- Joined
- Dec 1, 2010
- Messages
- 66,711
- Reaction score
- 39,495
- Location
- El Paso Strong
- Gender
- Undisclosed
- Political Leaning
- Conservative
Would there be any restrictions?
Last edited:
No, no restrictions. But there would be a lot more support for women who did choose to have a child, especially single mothers, and a lot less messed up sexual double standards. We don't like abortion either, but instead of trying to force women to have children when they don't want to, we want it to be an easier choice to make. But the decision will always ultimately be hers and hers alone.
Lol, right. What's preventing you all from offering all this support you claim you want to right now? Also, if you truly didn't like abortion either it seems like you wouldn't have such contempt for others that also didn't "like" it and would, at least, understand why we don't "like" it.
Lol, right. What's preventing you all from offering all this support you claim you want to right now? Also, if you truly didn't like abortion either it seems like you wouldn't have such contempt for others that also didn't "like" it and would, at least, understand why we don't "like" it.
Would there be any restrictions?
You are. You are what is preventing us. Conservatives keep stopping us from providing this support. That's why this is the only industrialized nation without mandatory maternity leave. That's why this country is all hung up on covering contraception for women. That's why this country has serious problems with rape culture and slut shaming. Conservatives keep trying to punish women for their sexuality, insisting that they must procreate, but then punishing them again if they don't do it as wives to affluent husbands. You know that a substantial portion of abortions are performed for mothers who already have children but cannot afford more, right? That's a demographic that is constantly ignored by the anti-woman faction. And that's why we don't accept your nonsense. It's not that you don't like abortions. It's that you don't like women. You only like them if you can portray them as a madonna, and are quick to abandon them if you can portray them as a whore.
We don't feel the need to control women. But we'd like it if they never felt like they couldn't afford to have a child. The choice should come with as little duress as possible, especially economic duress.
Would there be any restrictions?
i knew very few people that want zero restrictions just like there are few that want it banned under all circumstances
but i can only answer for myself and that answer as been the same for a long time
if it was up to me it would actually be more restrictive technically and the ZEF would have legislative rights. But my restrictions would do very little to impact whats going on in reality simply because the super vast amount of abortions happen before i would place my restrictions which would be at 20/21 weeks.
about 1.25 or less of abortion happen after that and as far as i know the super vast majority of them are only done to save the woman's life as its in immediate danger or the ZEF istself is severely deformed
but anyway i would make it at 20/21 weeks to try my best to make it as equal for BOTH lives as possible
Wow, all way into halfway through the pregnancy. If you're ok with that, I'm sure you could be nudged to go further into the pregnancy, say 26 weeks? After all, it's just a month and a half longer.
well you said ONE of the key words
HALF
thats exactly ONE of the reasons i pick 20/21 weeks because it is HALF and because 21 weeks is the earliest possible viability
and no, i would not go to 26 weeks, the only way i could be nudged is lower not higher but not much lower because then its too far away from being as close to equal as it can be. I want both lives and the rights of both to be as respected as possible.
also even though RvW is already at 24 weeks which is 50% viability I also have no plans to fight against it, id like it lower but its actually pretty close to equal already.
If it was more solid of a cap and the ZEF had legislated rights at the same point it be near perfect in my opinion
Republicans, duh. You know, the party of "cut funding for poor families and everything not going to people with six figure incomes."
Would there be any restrictions?
Would there be any restrictions?
Would there be any restrictions?
Yes. Elective abortions would be banned after 20 weeks gestation.
After that point abortion would only be allowed if the pregnancy seriously threatened the mother's health or the fetus wasn't viable.
If abortion were left in the hands of the woman, her family, and her [doctor] as it had been for millinnea, advocates and restrictions would be irrelevant.
No, no restrictions. But there would be a lot more support for women who did choose to have a child, especially single mothers, and a lot less messed up sexual double standards. We don't like abortion either, but instead of trying to force women to have children when they don't want to, we want it to be an easier choice to make. But the decision will always ultimately be hers and hers alone.
If abortion were left in the hands of the woman, her family, and her [doctor] as it had been for millinnea, advocates and restrictions would be irrelevant.
If it were up the doctors there would be no abortions since they are against the Hippocratic Oath
No doctor is forced to perform any medical procedure he is opposed to. Your contention would be true if no doctors today performed abortions...which we know is incorrect.
Glad you got that out of your system yet it doesn't answer my question at all. You don't like us, I get that. I've known that for a long time now, so for that reason that keeps you from stepping up and offering support? As long as you're going to tell us what we truly believe, I'll do the same. Don't tell me you don't "like" abortion when so many on your side seem to believe that a developing baby in the womb is worthless tissue and something to be despised like cancer or a parasite or any of the other euphemisms you all use. It seems, to me many people who are a pro abortion have to justify it by describing the fetus in the worst most malevolent way. Don't tell me you don't "like" abortion if you'd support the choice to kill a baby during labor and delivery just so long as it's still in the womb. Shoot, I read a comment just tonight that it's not even a baby post birth as long as the umbilical cord is not yet cut so please, don't try to sell me your brand of "compassion".
Just not any reputable doctors and of course bastardization of the Hippocratic oath doesn't help.
Ok, fair enough.
Both of which are irrelevant to my post...and contraditory to your initial post.
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?