• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Apparently, anti-abortion laws do not reduce abortions.

Southern Dad said:
Why? You don't want to make sure the woman has seen what she is about to snuff out. I think she should sign it. And yes, they have clearly shown that they are irresponsible and make bad decisions. That's why they are knocked up.
Click to expand...

You've just dumped in one of the oldest, most ridiculous pro-life arguments ever.

Men who knowingly ejaculate sperm into a woman are the most irresponsible. See how that kind of nonsense works both ways?

This isn't about irresponsibility by women's sexual conduct for pro-life. This is about men's control over women and condemning women for having sex for pleasure...in the same manner as men

And then pro-life try to use legislation to prevent abortion, which amounts to nothing less than using the child as their punishment for having sex for pleasure and bond...JUST THE SAME AS MEN.

They want to force women to be responsible for prenatal care, giving birth, postnatal care...and the cost of raising a child until adulthood.

Now comes the hideous part 3. Most pro-life are in favor of significantly diminishing or removing social services that impact children who can't fend for themselves, nor do they have a political voice.

In other words, "Who the hell do women think they are? They're irresponsible sluts, who think they can get away for having sex for pleasure. I'll teach her a lesson, force her to have the kid, that's learn her." What about the irresponsible man who was having sex for pleasure with her? Who ejaculated sperm in her?
 
Southern Dad said:
That is because what the left characterizes as anti-abortion laws aren't really anti-abortion laws. They are simply common sense things that should be in place. Having a woman see the ultrasound, is that really so bad? Why hide it from her? Requiring the doctor to have admitting privileges at a nearby hospital? That's bad, how?
Click to expand...

Because it is making some women have to drive 150 miles to find a clinic to give them 2 pills for one. Those laws are meant to limit a woman's rights as defined by the Supreme Court. How would you like YOUR rights limited too?

That is the point of HB2, and of Targeted Regulation of Abortion Providers (TRAP) laws in general. Straight-up banning abortion is the dream, obviously, but failing that, if you can just make abortion inconvenient enough, maybe women will decide not to bother. Maybe they’ll think, “Hey, I really wanted an abortion given that I’m out of a job and already have three other kids I can’t afford to feed, but it’s too much trouble to haul 75 miles to the nearest clinic two days in a row, so I guess I’ll just have to spend the next 18 years raising the baby instead.”
Click to expand...

Women in Texas have to drive hundreds of miles to reach an abortion clinic.
 
Removable Mind said:
You've just dumped in one of the oldest, most ridiculous pro-life arguments ever.

Men who knowingly ejaculate sperm into a woman are the most irresponsible. See how that kind of nonsense works both ways?

This isn't about irresponsibility by women's sexual conduct for pro-life. This is about men's control over women and condemning women for having sex for pleasure...in the same manner as men

And then pro-life try to use legislation to prevent abortion, which amounts to nothing less than using the child as their punishment for having sex for pleasure and bond...JUST THE SAME AS MEN.

They want to force women to be responsible for prenatal care, giving birth, postnatal care...and the cost of raising a child until adulthood.

Now comes the hideous part 3. Most pro-life are in favor of significantly diminishing or removing social services that impact children who can't fend for themselves, nor do they have a political voice.

In other words, "Who the hell do women think they are? They're irresponsible sluts, who think they can get away for having sex for pleasure. I'll teach her a lesson, force her to have the kid, that's learn her." What about the irresponsible man who was having sex for pleasure with her? Who ejaculated sperm in her?
Click to expand...

I'm not saying that men who get a girl knocked up aren't irresponsible but they aren't the one going in for the abortion. That's the woman. And I'm all for abortions. I think there needs to be more of them not less.
 
iguanaman said:
Because it is making some women have to drive 150 miles to find a clinic to give them 2 pills for one. Those laws are meant to limit a woman's rights as defined by the Supreme Court. How would you like YOUR rights limited too?
Click to expand...

She's snuffing out a life, what's a 150 miles?
 
iguanaman said:
Then you would see those laws as they are. They are specifically written to infringe on a womens right to an abortion and have no other real purpose.
Click to expand...

Oh, because I don't see it your way, then I must be against abortion? I'm not, I'm all for them.
 
Ntharotep said:
I'm not anti-abortion but Devil's Advocate is my favorite game (it was an Ok movie to).
So.
Anti-Murder laws have not reduced murders.
Anti-Drug laws have not reduced drug use.
Click to expand...

That is correct. The deterrent effect of those laws is minimal as history has shown.
 
Southern Dad said:
I'm not saying that men who get a girl knocked up aren't irresponsible but they aren't the one going in for the abortion. That's the woman. And I'm all for abortions. I think there needs to be more of them not less.
Click to expand...

Your logic here ...isn't working for me, but...how about a court order reversible vasectomy for males (of any age) who irresponsibly knock up girls or women as punishment for being irresponsible? And after the guy proves to the court that he's attended sex ed classes and parenting classes he can be considered for having the vasectomy reversed. That work for ya?

But you really think this is all about women...because they have the uterus. Right? They're really and truly the irresponsible person. Man...I'm really overwhelmed at this kind of belief system.
 
Southern Dad said:
No, there are not many women with unwanted pregnancies who were not irresponsible. Very few abortions are from rape. That's a small percentage and you know it. The majority of abortions are just some woman wanting that life inside of her sucked out because she doesn't want to be a mommy. And I am pro-abortion. I want more abortion mills built, not less. But I don't want them taxpayer funded.
Click to expand...

I never made a comment on how many abortion are from rape. I said *some*, which is true. However, it *is* true that just over half of abortions were on women who were using contraception.

• Fifty-one percent of abortion patients had used a contraceptive method in the month they got pregnant, most commonly condoms (27%) or a hormonal method (17%).[6]

6. Jones RK, Frohwirth L and Moore AM, More than poverty: disruptive events among women having abortions in the USA, Journal of Family Planning and Reproductive Health Care, 2012, 39(1):36–43.
Click to expand...

https://www.guttmacher.org/fact-sheet/induced-abortion-united-states


I'm not sure I believe you are "pro-abortion" (I am pro-CHOICE), but in the USA, "non elective" abortions are not paid for with federal funds.
 
Southern Dad said:
Why? You don't want to make sure the woman has seen what she is about to snuff out. I think she should sign it. And yes, they have clearly shown that they are irresponsible and make bad decisions. That's why they are knocked up.
Click to expand...

Oh, I forget to previously ask...who are what has clearly shown that women who have sex for pleasure - the same as men - are irresponsible and make bad decisions - anymore than the men that they have sex with?

And god forbid the ****ing birth control fails...women are still slut-shamed by people who believe as you do.

What is your source for such information?

But how do these irresponsible women in the US impact your life personally with their "irresponsible sexual conduct" which a unexpected or unwanted pregnancy occurs? Well, the ones who get knocked up and keep the kid. They get into your tax pocket or something like that? Is this what this is about?
 
Scrabaholic said:
They shouldn't be mandated by govt. If a woman wants to see the u/s, she should be able to but she should not be forced to see it.

Admitting privileges are not needed. If a woman has complications from the abortion, she's going to go to the ER and get treated there. The doctor who did the abortion having admitting privileges is not going to make a difference in the care she receives.

Besides, there are too many hospitals that won't give admitting privileges to doctors who do abortion. Do you think they should be mandated by force of law to give them?
Click to expand...

For that matter, why should the woman go through an extra unneeded medical procedure?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom