Ohio passes 'heartbeat' abortion bill

[ccj823]

the Christian Taliban is really intent on installing Christian Shariah Law in the U.S. and we can't let that happen

Not that I agree with trump here, or Republicans, but most women are prolife. It's 50-40 with 10 undecided right now. Don't pretend this is about women's rights, because it's not. It's a moral argument over when a life is a life.

you have a source for that? as of 2015 is was 54% of women were pro-choice (gallup) so it would be strange that it dropped 15% in a year.

[Sargerasraider]

We lived through this shit as a country and decided religion wasn't enough of an excuse when our wives / sisters / daughters / mothers / cousins / neices were being butchered by the thousands. Why let religious nutjobs turn back the clock now?

Do you think about the hyperbole you post, or does it just kind of fall out?

Hypothetically, let's say Roe v. Wade was reversed. What would happen? Do you even know?

[Bullettime]

Do you think about the hyperbole you post, or does it just kind of fall out?

Except this was the case. Women were, are, and will still get an abortion regardless of the law. It's a matter of if the government wants to keep trying to push for draconian religious policies or allow it while regulating it to stop more women from dying or being permanently maimed in getting one anyways.

Many states already disallow third trimester abortions and such. A measure like this, being most women don't even know they're pregnant or are just finding out at 6 weeks, will just push more women to going back to back alley doctors. It will do nothing towards actually stopping abortion.

[Edge-]

And you're such a good progressive person who loves to see unborn children murdered.


*facepalm*

There is no such thing as an unborn child. By any definition of the word one must be born to be a child, so you cannot call a fetus a "child" unless you are intentionally trying to be incorrect.

[Espe]

Not that I agree with trump here, or Republicans

Yeah, sure buddy
Pro-choice outpolls pro-life

According to a new Gallup poll, 50 percent of Americans now call themselves pro-choice, including 54 percent of women and 46 percent of men. Only 44 percent of respondents labeled themselves pro-life, the lowest response in more than five years.

But there's no reason to fall back on argumentum ad populum even if my side has the clear majority.

Again, we've already been there as a country and decided that causing mass harm to young girls and women in the name of religion is completely unacceptable.

[God Save The King]

Not that I agree with trump here, or Republicans, but most women are prolife. It's 50-40 with 10 undecided right now. Don't pretend this is about women's rights, because it's not. It's a moral argument over when a life is a life.

50% Pro Choice vs 44% Pro Life



Full List of all Gallup Polls On Abortion Matters

You can see it varies a bit, but if you average the last 20 years of polls you get around 49-45

[Sargerasraider]

Except this was the case. Women were, are, and will still get an abortion regardless of the law. It's a matter of if the government wants to keep trying to push for draconian religious policies or allow it while regulating it to stop more women from dying or being permanently maimed in getting one anyways.

Many states already disallow third trimester abortions and such. A measure like this, being most women don't even know they're pregnant or are just finding out at 6 weeks, will just push more women to going back to back alley doctors. It will do nothing towards actually stopping abortion.

You don't see hyperbole in posting that women were "butchered by the thousands" in talking about a state law that, even if passed, would only result in women driving to Indiana or Pennsylvania?

[God Save The King]

Yeah, sure buddy
Pro-choice outpolls pro-life

But there's no reason to fall back on argumentum ad populum even if my side has the clear majority.

Again, we've already been there as a country and decided that causing mass harm to young girls and women in the name of religion is completely unacceptable.

why do you do this to me. beat me by 1 minute you jerk

Also it's important to note that this considers personal choice. Like, there are plenty of women I know who are strongly pro-life for themselves but are pro-choice politically. (anecdotal, yes).

In my previous post you can see a very comprehensive set of polling done by Gallup, in which only around 15% of the country believes that abortions should be banned.

[Espe]

Do you think about the hyperbole you post, or does it just kind of fall out?

Talking to yourself in the mirror again, champ?

There's no need to attack me just because you know I'm right.

- - - Updated - - -

why do you do this to me. beat me by 1 minute you jerk

Looks like we both got beat by Kangodo lol

- - - Updated - - -

a state law that, even if passed, would only result in women driving to Indiana or Pennsylvania?

Oh so only rich people should be allowed access to needed medical care? Jesus christ that's dark.

And yeah, young girls and women were butchered by the thousands before Roe V. Wade, hence Roe V. fucking Wade.

[Bullettime]

You don't see hyperbole in posting that women were "butchered by the thousands" in talking about a state law that, even if passed, would only result in women driving to Indiana or Pennsylvania?

The concern is that Ohio Republicans are effectively using this to set a national precedent.

The law they passed is already unconstitutional, or teetering on it. What they're doing is passing an unconstitutional law then hoping Trump can ram through a Supreme Court justice to overturn standing precedent before the current Supreme Court can hear the Ohio case and try strike it down. They could then use that ruling to set new national precedent.

And yes, they were. That was one of the major points of Roe V. Wade.

[Espe]

The concern is that Ohio Republicans are effectively using this to set a national precedent.

The law they passed is already unconstitutional. What they're doing is passing an unconstitutional law then hoping Trump can ram through a Supreme Court justice to overturn standing precedent before the current Supreme Court can hear the Ohio case and try strike it down. They could then use that ruling to set new precedent.

And yes, they were. That was one of the major points of Roe V Wade.

They did the same thing when they overturned 80+ years of precedent on gun control and expanded the definition of "well-regulated militia" to encompass even solo right-wing lunatics with no training who don't feel safe in Wal-mart without an AR-15 strapped to them. Same court who brought us "corporations are people too!" Things can get fucked up fast.

[Sargerasraider]

The concern is that Ohio Republicans are effectively using this to set a national precedent.

The law they passed is already unconstitutional, or teetering on it. What they're doing is passing an unconstitutional law then hoping Trump can ram through a Supreme Court justice to overturn standing precedent before the current Supreme Court can hear the Ohio case and try strike it down. They could then use that ruling to set new national precedent.

And yes, they were. That was one of the major points of Roe V. Wade.

In the end, the ideas and reasoning of both sides are so far apart, I don't know why I bother getting into the discussion.

It comes down to a discussion of the meaning of personhood, and as that is not going to be defined by the minds of mmo-champ, we'll remain with half the people worried about restricting individual rights and half the people concerned about possibly abetting murder.

Talking to yourself in the mirror again, champ?

There's no need to attack me just because you know I'm right.

I know you take delight in treading that line of being annoying enough to try to provoke an angry response on one hand, but not get banned on the other. It's like being in middle school again.

[Mizix]

This is why people need to understand their bodies, because the luteal phase rarely if ever changes for the woman. If they understand their bodies, they'd know that the first phase is what can vary. Then they get discharge, their body is becoming fertile, and then they ovulate and start the luteal phase. For my wife, it's always 14 days. They need to teach people fertility awareness, how to recognize these things, and then a lot of progress can be made, because for you to say that it's common to not know you're pregnant, is ridiculous. That needs to change.

God, I hope people like you reincarnate in a woman's body in your next life. People really have to experience some things before pontificate about them. Women cycles can change for any number of reasons, you can have 2-3 months of incredibly regular cycles and then it throws off for no particular reason. All of it, not only the first phase. "Rarely if ever changes" is a statement that only a man or a woman that for some reason is blessed with the most regular period in the history of mankind, would make. Some months you don't even ovulate, because reasons. Some months ovulation is accompanied by light spotting and it hurts like PMS. Some months ovulation happens and you don't even realize because that month discharge has changed! It's not always the same and it's not always easy to understand in what phase, exactly, you are in. Sure, there is a general rule and after so many years most women will have a general idea of how their period works, but it's always subject to change.

Fertility awareness is a thing for women trying to conceive, everyone else does not obsess over their cycle. It can be useful though and I don't oppose more education for young women in that regard. However, your wife being super regular is not an argument to defend the six weeks ban: every woman's body is different. A 12 weeks ban would made much more sense. It is strict enough while being reasonable, if the intention is to let a choice. If the intention was to outright ban abortions, unless rare exceptions, then six weeks is the way cowards go.

[GennGreymane]

Oh look, more stupid stuff. Also why heart beat? Is it because the ancient Egyptians thought the heart meant more than pumping blood? Were these lawmakers just reading too many romance novels?

[ElDoorO]

First of all you can calm down, there's no need to get so upset.

Republicans have made it abundantly clear they don't see women as anything other than cattle that have to be told what they can and can't do with their own bodies. You're obvious not a doctor and even if you were you wouldn't be a doctor to every woman in the US. I for one think women are smart and capable enough to decide what medical procedures they need and don't need. Republicans, obviously, feel much differently about the issue and have shown time and time again they are willing to cause mass harm to US citizens in the name of religion or profit.

Sorry if that bothers you champ, thems just the facts of the situation, as they say.

Heh, I like how you're actually upset but won't admit it and instead are like "nuh uh! You are!".

I suppose your conversation won't get further than hyperbole. That's unfortunate. We're done here until you're prepare yourself to have a stronger stance.

- - - Updated - - -

That is exactly how it works, just like if a woman wishes to have a child, she can find a willing donor - forcing a man to hand over his sperm would be just a heinous as forcing a woman to carry an unwanted pregnancy to term

Assuming you're fantasy could be done, the women should be forced to pay child support, yes?

[RickJamesLich]

And now for some words from the founder of Planned Parenthood:

[Masark]

And now for some words from the founder of Planned Parenthood:

Your quote is missing most of the words.

"We do not want word to go out that we want to exterminate the Negro population, and the minister is the man who can straighten out that idea if it ever occurs to any of their more rebellious members."

Translation : People claiming as such are distributing falsehoods and we should counter them.

I believe "the minister" she is referring to is Martin Luther King Jr.

[GasaiYuno951]

I don't believe any federal funding used by Planned Parenthood is used for abortions anyways, for example. Last I remember reading, it was specifically not allowed to be used for that, only for other health care and preventative care/education purposes.

And I hope you're against the death penalty as well, just to be consistent.

i dont like abortions as the child who is losing their life didn't make that choice
while the criminal who did make said choice should be put to death when warranted

[Elegiac]

i dont like abortions

Then don't have one.

[Nihilist74]

The hypocrisy of it is that these people don't give a crap about the baby. They just want to control people. In this case women.