• 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!

Hmm?

Joined
Oct 4, 2018
Messages
299
Reaction score
56
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Oh wait it’s ever more evil than I thought, in NY you can abort your child up to birth. LET THAT SINK IN. Now VT is trying to pass a similar law. I hope ever woman that aborts her baby dies during the procedure. You evil ****s.
 
Oh wait it’s ever more evil than I thought, in NY you can abort your child up to birth. LET THAT SINK IN. Now VT is trying to pass a similar law. I hope ever woman that aborts her baby dies during the procedure. You evil ****s.

1. Have you read the law?

2. Give me one example of a woman aborting that late without compelling reason.
 
What's difficult to 'sink in' is the level of ignorance people happily display in this sub-forum out of misguided self-righteousness.

At least 10 states and the entire country of Canada have no gestation term limits and NO such late term elective abortions occur.

So since when is removing useless, feel-good legislation from the books (or declaring it's useless publicly and clarifying the law) so "heinous?"


For me, less big govt and less govt intrusion into people's business is a good thing.
 
1. Have you read the law?

2. Give me one example of a woman aborting that late without compelling reason.

Tht t’s not the point, the option should be available unless a medical professional makes the determination that a 9 MONTH abortion is necessary. The new law allows the woman to make that determination.
 
Tht t’s not the point, the option should be available unless a medical professional makes the determination that a 9 MONTH abortion is necessary. The new law allows the woman to make that determination.

The woman cant do anything about it if a Dr wont perform the procedure. (Well, not safely).

And Drs are not forced to perform elective abortions.

Now...just as relevant, why would a woman decide to have an abortion at 8 or 9 months if not medically necessary?

Some points to consider:

-- why would a woman accept all the pain and sacrifices for 8-9 months before deciding?

--the procedure, that late, amounts to induced labor anyway.

--the procedure is more dangerous and painful for a few reasons, one of which is the cervix is not dilated.

--since basically a woman goes thru labor anyway, why not give birth and make a quick $20,000 in offering it for private adoption?
 
Back
Top Bottom