American Politics 3.0 - Back to Brunch

[wittynickname]

Originally Posted by Jason14h

Yes - guess what people sleep with multiple partners and sometimes there are “surprises” at birth.

You don’t think a husband seeing a different race baby may say “get rid of this immediately” right after birth ….

There are also extreme family pressure where a young women after birth could
Make a decision based on immediate pressure

You dont see any chance that a young women who has a family against mixed race babies and has a mixed race child getting pressured by the family or panicking right after birth to “abort”

We literally have just seen religious nuts fight to change Roe, and you don’t think religious racists people would ever “abort” a newborn based on race ….

You do realize the different between aborting a fetus and murdering an actual living, breathing baby, right?

Your examples are murdering a baby. There is not a single pro-choice person suggesting that a mother can "abort" a baby once it's out of the womb.

And by the way: men kill their pregnant partners with surprising regularity. Taking away a woman's right to choose will only make that happen more often.

[afc wimbledon]

Originally Posted by Jason14h

Yes - guess what people sleep with multiple partners and sometimes there are “surprises” at birth.

You don’t think a husband seeing a different race baby may say “get rid of this immediately” right after birth ….

There are also extreme family pressure where a young women after birth could
Make a decision based on immediate pressure

You dont see any chance that a young women who has a family against mixed race babies and has a mixed race child getting pressured by the family or panicking right after birth to “abort”

We literally have just seen religious nuts fight to change Roe, and you don’t think religious racists people would ever “abort” a newborn based on race ….

Yes I'm sure the 3 or 4 medical staff are fine with being co conspiritors to murder for the 200 bucks a day they get, I mean its a complete stranger, why wouldnt they throw in?

On a real note the infanticide of actually born female babies who used to be abandoned in garbage cans in the park seems to have dropped off to nil since you can get a gender test in Blaine and a quick abortion in Vancouver, we may view the cultural pressures as abhorent but thousands of girls were murdered in their first days, these days they are mostly terminated in the first trimester, that is a positive I think

[Jason14h]

Originally Posted by wittynickname

You do realize the different between aborting a fetus and murdering an actual living, breathing baby, right?

Your examples are murdering a baby. There is not a single pro-choice person suggesting that a mother can "abort" a baby once it's out of the womb.

And by the way: men kill their pregnant partners with surprising regularity. Taking away a woman's right to choose will only make that happen more often.

I know actually reading the thread vs picking a single post would make contributing to the actual discussion more hard then just posting outrage - But this was the post a responded too

Originally Posted by fleury View Post
if a fetus was 9 months old and someone hypothetically said they didn’t want it anymore, would that be right?

Why the #### would a woman go through 9 months of pregnancy and THEN decide "Well, that was fun, but I'm out. Out!" The thing about hypotheticals is that they should have at least a smidgen of plausibility.

"What if I impregnated an alien and she laid an egg? IS THE 'DENNY'S SCRAMBLER' MURDER?!?!"

I am just providing example that are 100% plausible why a women after 9 months would say ""Well, that was fun, but I'm out. Out!"

No where did I ever suggest they should be allowed too.

Of course they shouldn't. And that should have been the simple reply to Fleury's question. Not "It would never happen" - Because that is completely incorrect

[Jason14h]

Originally Posted by PepsiFree

Well they’d probably just give the baby up for adoption but sure man, I’m sure people are out there clubbing newborn mixed-race babies.

I too think “they care about a fetus more than a person” but no, I don’t actually think the same people fighting to end abortions actually turn pro-infanticide when the baby comes out mixed-race.

And it kind of presents the question of what the #### you’re talking about considering that has literally nothing to do with the right to abortions. You can’t have an abortion after birth, because there’s nothing to abort.

Pepsi you literally thanked the post I responded too:

Originally Posted by jammies

Why the #### would a woman go through 9 months of pregnancy and THEN decide "Well, that was fun, but I'm out. Out!" The thing about hypotheticals is that they should have at least a smidgen of plausibility.

"What if I impregnated an alien and she laid an egg? IS THE 'DENNY'S SCRAMBLER' MURDER?!?!"

I am just providing use cases where a women may decide to try and 'abort' a newborn and reasons they don't want them.

Every use case I provided not only has a, and I quote "Smidgen of Plausibility" - But are cases where infants have actually been murdered in the past.

Race, Physical and Mental Deformation, and Sex are all REAL reason women/families decide to murder newborn wordwide.

I am just providing the use cases that would occur in response to a dramatic post YOU thanked suggesting NOwomen would ever decide after birth they didn't want to baby. Nothing more, nothing less. It actually goes back to

Fleury's post right before

if a fetus was 9 months old and someone hypothetically said they didn’t want it anymore, would that be right?

The obvious answer is NO!!

Not "It would never happen"

[Jason14h]

Double Post

[Fuzz]

But killing a new born isn't abortion, it's murder. You can tell because of the "born" part. And who is going to perform this murder? Your scenario makes no sense. Jammies was referring to carrying the fetus for 9 months but before it is born. Let's call it 8.99999 months, for clarity.

[Scroopy Noopers]

Originally Posted by Jason14h

Yes - guess what people sleep with multiple partners and sometimes there are “surprises” at birth.

You don’t think a husband seeing a different race baby may say “get rid of this immediately” right after birth ….

There are also extreme family pressure where a young women after birth could
Make a decision based on immediate pressure

You dont see any chance that a young women who has a family against mixed race babies and has a mixed race child getting pressured by the family or panicking right after birth to “abort”

We literally have just seen religious nuts fight to change Roe, and you don’t think religious racists people would ever “abort” a newborn based on race ….

This isn’t the movies…

[nfotiu]

The problem with creating language requiring medical necessity for late term abortions is that you end up with laws like we used to have in Virginia that required a panel of 3 doctors to determine if it was medically necessary.

A lot of the instances where this would happen are emergencies, and it risks lives to have to take the time to assemble a panel, when Doctors should be trusted to make these calls with their patients.

Democrats have a hard time articulating this point, since it gets the republicans an out of context soundbite that they can run 100 times a day in commercials saying the Democrat wants to kill infants.

[PepsiFree]

Originally Posted by Jason14h

Pepsi you literally thanked the post I responded too:



I am just providing use cases where a women may decide to try and 'abort' a newborn and reasons they don't want them.

Every use case I provided not only has a, and I quote "Smidgen of Plausibility" - But are cases where infants have actually been murdered in the past.

Race, Physical and Mental Deformation, and Sex are all REAL reason women/families decide to murder newborn wordwide.

I am just providing the use cases that would occur in response to a dramatic post YOU thanked suggesting NOwomen would ever decide after birth they didn't want to baby. Nothing more, nothing less. It actually goes back to

Fleury's post right before



The obvious answer is NO!!

Not "It would never happen"

You understand we’re talking about the United States in the year of 2022, right?

And we’re also talking about abortion? Not baby murdering? Like, your whole premise makes zero sense if it’s predicated on what happens AFTER birth? Fleury’s post clearly says “fetus,” you know?

Again, we’re talking about abortion. Not a new definition of “aborting” a newborn. You abort a pregnancy, not a fetus/newborn/whatever.

It’s great if you want to talk about infanticide (I guess?) but that’s not what we’re talking about and not what either of the posts you mentioned were referring to. Fetus in the womb, pre-birth, abortion, etc.

It just made zero sense.

[CliffFletcher]

It’s weird that suggestions the stage of pregnancy should be taken into account when crafting abortion policy is being painted as some kind of misogynist, conservative agenda when it’s an opinion shared by the great majority of American women.

68 per cent of American women say abortion should be legal in some cases and illegal in others (21 per cent believe it should be legal in all cases and 9 per cent that it should be illegal in all cases). Of those, only 15 per cent say term should have no bearing on legality.

https://www.pewresearch.org/religion...on-views_0_10/

[Monahammer]

Originally Posted by fleury

And that’s a totally fair and a good stat. What I would like to know is where it’s fair to have the lines drawn? There are so many good arguments for a variety of things.

I find this super annoying, as you're pretending to present as a semi rational anti-abortion stance but you clearly aren't given your last post and your general tone. If there are so many good arguments for a variety of things (what vague bull####) then please elucidate us to those good arguments.
For example:

Originally Posted by fleury

Personally, I see moreso the line being drawn at a beating heart so 6.5 months seems crazy late. I don’t know the answer though.

You've obviously had enough experience and reading here to create your own personal view, even though seconds later you seem to indicate you don't in fact know the right answer. So what informs your opinion that a beating heart = life?

[Monahammer]

Originally Posted by CliffFletcher

It’s weird that suggestions the stage of pregnancy should be taken into account when crafting abortion policy is being painted as some kind of misogynist, conservative agenda when it’s an opinion shared by the great majority of American women.

68 per cent of American women say abortion should be legal in some cases and illegal in others (21 per cent believe it should be legal in all cases and 9 per cent that it should be illegal in all cases). Of those, only 15 per cent say term should have no bearing on legality.

https://www.pewresearch.org/religion...on-views_0_10/

Reading your posts often reminds me that people can comprehend conversations selectively. It is an effective tool for guiding debates in nefarious ways.

[nfotiu]

Originally Posted by CliffFletcher

It’s weird that suggestions the stage of pregnancy should be taken into account when crafting abortion policy is being painted as some kind of misogynist, conservative agenda when it’s an opinion shared by the great majority of American women.

68 per cent of American women say abortion should be legal in some cases and illegal in others (21 per cent believe it should be legal in all cases and 9 per cent that it should be illegal in all cases). Of those, only 15 per cent say term should have no bearing on legality.

https://www.pewresearch.org/religion...on-views_0_10/

It is probably worth distinguishing what is the right solution and what is a politically tenable solution.

It's pretty gross that public opinion should decide what medical decisions a woman can make with her health care provider, but I guess we're in a democracy, so here we are. It really should be a constitutionally protected right and not something political.

Now in absence of the protection of RvW, it is left to legislators in the US. In all but the bluest states, it seems that no restriction access to abortions is a losing political effort. Pragmatically, it is probably time to accept that some kind of limit of 15-22 weeks with medical exceptions is significantly better than having it banned completely, even though there are plenty of problems with that approach.

[Izzle]

This hearing is ####ing WILD!

[CaptainCrunch]

Originally Posted by Izzle

This hearing is ####ing WILD!

I was going to use some different terms, like unhinged, insane and crazy. Including a physical altercation in the presidential limo when they wouldn't take Trump to the capital.

[Wormius]

Originally Posted by CliffFletcher

It’s weird that suggestions the stage of pregnancy should be taken into account when crafting abortion policy is being painted as some kind of misogynist, conservative agenda when it’s an opinion shared by the great majority of American women.

68 per cent of American women say abortion should be legal in some cases and illegal in others (21 per cent believe it should be legal in all cases and 9 per cent that it should be illegal in all cases). Of those, only 15 per cent say term should have no bearing on legality.

https://www.pewresearch.org/religion...on-views_0_10/

Does it matter? A woman also shouldn’t be dictating what should be appropriate or legal for another in this kind of personal situation. Why is it relevant?

[PeteMoss]

Originally Posted by CaptainCrunch

I was going to use some different terms, like unhinged, insane and crazy. Including a physical altercation in the presidential limo when they wouldn't take Trump to the capital.

Yes - I mean I'm sure nothing will happen because its the US. But my god.

[GirlySports]

so it this going to sink him?

[Locke]

Originally Posted by Izzle

This hearing is ####ing WILD!

Link?

[PeteMoss]

Originally Posted by Locke

Link?

Any US news website will have it. NYtimes.com, CNN.com

On recess now though.