifically rejected public opinion, are they removing "We the people" next?]
    Last edited by Cyclops; June 27, 2022 at 12:48 AM.
    Jatte lambastes Calico Rat

  7. #207

    Default Re: Supreme court to overturn Roe vs Wade

    Quote Originally Posted by Roma_Victrix View Post
    I'll tell you what's chilling, conservatives like you who don't give a damn if women with septic uterus or ectopic pregnancies die from those complications in a hospital bed while fiddling around with lawyers to see if what the doctors are doing is legal or not. There are multiple states right now after the fall of Roe V Wade that don't make exceptions for rape, incest, OR the health of the mother. My own mother had a miscarriage back in the 1980s, the first time she was pregnant. Evangelical Conservatives (and conservative Catholic allies) would rather have my mother DIE than give birth to me and my siblings later in her life.

    That's the sort of evil rotten horrific garbage you are peddling here. How nice of you! Conservatives also don't care about kids, they care about punishing women. It's very clear. Women are just incubators and the kids are just fodder, to be fed into abusive foster homes for all the GOP cares. Here's a fun little article detailing the trigger laws and laws that will soon come into effect state-by-state, and take notice how some states don't have exceptions for rape, incest, or even the health of the mother. That is the nightmare that SCOTUS has now unleashed.
    I honestly think they do not, can not, see women as people. In that regard they can't understand why someone might get upset their wife or daughter died of a septic uterus. Just go buy another one.

    Of course the right cares about kids. Who else are they going to shoot en-masse when they are told no/aren't treated as special for being white/are bored?

    Quote Originally Posted by Cyclops View Post
    Is self defence not a valid argument anymore?
    Not for women no. I wouldn't be surprised if the right starts jailing rape victims for bruising or scratching their rapist.

    Compromise is needed, and consensus building.
    The only compromise I could see happening is if someone found a way to perform an abortion with a gun. Then the right would see it as the most sacred of rights.

    [Edit: geez Thomas lined up runs at contraception and marriage too, getting a bit dismal. Alito specifically rejected public opinion, are they removing "We the people" next?]
    Between gerrymandering and voter suppression and being able to just toss Democratic wins by merely alleging fraud, they are no longer accountable to the people.

  8. #208

    Default Re: Supreme court to overturn Roe vs Wade

    Quote Originally Posted by Vanoi View Post
    https://www.yahoo.com/news/noem-defe...161637081.html

    Do Republicans just really hate women in general?
    I'm not a biologist, but I believe Kristi Noem is a woman.

    This might not be as you'd expect:

    Republican women express more opposition to abortion than Republican men - 68% of Republican women call themselves pro-life compared to 59% of their male counterparts. Also, Republican women were the only group in this poll to oppose exceptions for abortion in cases of rape and incest. A majority opposed that, while most Republican men do support those exceptions.
    Source: Republican Women And Abortion

    Here is a PDF of the poll being discussed.
    Quote Originally Posted by Enros View Post
    You don't seem to be familiar with how the burden of proof works in when discussing social justice. It's not like science where it lies on the one making the claim. If someone claims to be oppressed, they don't have to prove it.


  9. #209
    Vanoi's Avatar Dux Limitis
    Civitate

    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Myrtle Beach, South Carolina, USA
    Posts
    16,856

    Default Re: Supreme court to overturn Roe vs Wade

    Quote Originally Posted by sumskilz View Post
    I'm not a biologist, but I believe Kristi Noem is a woman.

    This might not be as you'd expect:

    Source: Republican Women And Abortion

    Here is a PDF of the poll being discussed.
    People hate themselves all the time. As for your poll I'm not really surprised Republicans oppose abortion women or not.

  10. #210
    Morticia Iunia Bruti's Avatar Tribunus
    Join Date
    May 2015
    Location
    Deep within the dark german forest
    Posts
    7,443

    Default Re: Supreme court to overturn Roe vs Wade

    Quote Originally Posted by Pontifex Maximus View Post
    Never thought I'd live to see it. The American holocaust has been put on pause for now, but I am sure California will soon pass laws legalizing infanticide up to six months or something similarly objectively evil and insane.
    So every women, who has aborted or everyone, who is pro-choice, is a Nazi?
    In my sadness see me dancing
    In my darkness see me sing
    In my sorrow see me laughing
    Watch my fear just disappear



  11. #211

    Default Re: Supreme court to overturn Roe vs Wade

    If abortion is the murder of an innocent human being, there's no rational reason to allow exceptions for rape or incest. Is a child conceived in rape or incest any less of an innocent human being than other children?
    Ignore List (to save time):

    Exarch, Coughdrop addict

  12. #212

    Default Re: Supreme court to overturn Roe vs Wade

    Quote Originally Posted by Prodromos View Post
    If abortion is the murder of an innocent human being, there's no rational reason to allow exceptions for rape or incest. Is a child conceived in rape or incest any less of an innocent human being than other children?
    For the same reason that a person is not legally obliged to assist someone in peril (even if it would be the moral thing to do), a woman should not be forced to carry a child they are not responsible for.



  13. #213

    Default Re: Supreme court to overturn Roe vs Wade

    Quote Originally Posted by Cope View Post
    For the same reason that a person is not legally obliged to assist someone in peril (even if it would be the moral thing to do), a woman should not be forced to carry a child they are not responsible for.
    This.
    Quote Originally Posted by Prodromos View Post
    If abortion is the murder of an innocent human being, there's no rational reason to allow exceptions for rape or incest. Is a child conceived in rape or incest any less of an innocent human being than other children?
    Biblically, while abortion is never permitted it is also not necessarily considered murder unless the mother dies in the process, as when a man causes a woman to miscarry as the result of a fight. So while an abortion in case of rape or incest (incest typically involves the coercion of a younger woman) is morally wrong, it would not be murder and the man should be held liable, not the woman. The lack of consent essentially caused the termination of the pregnancy and the innocent blood is on his hands. By the same token, exceptions for medical emergencies are feasible because the life of the mother is more important.
    Last edited by Lord Thesaurian; June 27, 2022 at 08:27 AM.
    Quote Originally Posted by Ludicus View Post
    I'm convinced that if the U.S. wanted, they could solve the conflict in 48 hours.
    Quote Originally Posted by Ludicus View Post
    No, we don't care about your libertarian "evidence".

  14. #214

    Default Re: Supreme court to overturn Roe vs Wade

    Quote Originally Posted by Lord Thesaurian View Post
    Biblically, while abortion is never permitted it is also not necessarily considered murder unless the mother dies in the process, as when a man causes a woman to miscarry as the result of a fight. So while an abortion in case of rape or incest (incest typically involves the coercion of a younger woman) is morally wrong, it would not be murder and the man should be held liable, not the woman. The lack of consent essentially caused the termination of the pregnancy and the innocent blood is on his hands. By the same token, exceptions for medical emergencies are feasible because the life of the mother is more important.
    It isn't that the life of the mother is "more important", its that the mother has the right to protect herself from death or serious bodily injury, even if that requires the termination of her own in utero child.



  15. #215

    Default Re: Supreme court to overturn Roe vs Wade

    Quote Originally Posted by Cope View Post
    For the same reason that a person is not legally obliged to assist someone in peril (even if it would be the moral thing to do), a woman should not be forced to carry a child they are not responsible for.
    Quote Originally Posted by Lord Thesaurian View Post
    This.

    Biblically, while abortion is never permitted it is also not necessarily considered murder unless the mother dies in the process, as when a man causes a woman to miscarry as the result of a fight. So while an abortion in case of rape or incest (incest typically involves the coercion of a younger woman) is morally wrong, it would not be murder and the man should be held liable, not the woman. The lack of consent essentially caused the termination of the pregnancy and the innocent blood is on his hands. By the same token, exceptions for medical emergencies are feasible because the life of the mother is more important.
    None of that changes the fact that if you consider a fetus to be a live person the act of aborting the pregnancy is the act that's killing the fetus. With your logic its same as a mother not feeding a baby. You guys can try to twist it as much as you like.
    The Armenian Issue
    http://www.twcenter.net/forums/group.php?groupid=1930

    "We're nice mainly because we're rich and comfortable."

  16. #216

    Default Re: Supreme court to overturn Roe vs Wade

    Quote Originally Posted by PointOfViewGun View Post
    None of that changes the fact that if you consider a fetus to be a live person the act of aborting the pregnancy is the act that's killing the fetus. With your logic its same as a mother not feeding a baby. You guys can try to twist it as much as you like.
    Child abuse/neglect resulting in death is a felony. Do you believe abortion should be a felony?
    Quote Originally Posted by Ludicus View Post
    I'm convinced that if the U.S. wanted, they could solve the conflict in 48 hours.
    Quote Originally Posted by Ludicus View Post
    No, we don't care about your libertarian "evidence".

  17. #217

    Default Re: Supreme court to overturn Roe vs Wade

    The self-defense argument for abortion in the case of rape seems to be a weak one, since a child conceived in rape is no more of a threat to the mother's life than a child conceived in a consensual sexual encounter. Certainly in the case of rape, the child was placed in the woman's body without her consent, but it's hard to see how this gives her a right to kill him.

    Imagine that you live alone in the woods and you're woken up in the middle of the night by the sound of someone rummaging through your kitchen. You come downstairs with a loaded shotgun ready to kill the intruder, only to discover that the person stealing your food is in fact a toddler. Would you say you have a self-defense right to kill the toddler for being on your private property and eating your food without your consent? Probably not, because a hungry child is no threat to you.

    The same applies to an unborn child siphoning nutrients from a woman's bloodstream. Granted, there will be some cases where a woman's life is genuinely at risk if she continues a pregnancy; in such cases, an abortion of some kind might be permitted to save the woman's life. But in the absence of a credible threat to the mother's life, it would seem hard to justify an abortion as an instance of legitimate self-defense.
    Ignore List (to save time):

    Exarch, Coughdrop addict

  18. #218

    Default Re: Supreme court to overturn Roe vs Wade

    Quote Originally Posted by Prodromos View Post
    The self-defense argument for abortion in the case of rape seems to be a weak one, since a child conceived in rape is no more of a threat to the mother's life than a child conceived in a consensual sexual encounter. Certainly in the case of rape, the child was placed in the woman's body without her consent, but it's hard to see how this gives her a right to kill him.

    Imagine that you live alone in the woods and you're woken up in the middle of the night by the sound of someone rummaging through your kitchen. You come downstairs with a loaded shotgun ready to kill the intruder, only to discover that the person stealing your food is in fact a toddler. Would you say you have a self-defense right to kill the toddler for being on your private property and eating your food without your consent? Probably not, because a hungry child is no threat to you.

    The same applies to an unborn child siphoning nutrients from a woman's bloodstream. Granted, there will be some cases where a woman's life is genuinely at risk if she continues a pregnancy; in such cases, an abortion of some kind might be permitted to save the woman's life. But in the absence of a credible threat to the mother's life, it would seem hard to justify an abortion as an instance of legitimate self-defense.
    The argument is predicated on a right to bodily autonomy, not self-defense. There should be no legal obligation to sustain a non-consensual pregnancy. The ordinary parental responsibilities which stem from willful creation do not apply.



  19. #219
    Genava's Avatar Senator
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Geneva
    Posts
    1,013

    Default Re: Supreme court to overturn Roe vs Wade

    Quote Originally Posted by Cope View Post
    For the same reason that a person is not legally obliged to assist someone in peril (even if it would be the moral thing to do), a woman should not be forced to carry a child they are not responsible for.
    1. Ok for the US but not all legislations are like this (although the topic is specific to the US case, from a general pov, it doesn't hold because a lot of countries have the obligation in their laws)
    2. Furthermore, if there is no obligation to assist a stranger in peril in a context not involving you, it is not necessarily the case if the issue is related to you or if you have another obligation toward the person in peril. Notably a parent is obligated to help his/her children in peril.
    3. Finally, you are not obligated to help someone in peril but do you have the right to terminate the life of the person? I don't think your position is really defensible.
    4. If the fetus is a human being and is considered an individual, killing him for a motive he is not responsible for is hard to justify.
    5. And if responsibility matters that much, so a minor can abort in any case because she is not responsible for?
    LOTR mod for Shogun 2 Total War (Campaign and Battles!)
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bIywmAgUxQU

  20. #220

    Default Re: Supreme court to overturn Roe vs Wade

    Quote Originally Posted by Lord Thesaurian View Post
    Child abuse/neglect resulting in death is a felony. Do you believe abortion should be a felony?
    Nope. It should be fairly apparent why it is not.
    The Armenian Issue
    http://www.twcenter.net/forums/group.php?groupid=1930

    "We're nice mainly because we're rich and comfortable."

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •