ROEvember is Coming

I don't think anyone should be able to call themselves a Pro-Lifer unless they are against all killing, not just humans. To me, if you swat a mosquito you are not Pro-Life.

Quote: DRich

I don't think anyone should be able to call themselves a Pro-Lifer unless they are against all killing, not just humans. To me, if you swat a mosquito you are not Pro-Life.

They certainly exist, but they are a minority. There are pro-life vegans who think killing anything is a sin. But, it is a fringe. Many vegans are not against abortion, and many anti-abortion people are not in favor of veganism.

Quote: Gandler

They certainly exist, but they are a minority. There are pro-life vegans who think killing anything is a sin. But, it is a fringe. Many vegans are not against abortion, and many anti-abortion people are not in favor of veganism.

If only there was a way to predetermine which fetuses will end up vegans and ABORT ABORT ABORT.

Quote:

Republican legislators in Florida hit the pause button on a bill that would have given any “unborn child” new protections after opponents raised concerns it would impact women’s reproductive rights in ways similar to the Alabama IVF ruling. The bill had passed easily through most committees in the Republican-led legislatur

The Florida bill’s derailment comes as Republicans grapple with the political fallout from the Alabama Supreme Court ruling declaring embryos children. While many in the GOP were initially quiet on the ruling, conservative lawmakers are now voicing their support for IVF. The issue underscores the party’s election-year challenges over women’s reproductive rights.

Pay attention to the last sentence. Gotta let this election year pass, before pushing for this measure. Smarter Republicans in favor of what that Alabama court did, would have definitely paused that ruling for now if they could have seen what the outcome was. But they'll be right back at it as soon as they can work it out with IVF in place and the time is right again. This is just a pause.

Quote: GenoDRPh

That "repugnant" practice is used overwhelmingly to terminate a pregnancy that poses a danger to the health of the gravida that was not detected earlier in gestation, or developed late in gestation. It is indeed a "normal: method of abortion, i.e. normal to the individual circumstances of a late-term pregnancy.

A different court, in Roe and Casey, ruled that states can ban abortions after fetal viability. So they did indeed return some abortions regulation back to that states But that wasn't good enough for American Christian Taliban.

Republicans absolutely cannot be trusted to protect reproductive freedom.

--There is a ban on a repugnant type of birth followed by the murder of the child delivered.
--There is an exception for medical danger to the mother.
--There are other ways to terminate the fetus pre-birth.

Democrats cannot be trusted to not further expand the laws on abortion and make all forms of what they consider abortion legal.

(I don't trust any politician)

Before long, most citizens will be conservative and pro-life.

Because many of the abortion crew won't have babies or have less babies.


An exception could be same-sex marriages that adopt babies, which is why the law could be there (to extend non-conservative ideology).

Quote: DoubleGold

Before long, most citizens will be conservative and pro-life.

I come here for the back and forth with people who have different attitudes/opinions than I have. When a post is that out of touch with reality I don’t know where to start.

Quote: SOOPOO

I come here for the back and forth with people who have different attitudes/opinions than I have. When a post is that out of touch with reality I don’t know where to start.

I noticed you weren't aborted (I stole that from a Reagan quote). :)



Everyone here had a mother that didn't abort them (100% guaranteed).

It could be, some that would have been here were aborted.



The next generation is a little different, because over 60,000,000 million babies were aborted since the time we weren't aborted.

Each generation, changes a tad, because of the math.

Because a person that's dead can't have children.


So if the left primarily believes in death and the right primarily believes in life, it becomes a math population issue.


I'll never understand a person that gets an abortion done since they weren't aborted.

It's like opposite thinking.

And I'll never believe a climate czar that flies in jets more than 1000 people combined.

Quote: DoubleGold

Before long, most citizens will be conservative and pro-life.

Because many of the abortion crew won't have babies or have less babies.


An exception could be same-sex marriages that adopt babies, which is why the law could be there (to extend non-conservative ideology).

Just no.

There are many birthing people who have had abortions and later delivered one of more children. There are lots of people who support abortion as a right who would never have an abortion. They'll all likely have children that mirror many of their positions on issues. I don't see a radical change in the balance of conservatives and liberals due to abortions.

Quote: RonC

Just no.

There are many birthing people who have had abortions and later delivered one of more children. There are lots of people who support abortion as a right who would never have an abortion. They'll all likely have children that mirror many of their positions on issues. I don't see a radical change in the balance of conservatives and liberals due to abortions.

Another way to think of it, is of the 60,000,000 persons that were aborted since I was born, most of those would be on the left.

Those 60,000,000 could have turned into 500,000,000 left-leaning citizens.

There would be no election other than with one political party.

We'd be Communist.

Another 100 years ("before long"), the numbers would skyrocket.