this is not progress...once again, since 1975, the Gallup poll has shown virtually every year that over 80% of Americans believe that abortion needs to be kept legal for some cases...appreciation of that reality is where the true progress needs to begin...(hint:...Contraception...Sex/Sexuality Education...Investments in programs to encourage women to carry to term...).
Women are not "Insentient Baby Making Machines" who must carry a pregnancy to term no mater how they were impregnated...sadly, our current Supreme Court doesn't understand this.
(no message)
(no message)
People who want abortion on demand will think twice before moving to Texas.
(no message)
(no message)
want to live their lives with that issue...furthermore, previous Supreme Courts have recognized that desire and built precedent for Roe v. Wade.
I'm asking you and everyone else...do you believe that every pregnant woman must carry to term regardless of how she became pregnant?
(no message)
(no message)
laws throughout the U.S...Roe v. Wade brought stability...now we've lost it...
Let's see the lawyers on this board try to defend your sentiment there Ty.
(no message)
(no message)
America, land of men!
necessary to amend the constitution.
politicized...and was so long before Roe v. Wade, which was decided because of all that rancor...as I said...we're right back where we started from.
Link: https://www.pewresearch.org/politics/2019/08/29/u-s-public-continues-to-favor-legal-abortion-oppose-overturning-roe-v-wade/
If this is matter is that important to you than you can move to a state that is in line with your values, or elect people where you live that will enact state laws to your liking.
What is your opinion on that?...it's essential to the debate.
As for living in a state that 'suits one's values'...imagine a young female college graduate from a state that legalizes abortion...say it's a Med School and she's dependent on "The Match" to see where she'll serve her Residency...but her top choice is a hospital in a state that does not allow abortion...that is a clear infringement on her freedom to pursue her career. I could cite numerous similar examples of how this ruling today will create enormous chaos...we've seen this before, which is why Roe v. Wade came to be in the first place.
at any time, for any reason? or, would you allow a state to put some limits in place?
This is more essential to the debate.
resources to make them?
You asked: "How would you make fair determinations in each of those cases...given you have limited time and resources to make them?"
I'm not sure what you mean. Each legislature meets to make rules for exactly these types of things, for the people in their respective state. That's why we have state elections, for the people to decide who they want to make these decisions. Some states have referendums as well. The courts then apply those laws in specific cases. I assume you know this is how things work, so I'm not sure why you are asking.
Now answer my question, please.
by a "Consensual Pregnancy" being the subject of an abortion.
No reason to talk about special cases (e.g., rape). You are an absolutist on this issue. I actually thought you may be willing to compromise partially, given that you pretend to be Catholic. But, you think every fetus has no right to live whatsoever. It all depends on whether the mother changes her mind after getting pregnant.
Where do you draw the line? The birth canal? You can kill the fetus while even a part of it is still located in the birth canal?
Or, cutting the umbilical cord? Can you kill a born baby still attached to the mother by the umbilical cord? Or later?
I assume you draw the line somewhere, but maybe you don't? I look forward to your answer.
(no message)
(no message)
We have different murder statutes in every state. We have different assault, battery, burglary, fraud, etc., statutes in every state.
This is because we have different legislatures in every state.
Would you abolish these differences because humans are the same in every state, and we shouldn't have any differences from state to state because "humans are the same everywhere"?
pregnancy to term?
Why not make the argument for the majority of cases?
Every time you mention rape, you weaken your position, because everyone can see that you don't feel strongly about the substantial majority of abortions which result from consensual sex. You don't know how to defend those. So, you seek to distract from that.
a choice for such situations?..this is essentially the "Cornerstone" case of why women need to have control over their reproductive rights...if you can't agree on this point, there's no reason t go further.
We can certainly continue to work on this issue, but not if you deny that rare, yet critical, circumstance...which again, applies to women in all 50 states.
What's your position on rape and abortion?
You said: "...could it be that you agree abortion should be a choice for such situations?"
No, I do not. My position has always been clear on this.
It is always illicit to intentionally act to cause the death of an innocent person, as the primary goal of that act.
Innocent humans should be protected from being murdered regardless of how they are created, or where they find themselves located.
You said, "..this is essentially the "Cornerstone" case of why women need to have control over their reproductive rights...if you can't agree on this point, there's no reason t go further."
Tell you what: Let's proceed on the basis that we agree that rape or incest victims should be allowed access to abortion. We can discuss special cases later, after we resolve the majority of abortions. What is your argument to keep states from placing reasonable restrictions on killing the unborn in the majority of pregnancies?
in every state of the Union...correct?...I just want to know that the rug won't be pulled out as we move forward.
I was clear, and you misstated my position. I absolutely disagree that rape or incest are justifications for the murder of an innocent human being. There is no justification for intentionally engaging in an act of killing an innocent human being, where the primary goal of the act is to kill that innocent human being.
I was clear on that.
I then said that for the sake of this discussion, we should assume the opposite of that. Assume that the GOP is willing to accept that abortion is a right in cases of rape and incest in, say, California, but that in other cases, they want parental notice, or to restrict abortion after viability in all cases, or to make abortions a procedure to be carried out only in a certain level of medical facility, or whatever. Is there any restriction you would accept?...any restriction? After all, if you are not willing to grant any restrictions on the majority of abortions, then your emphasis on these special cases is just a debating tactic, and you actually just like all abortions, not the special case abortions. I will ask again the question you dodged: Are there any restrictions that you would accept on non-rape, non-incest abortion? Where would you draw the line? When can a baby not be killed? partial birth? umbilical cord cut?
epitomes of "Unwanted"...in point of fact they are nothing less than violent attacks on vulnerable innocent women...with monumental consequences for their lives...their physical health...mental health....and their freedom to conduct those lives according to their own wishes.
Your position totally ignores these violent attacks and the lifelong damage they impart on women...this is why less than 20% of the country sides with you...it hasn't changed for decades and IMO it never will...as this chart suggests...such pregnancies are not "Gifts from God"...they are the physical results of attacks against those women's will...they should not have to bear them if they don't want to...is that unreasonable?
(no message)
no matter HOW she is impregnated?"...that was my attempt to get a response for the "Worst Case" scenario..."Rape/Incest"...you then jumped in and pivoted to the other end of the spectrum...so, frankly it is you who won't respond to the question I posed first...
You've already stated that you have ZERO empathy or concern for the woman's suffering...even in cases where the woman is TOTALLY INNOCENT...yet you insist that she bears the entire burden such criminal acts create...as was shown in the Supreme Court dissent...there is no "Balance" in your "Justice"...
Fortunately, over 80% of American adults don't agree with you, and though this will take much longer than it should, a better solution to the Abortion issue will come.
Watch the linked video to get a glimpse...perhaps for the first time, of what 'Reality' in this debate looks like...focus on Anna Navarro's words.
Link: https://www.cnn.com/videos/politics/2022/06/24/ana-navarro-alice-stewart-scotus-abortion-reaction-nr-vpx.cnn
By the way, I have tremendous empathy for those who find themselves with a crisis pregnancy. How dare you say that I said I didn't.
Mothers with a crisis pregnancy need help, and I do help them. I support a local home for them. I would hope every prolifer does the same. You owe me an apology for lying about me in that regard. I never said that.
I can tell you're never going to say "Uncle" on that score ;-)...
I get that you consider your support for a crisis pregnancy center sufficient empathy, but the stakes for many women are much higher than what such programs can address, which is why I asked you to view the video...did you?
I believe that the reason over 80% of American adults do not agree that abortion should be illegal in ALL CASES, is because of their awareness of the undue burden women would suffer from rape and incest...which means that no state should make abortion completely illegal...once that condition is agreed upon, then discussions can be had on what to do about the less clear reasons for women seeking abortion...but again..."Step 1" (Abortion for Rape/Incest) is a "Sine Qua Non" condition.
It's going to take more time than it should, but IMO the 'demand' can't be denied...it sure would help if you and others in the <20% cohort would join in earnest to aggressively push for 1) Contraception...2) Better Sex/Sexuality training...not just for kids, and 3) much more investment in programs that encourage women with Unwanted Pregnancies to carry them to term...and that includes your Crisis Pregnancy Centers.
On a related note...what is your position regarding "Contraception"?
(no message)
(no message)
(no message)
(no message)
(no message)