I will stand against any organization that supports abortion.
I could totally take you. Bring it on, old man!
1. Eliminating abortion would simply be defining it as it should be defined - murder.
2. I fight against Planned Parenthood because of the above statement. If you agreed with #1, you'd be against them too.
3. "Women's rights" is subjective. I do not believe women should have the right to snuff the life of their unborn child.
Tell me.
Do you support abortion in cases of rape or incest?
What if the mothers health is in danger?
I'm talking about the government having any power over health care decisions. I don't want to give any more power to government because that gives them the right to pull the strings.
What I mean is that the government (whichever political party is in control at that moment) now has control over that aspect of your life. Therefore, they have the ability to take as much control as they want. They have the ability to regulate it as much as they want. They have the power to limit your decision-making if they're in charge of it.
If the mother's health is in danger, of course.
In cases of rape and incest.... those are the only cases that would give me pause. I cannot imagine what it would be like to be raped and have a child conceived from that. I cannot honestly say what I would do or feel since I've never been in that situation. If there's an abortion from either case, it's still the death of a unborn child. I guess you could say I would understand it more than if you just aborted her because you didn't want her.
MmhmmI will stand against any organization that supports abortion.
The government can regulate as much as they want even without government healthcare the same way that they regulate all private industries now. Furthermore, corporate entities who are interested primarily in profit can and often do limit the decision-making process and "take control" of their clients' healthcare in damaging ways. Even further, the government isn't like some totalitarian body. If it goes too far, there are means for the people, if they care enough, to change it.
Not following. Could you explain for us senior citizens?
If the mother's health is in danger, of course.
This is one thing that shows the faulty reasoning of the OP.Fair enough.
But your dogmatic push to have abortion made illegal would deny that woman the option, and force her to give birth to a baby that will undenaibly remind her of that terrible event for the rest of her life.
Now there are women that carry to term in these situations and who can live with it.
But what you would deny is deny them that choice, by having government decide that health decision for her.
And so you are proposing the very thing you say you oppose in your OP.
Then you are pro-choice. The mother has a choice on whether to terminate her pregnancy if her health is in danger!
It's just a basic political observation. In any given number of political issues, you have a means of approaching it and defining it for the public. It's a means to fight over public policy. The idea is that each interest group needs to find a way to frame the issue and make it comprehensible for the public to adopt their viewpoint at any point in the policy process. Frequently it encourages kind of a tribalistic mentality in which one side simply cannot see the issue through the lens of the other tribe, because the framing has made it almost incompatible. It's needed for policy promotion, nevertheless.
Tell me how offering student loans is an intrusion in your life.
Tell me how having the option to cover your children until they are 28 is an intrusion into your life.
Tell me how having more options is taking options away from you.
Then you are pro-choice. The mother has a choice on whether to terminate her pregnancy if her health is in danger!
You're misrepresenting what I'm saying. I'm a libertarian. I think too much government intrusion is anti-freedom. The "Julia" propaganda showed a fictional character going through life with government carrying her along the way. I don't want women (or anyone) to want government to carry them from cradle to grave. I don't think anyone should find happiness in knowing that the government is there with another program full of regulations for them to follow.
And where's the one for when Julia gets knocked up in highschool and her parents kick her out of the house - or she has an abortion when she's 17 and suffers serious life long complications?
Where's that one?
That's not a perfect story, though....
Ok, framing an issue I understand.
So all women should be controlled by government’s word because you agree with it? You would stand behind them making laws which restrict a woman’s right to her reproduction?Yes, I'm fine with government telling women they can't kill their babies. I'm such a horrible person.
Not at all fear mongering. What does the right wing want from women beside our votes? You can’t give an answer because you back the party that attack women’s rights and women outright.*eyeroll* That's a tired, lame, unintelligent, incorrect, fear-mongering talking point.
I have five children living in my home. I would not have an abortion but I would not take that choice away from all my sisters because of my choice. You would. Then you say you don’t want government controlling your health care yet you stand behind the party that wants women to be forced to have invasive procedures. How funny that is.Yes, I understand that you believe you own your unborn child and, therefore, can do whatever you want with "it".
Those rights were fought for by women who actually wanted women to be equal. They would be outraged by the way the right wants to treat women. They would be outraged that a broadcaster could call a woman a slut of radio because she has sex. How long have women had to accept less for jobs than men? How many years did it take to fight for the right to attend college where the male was not treated preferentially? How much would you be willing to give back? How many rights are you satisfied with? Because you are content the rest of us can go to hell? How nice for you.Well, since women can vote, drive, get a job, own a home, go to college ... what else is there?
You don’t believe it but it is said by the side you say you identify with. Why is the Republican Party in trouble with women voters everywhere if they are so women friendly? You say you identify with them yet you create a thread to call on women to stand with you. It seems insulting to me. I have to laugh when anyone from the right says they are for women’s rights.I don't know. You'd have to ask someone who believes that.
I don't know. I don't listen to Rush, nor does he speak for anyone but himself.
If the mother's health is in danger, of course. In cases of rape and incest.... those are the only cases that would give me pause. I cannot imagine what it would be like to be raped and have a child conceived from that. I cannot honestly say what I would do or feel since I've never been in that situation. If there's an abortion from either case, it's still the death of a unborn child. I guess you could say I would understand it more than if you just aborted her because you didn't want her.
You're misrepresenting what I'm saying. I'm a libertarian. I think too much government intrusion is anti-freedom. The "Julia" propaganda showed a fictional character going through life with government carrying her along the way. I don't want women (or anyone) to want government to carry them from cradle to grave. I don't think anyone should find happiness in knowing that the government is there with another program full of regulations for them to follow.
No - pro-life doesn't mean you oppose abortion 100% all the time :roll:
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?