Ruth Bader Ginsburg has passed (Replaced by Amy Coney Barrett)(Now Abortion Discussion) (10 Viewers)

That Pew report is full of fascinating facts about the polling on abortion. For your consideration: there is only one religious group that favors making abortion illegal, and no it’s not Catholics.

There is hope for Texan women...

In an interesting turn of events, today the Mexican Supreme Court unanimously declared unconstitutional a law in the State of Coahuila - which happens to border Texas - that penalized abortion, practically making abortion a right to all women in MX.

When Mexico is less conservative than Texas...

AOC was on Anderson Cooper today and she ripped Abbot a new one

I had read this before, but just found it again. This is in response to Farb’s assertion that women have no constitutional right to make their own decisions about their bodies.

Also, there were roughly 355,000 births in TX in 2019. Which means there were between 3500 and 10,000 women who experienced the genetic abnormality that was in my thread above. Just that one genetic abnormality. This new law means these women will no longer have the safer choice to terminate the pregnancy but must take their chances with carrying the pregnancy to term and then watching their baby die within hours. All the while grieving, and not being able to escape this grief. I don’t consider that insignificant.

Also, this may be rarer, but these things also happen. One twin can have a fatal disorder and the other twin can be fine. Modern medicine can now selectively abort the one twin, thus ensuring the other twin will survive. If nothing is done, most often both twins will die. I don’t care how rare this is, if this happens to you or someone you love, and both twins are lost needlessly, you don’t forget that.

These laws are anything but “pro-life”. Because of a fantasy about all these women who are casually having sex and then aborting willy-nilly, people are willing to deprive all women of necessary health care. That’s just a fact.

Sure there may be the occasional irresponsible woman who doesn’t take abortion as anything other than a convenience, but that’s between her and her god. It doesn’t concern anyone else.

MT15 said:

I had read this before, but just found it again. This is in response to Farb’s assertion that women have no constitutional right to make their own decisions about their bodies.

Click to expand...

Note that the above is a Conservative (big C) position. It hinges on the personal and property rights (the personal property being you, yourself) of the individual as being supreme.

cuddlemonkey said:

I am asking you what supports your assertion that a fetus is alive.

Click to expand...

So if there is a question, the natural response is to kill it? To answer your question, my beliefs.

Can I ask when you think the destroying of a human life in the womb should be limited?

The thing I don’t get is this: nobody who is pro-choice wants to force anyone to have an abortion, that would be a violation of a woman’s rights. But the other way around, violate a woman‘s rights by banning abortion? No problem!

bdb13 said:

I view it as akin to the axiom "the government closest to the people serves the people best." In my view it's not the role of others to impose their moral code and supersede the autonomy of.. let's say my wife and I.. to make a decision that's consequential only to the two of us.

Higher brain function and the fetus' ability to sense pain. Prior to that I view the fetus as akin to a brain dead individual in a vegetative state.

Click to expand...

It would effect 3 of yall. Remember, you ending a life and I assume from discussing other topics with you, you and your wife would have a valid reason, but it is not just you two that are effected, there is a 3rd life. There is no moral code put upon you unless you are in favor of murder, then yes, a moral code has been thrust upon you.

So you would support pulling the plug on an individual that is in a vegetative state but there is no doubt that with in 9 months at the most, this brain dead vegetable will be awake and be a fully functioning human with an entire life to live? No, you wouldn't.

SaulGoodmanEsq said:

When Mexico is less conservative than Texas...

Click to expand...

I read on this forum that the Mexicans want to get rid of the statue of Cristopher Columbus. Next they will cancel "La Virgen De Guadalupe", the patron of México and mother of God.

MT15 said:

You took a shot at me, saying I only care about humans who can vote. So I took a shot at you, don’t like it, then stop doing it. You say you don’t mind, but your responses say different.

Now to debunk your strange ideas about who supports a woman’s right to make her own decisions about her own healthcare and her own body. This chart is from the Pew report (2021) that I linked above:

You still haven’t answered my question about why your religious beliefs get to be imposed on everyone and how is that different than Sharia Law?

Click to expand...

Interesting point, but if it makes you feel better, I don't and didn't mean 'you' as in @MT15 only care about votes, I meant your side of the argument. I also think you can figure out who gets ruffled by reading our response..one is a very clever, witty and charming joke, the other is just more of a personal attack.

I was going off of this article I when I did a quick a google search. I think Vox is a lefty a site so that is why I picked it so as not to have to get into a sources debate with those that don't really know how to debate (not you MT- you are good at what you do).

https://www.vox.com/2019/5/20/18629644/abortion-gender-gap-public-opinion

So is US citizenship acquired at conception if the conception occurs inside the US?

It seems unfair to deny zygotes citizenship just because their mother decided to birth them outside the US.

SystemShock said:

There is hope for Texan women...

In an interesting turn of events, today the Mexican Supreme Court unanimously declared unconstitutional a law in the State of Coahuila - which happens to border Texas - that penalized abortion, practically making abortion a right to all women in MX.

Click to expand...

And the church of Satan, they are pro-choice allies.

I do think this law will be challenged in the SCOTUS, they just couldn't take it on now because no one was been effected by this new law. Once someone files a law suit, it will be challenged, then the real fight will begin.

This law will not get by SCOTUS unless they are willing to overturn 50 years of precedent and the basic constitutional rights of women. With this court, stacked by radicals, it’s going to be close.

MT15 said:

This law will not get by SCOTUS unless they are willing to overturn 50 years of precedent and the basic constitutional rights of women. With this court, stacked by radicals, it’s going to be close.

Click to expand...

Yeah, I don't see it holding up once it's challenged. But I do agree it will be close.

Farb said:

It would effect 3 of yall. Remember, you ending a life and I assume from discussing other topics with you, you and your wife would have a valid reason, but it is not just you two that are effected, there is a 3rd life. There is no moral code put upon you unless you are in favor of murder, then yes, a moral code has been thrust upon you.

So you would support pulling the plug on an individual that is in a vegetative state but there is no doubt that with in 9 months at the most, this brain dead vegetable will be awake and be a fully functioning human with an entire life to live? No, you wouldn't.

Click to expand...

This is why this is my least favorite topic to discuss. There's such a large gap in between what we each believe that I don't believe it can be bridged. You believe it's murder absolutely and that's your right and I can't really formulate anything to tell you that you're wrong. I strongly don't believe it's murder if the abortion is performed within a reasonable time frame following conception (reasonable subject to debate of course, but I would define it I think with the parameters from my last post), and while I'm open to hearing what someone has to say and willing to change my mind, I haven't ever heard anything that I found particularly compelling.

I get what you're saying with it affecting three of us.. I just don't see it the same way man. In my view the decision affects two people and also ends the potential life of a fetus that still had a decent chance of ending early anyway due to miscarriage. I don't view an 8-week-old fetus to be the same as my wife and I and I don't have any moral hang ups in my own head on viewing it that way.

I can certainly understand why someone who thinks it's murder believes I should have some hang ups, but my younger sister had a friend from childhood die while giving birth a couple months ago and it only served to reaffirm and strengthen how I feel on the subject.

DaveXA said:

Yeah, I don't see it holding up once it's challenged. But I do agree it will be close.

Click to expand...

It is challenged - but still at the district court. The unusual (private) enforcement mechanism of the law is what complicates the legal challenge and ultimately why the SCOTUS refused to issued an injunction. An injunction only keeps people from doing something while a case is pending, it doesn't invalidate law itself. The Court basically said there was no party to the case that they could enjoin.