- Joined
- Nov 10, 2016
- Messages
- 14,607
- Reaction score
- 9,303
- Gender
- Undisclosed
- Political Leaning
- Undisclosed
I look at the posts about the dems and Ginsburg being responsible for abortions. Do you actually think that there were no abortions before Roe, or that there were fewer abortions, then you do not know history. There have been abortions since forever and the number will never really be known as poor families and the rich as well did not tell people as it violated the laws in every state in the union. The only real thing that Roe did was make it safer for women to get one as they could go to a real doctor and have it done. Just so you know I am a Catholic and against abortion as that is what my religion says I must be. Should my or your beliefs be the ones that run this country and all of the women. And do you think that outlawing abortions again will stop them any more than it did before Roe? And now I hear that the religious right wing want to once again outlaw contraceptives. Won't that help the situation?
And now I hear that the religious right wing want to once again outlaw contraceptives.
That is a pipe dream, not a solution, as there will alsways be those who do not want to carry a child.The true solution is to keep abortions legal but make birth control accessible and child care accessible for those in need so that abortions are unnecessary unless the woman or unborn has a medical condition that puts their life or long term health in grave danger.
It would greatly reduce the number of women who would seek one. That is like saying we shouldn't have seatbelts because they do not eliminate traffic accident deaths.That is a pipe dream, not a solution, as there will alsways be those who do not want to carry a child.
That is a pipe dream, not a solution, as there will alsways be those who do not want to carry a child.
And now I hear that the religious right wing want to once again outlaw contraceptives. ?
It would greatly reduce the number of women who would seek one. That is like saying we shouldn't have seatbelts because they do not eliminate traffic accident deaths.
I look at the posts about the dems and Ginsburg being responsible for abortions. Do you actually think that there were no abortions before Roe, or that there were fewer abortions, then you do not know history. There have been abortions since forever and the number will never really be known as poor families and the rich as well did not tell people as it violated the laws in every state in the union. The only real thing that Roe did was make it safer for women to get one as they could go to a real doctor and have it done. Just so you know I am a Catholic and against abortion as that is what my religion says I must be. Should my or your beliefs be the ones that run this country and all of the women. And do you think that outlawing abortions again will stop them any more than it did before Roe? And now I hear that the religious right wing want to once again outlaw contraceptives. Won't that help the situation?
1. That is your belief.It would greatly reduce the number of women who would seek one.
iLOLThat is like saying we shouldn't have seatbelts because they do not eliminate traffic accident deaths.
Yes. That is what you believe even though birthcontrol is readily available to those who seek it in this country.Making Birth control accessible and reliable to women who do not wish to gestate a pregnancy reduces greatly
the number of unwanted pregnancies.
1. That is your belief.
2. Nor is a reduction the end goal of those who oppose taking of innocent life in this regard. So again, not a solution.
There will always be those who do not want to carry a child.
iLOL
No it isn't.
We shouldn't have seat-belts becasue that is a restriction on freedom.
The insurance industry pushed for them so as to reduce their payouts.
==============================================
Yes. That is what you believe even though birthcontrol is readily available to those who seek it in this country.
A reduction in numbers is not the goal of the other side. Speaking to the otherside's argument with an argument of reduction has no relevance.
It is an innocent life to them that is worthy of preserving and therefore they want to make the killing of that life an illegal act.
1. That is your belief.
2. Nor is a reduction the end goal of those who oppose taking of innocent life in this regard. So again, not a solution.
There will always be those who do not want to carry a child.
iLOL
No it isn't.
We shouldn't have seat-belts becasue that is a restriction on freedom.
The insurance industry pushed for them so as to reduce their payouts.
==============================================
Yes. That is what you believe even though birthcontrol is readily available to those who seek it in this country.
A reduction in numbers is not the goal of the other side. Speaking to the otherside's argument with an argument of reduction has no relevance.
It is an innocent life to them that is worthy of preserving and therefore they want to make the killing of that life an illegal act.
[
Interesting. You quote me twice, do not bother to edit out that which did not pertain to you, and still failed to respond in that post even though you had time to edit it. But instead, I believe, made a separate post two minutes later to respond. New forum woes have you?minnie616 said:[Nothing]
iLOL That is your prerogative.minnie616 said:I disagree.
Yes. Laws do stop those who are not lawless from breaking the law * and does indeed lay out punishment for those who break it. That is how it functions.minnie616 said:Laws do stop people from breaking the law they just punish the people who break them.
iLOL Hilarious.minnie616 said:When Birth control is available at no cost to a woman abortion rates fall greatly.
Colorado abortion rates keep declining. Free IUDs and easier access to the pill are the reason.Health officials say Colorado has made huge progress in access to birth control in recent years.
I disagree. Laws do stop people from breaking the law they just punish the people who break them.
Interesting. You quote me twice, do not bother to edit out that which did not pertain to you, and still failed to respond in that post even though you had time to edit it. But instead, I believe, made a separate post two minutes later to respond. New forum woes have you?
*I am pretty sure that is not what you meant though, so the following is my response to what I believe you meant.
Yes. Laws do not stop the lawless. But your commentary is irrelevant to what I stated. It was really like saying we shouldn't have laws becasue some people are going to break them anyways, which is an absurd proposition from the start.
Regardless, if folks are going to break them, you hold them accountable under the law for doing so, which is exactly what would be done if the opposing side got their way.
iLOL Hilarious.
1. That is not "proof".
2. That is not a study (not that a single study could prove anything).
3. A 10% drop is not "greatly". And a 10% drop shows it is not a solution. Not to mention you also have to then contend with the portion of that 10% which are from the morning after pill. (Which would also likely be outlawed if those on the other side of the coin have their way.)
It is simply not a solution whether you disagree or not.
The bottom line is that this is just one of those issues with no real solution between the opposing sides.
I look at the posts about the dems and Ginsburg being responsible for abortions. Do you actually think that there were no abortions before Roe, or that there were fewer abortions, then you do not know history. There have been abortions since forever and the number will never really be known as poor families and the rich as well did not tell people as it violated the laws in every state in the union. The only real thing that Roe did was make it safer for women to get one as they could go to a real doctor and have it done.
Making abortion illegal does nothing to stop abortions. What it does do is provide a a legal opportunity to punish women for not carrying a pregnancy to term. The mind of a person that needs to find women who get abortions, make criminals of them, punish them for being honest about whether or not they can take proper car of a child's is not just a little bit creepy it's a lot creepy. There is something basically sick with their world view.Agreed. And that's why abortion needs to stay legal. Making abortion illegal will probably not stop women who really don't want to carry a pregnancy and have a baby.
And now I hear that the religious right wing want to once again outlaw contraceptives. Won't that help the situation?
Making abortion illegal does nothing to stop abortions. What it does do is provide a a legal opportunity to punish women for not carrying a pregnancy to term.
It's not in jeopardyJoe Biden (with Obama) promised in 2007 to codify Roe. In 2008 when he could have, they chose not to do the work. That Roe is in jeopardy is Biden's legacy. 47 years of nothing.
Sent from my SM-G892A using Tapatalk
I dont sense any panicNot in jeopardy? Why the panic by the pro abortionists?
Sent from my SM-G892A using Tapatalk
You've been asked at least twice about this statement. Who are these "religious right wing" people who want to outlaw contraceptives?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?