Before we put a fetus to death.

[year2late]

So you give different humans different values? You would have made a great slave owner.



That is two lies in one: 1) The Bible says no such thing, 2) Nobody here has brought up religion or the Bible once.

Yes the Bible does. Read Exodus 21:22. If a woman is caused to miscarry...there is a fine. What do you think the punishment is for a born person?

BTW, I never said in this thread the Bible was brought up....do you deny God and religion are a frequent refrain in the abortion debates?

So no lies, just avoidance of facts on your part.

And the real fact is....calling people killers and murderers does not decrease the rate of abortion. Availability and accessibility of long term birth control options has significantly decreased abortion rates by decreasing (gasp) unwanted pregnancies.

 

[JayDubya]

Yes the Bible does. Read Exodus 21:22. If a woman is caused to miscarry...there is a fine. What do you think the punishment is for a born person?

BTW, I never said in this thread the Bible was brought up....do you deny God and religion are a frequent refrain in the abortion debates?

Actually, in this forum, it's you pro-aborts who like to keep bringing old Jewish law and overly literal Jewish beliefs about the "breath of life." Case in point, you just brought religion into things, almost at random.

Not to mention those among you who really like to let your religious freak flag fly and talk about reincarnation, or how unwanted babies are from Satan, or claim that killing whomever you want is part of "religious freedom," when that's not part of the religious practices of any extant real world religion. I mean the Norse and Aztecs really dug human sacrifice back in the day in all...

 

[Peter King]

Peter, it really doesn't matter what you say. You can say whatever you want. Me? I just accept what I can see with my own two eyes, hear with my ears, and read with my eyes.

Peter, if something is obvious, you need to accept it as fact. The fetus is a baby. All your senses should tell you that. And as long as that is true, then what are we arguing about?

No, the only thing that does not matter is what you think about abortion because Roe v. Wade guarantees the right for women to have abortions if they want to or need to.

Sorry, but as long as you ears, eyes and reading skill allows you to think that there is anything like a desire among liberals to have post birth abortions be legalized then I am sorry, but you can accept and trust it but I do not.

Well, if it were obvious it would be obvious to all people and not just partisan anti-abortion activists like you. A pre-abortion fetus is not a baby. A baby is something that is close to birth, not close to being a zygote or embryo. And my senses tell me nothing like your senses tell you.

And we are arguing because you have an anti-abortion view that I do not agree with (nor will I ever).

 

[d head]

Liberals killed it. You want bigger government, so embrace a nanny state that powders your bum and changes your diapers and oversees your life to make sure you don't make bad choices. WTF happened to liberal love if the nanny state?

So you condone big obtrusive government because "liberals " embrace it? That is some conservative principal you have adopted.
You so funny Papa.

 

[d head]

A night watchman state is the minimal state.

If the state fails at both prevention and prosecution of aggressive violence, then the most minimal aspect of government is not adequately provided.

This is currently the case in the United States, which spends more than it takes in on nonsense it is not legally authorized to do, yet at the same time ignoring the basic obligation to protect human rights.

So you condone the 24 / 7 monitoring of the current status of every uterus in the nation by the US government?
That isn't a very "libertarian" view of the limits of government now is it?

 

[JayDubya]

So you condone the 24 / 7 monitoring of the current status of every uterus in the nation by the US government?
That is a very "libertarian" view of the limits of government now is it?

:roll:

Yeah, of course, you really need 24 / 7 monitoring of everyone everywhere to prevent / prosecute homicide. That's totes magotes what I said there, chief.

 

[Papa bull]

:roll:

Yeah, of course, you really need 24 / 7 monitoring of everyone everywhere to prevent / prosecute homicide. That's totes magotes what I said there, chief.

Typical idiocy from the left. Require a hearing before abortions are undertaken and someone on the left thinks 24/7 uterus monitoring must be required. I'm only surprised some lib didn't have that brain fart on the first page of this thread.

 

[d head]

:roll:

Yeah, of course, you really need 24 / 7 monitoring of everyone everywhere to prevent / prosecute homicide. That's totes magotes what I said there, chief.

How do you suppose the government could guarantee legal counsel to every fetus, embryo and zygote if you don't know they exist, chief?
Around the clock monitoring of every mature uterus in the nation would be required to meet the OP's proposal.
That would be some "small" government, eh?

 

[Papa bull]

How do you suppose the government could guarantee legal counsel to every fetus, embryo and zygote if you don't know they exist, chief?
Around the clock monitoring of every mature uterus in the nation would be required to meet the OP's proposal.
That would be some "small" government, eh?

Simply require a hearing before an abortion can be performed. The end. Just like the way you keep people from voting illegally is to require they show an ID when they vote.

It doesn't have to be 100% foolproof to be an improvement.

 

[minnie616]

... Simply require a hearing before an abortion can be performed. .. ..

Women are not going to sumit to a hearing when they want an abortion.
They would have illegal abortions or they would self abort just as they did before Roe.

Making abortions illegal will not stop abortions.

Preventing unwanted pregnancies will reduce abortions and it has already been proven that is the answer.

Abortion rates fell by 13 percent between the years of 2008 and 2011 because more women used long term birth control which has a lower failure rate than birth control pills or condoms.

About 3.8 percent of women used long term birth control in 2005 by the years 2008 to 2011 7.2 percent of women chose long term birth control .

 

[d head]

Typical idiocy from the left. Require a hearing before abortions are undertaken and someone on the left thinks 24/7 uterus monitoring must be required. I'm only surprised some lib didn't have that brain fart on the first page of this thread.

How then would you represent a day old zygote from a violent attack by "plan B" if you don't know it exists?
Speaking of brain farts, you haven't thought this through very well have you Papa?

 

[wolfsgirl]

Peter, it really doesn't matter what you say. You can say whatever you want. Me? I just accept what I can see with my own two eyes, hear with my ears, and read with my eyes.

Peter, if something is obvious, you need to accept it as fact. The fetus is a baby. All your senses should tell you that. And as long as that is true, then what are we arguing about?

I can take a baby and hand it to someone else to feed for me. Can I do the same with a fetus? No? Then not the same thing.

 

[JayDubya]

Around the clock monitoring of every mature uterus in the nation would be required to meet the OP's proposal.

No, that does not follow.

After reading the thread, it appears the OP's proposal is essentially one that limits abortion to those that are justifiable. This would place limits on clinicians who could not legally perform the task without court authorization.

If you're going to talk about black market and back alley next - and you clearly are, so let's not waste time - the black market is always a concern and always a problem with any law. As ever, my response is "Human trafficking still happens, so are you going to tell us we should be pro-slavery?"

 

[JayDubya]

Women are not going to sumit to a hearing when they want an abortion.
They would have illegal abortions or they would self abort just as they did before Roe.

Yeah, the black market is always a thing and violent criminals who are immoral and driven are going to commit crimes. So what?

Historically, as you mentioned, those carry with them a great risk of sterility or death. Either way, you have a scumbag preventing themselves from killing again, at least with the same m/o. That's a positive outcome.

 

[d head]

Simply require a hearing before an abortion can be performed. The end. Just like the way you keep people from voting illegally is to require they show an ID when they vote.

It doesn't have to be 100% foolproof to be an improvement.

Who will pay all the lawyers at all those hearings Papa? The government?
I guess we will need to raise your taxes, eh? They don't come cheap.

 

[d head]

Yeah, the black market is always a thing and violent criminals who are immoral and driven are going to commit crimes. So what?

Historically, as you mentioned, those carry with them a great risk of sterility or death. Either way, you have a scumbag preventing themselves from killing again, at least with the same m/o. That's a positive outcome.

Plan B.
Abortion by pill.

 

[AJiveMan]

Seems to me I remember hearing someone calling for a small unobtrusive government.
WTF happened to that conservative idea?

It's all in the bucket.

 

[minnie616]

...

Historically, as you mentioned, those carry with them a great risk of sterility or death. ....

That was before Roe.

Now most abortions are very safe. The abortion pill and vacuum/suction aspiration are historically very safe.

And Plan B helps prevent pregnancies after unprotected sex and or condom breakage.

 

[JayDubya]

Plan B.

Prevents conception in the first place. A non-issue.

Abortion by pill.

Again, pharmacist can't legally sell. Again, there is always a black market, and on this black market you can buy a lot of awful illegal things; that isn't an argument for their legalization.

 

[AJiveMan]

Women are not going to sumit to a hearing when they want an abortion.
They would have illegal abortions or they would self abort just as they did before Roe.

Making abortions illegal will not stop abortions.

Preventing unwanted pregnancies will reduce abortions and it has already been proven that is the answer.

Abortion rates fell by 13 percent between the years of 2008 and 2011 because more women used long term birth control which has a lower failure rate than birth control pills or condoms.

About 3.8 percent of women used long term birth control in 2005 by the years 2008 to 2011 7.2 percent of women chose long term birth control .

But there's a certain group of people who want to dismember planned parenthood too, thereby taking away any pills needed to prevent unwanted pregnancies.

Isn't that weird?

Here was one supporter of a lawmaker who suggested a noble way of preventing women from becoming pregnant.

 

[year2late]

Typical idiocy from the left. Require a hearing before abortions are undertaken and someone on the left thinks 24/7 uterus monitoring must be required. I'm only surprised some lib didn't have that brain fart on the first page of this thread.

You do not see requiring a hearing before abortion is idiocy?

What is NOT idiocy is trying to decrease abortions in pragmatic fashion.

Idiocy is trying the same type of approach each time - failing miserably - and trying the same type of approach each time.

What has worked, If folks REALLY cared about decreasing abortions, they would look to what has worked. Availability and accessibility of long term birth control methods. Make them safer for all that want them and even more available and accessible.....watch the abortion rate drastically decrease.

Yup, requiring a hearing before abortion. The concept may give the pro-life crowd a large charge...but the end point has nothing to do with decreasing abortion and everything to do with giving a few folks a false sense of moral superiority.

 

[JayDubya]

That was before Roe.

Now most abortions are very safe. Plan B and vacuum/suction aspiration are historically very safe.

Don't even pretend that you do not routinely engage in fearmongering about how criminalizing abortion "now" would lead to sterility and death for those who seek illegal abortions.

 

[wolfsgirl]

Yeah, the black market is always a thing and violent criminals who are immoral and driven are going to commit crimes. So what?

Historically, as you mentioned, those carry with them a great risk of sterility or death. Either way, you have a scumbag preventing themselves from killing again, at least with the same m/o. That's a positive outcome.

Parsley will cause a miscarriage if caught early. And it doesn't take all that much in a tea.

 

[JayDubya]

Parsley will cause a miscarriage if caught early. And it doesn't take all that much in a tea.

Yeah, and a knife in the dark can slit a throat really well. So what?

Scumbags who want to kill for their own benefit can find cheap and inventive ways to make it happen. It can make protecting the innocent difficult.

Difficulty does not excuse not even trying and letting homicide run rampant, which is the best plan pro-aborts can come up with, apparently.

 

[wolfsgirl]

Yeah, and a knife in the dark can slit a throat really well. So what?

So how do you prevent a woman from having an abortion if all that is needed is growing in the garden? Not to mention that D&C is a medical treatment for more than abortion. Will a woman have to go to court before any medical treatment? Have a pregnancy test provided to the court before she goes to the doctor?