Roe V. Wade Has Been Overturned

Peruse back and read through SC's post. I agree with her.

Rick wrote: I have a lot of trouble understanding Homeagain and dealing with her deflections, yet I continue to try and discuss the issues with her. Throwing up your hands and running away for another few months doesn't do much good if your're just going to jump in every few months and tell us why you can't have a discussion. Try me... ask me any question and I promise to give you a direct answer. You may not like my style, but I don't like yours either... I'm tough enough mentally to hang in there and to keep trying. If it's just too much for you to deal with, well, I can't help you with that.

To be honest, my favorite forum would be me against 10 or more liberals/progresives, without any backup from a conservative. I know how conservatives think so there's no reason to spend much time confirming each other's views. That's why I spend too much time consuming left wing media... just trying to figure out the "logic" that seems insane to me.

My point, Rick, is that if you want discussion, if you want SC and myself, and perhaps other liberals, to engage with you here, then read and respond in a similar manner - thoughtfully, rather than calling a well thought out post by SC "silly."

When you keep posting the same stuff for months about "trusted sources" and TDS and laptops, it's not conducive to discussion.

"Peruse back and read through SC's post. I agree with her."

Well SC, Koobookie has thrown it back to you. It is obvious that she is unwilling to state her opinion. When does life begin. Straightforward question, if you have stated your position I can't find it. Should be easy to simply say it again.

So who here supports partial birth abortions? Who supports the the French and German limits in the 1st trimester? Who supports banning all abortions, including outlawing abortion pills?

I support abortion rights up till about 20 weeks. And I would even support the French model where if you need an emergency abortion you have to get a pair of doctors to approve it, like in the example of an ectopic pregnancy.

I think Texas's rules are too extreme. Mississippi? 15 weeks seems reasonable.

ramage wrote: "Peruse back and read through SC's post. I agree with her."

Well SC, Koobookie has thrown it back to you. It is obvious that she is unwilling to state her opinion. When does life begin. Straightforward question, if you have stated your position I can't find it. Should be easy to simply say it again.

I have not "thrown it back" to SC. I merely told you I agree with her.

Your question is, in fact, a gotcha question. You see the world, and this issue, in black & white. You think in absolutes, but this situation is full of grays.

Take your position for example: If life begins at conception, as I'm sure you think, then every single fetus is a human being, correct? Then what of ectopic pregnancies? The only options are to either kill one human or let them both die. Kind of gray, yes? After all, they are both humans, per your definition.

What of in vitro fertilization? Those are human beings, yes? They should be rescued rather than destroyed? If so, are you willing to sponsor them? Wow - more gray areas.

What of a woman who has a child developing within her that does not have a brain forming? After all, is it not a human life, according to your definition? What's that? Oh, it's not viable? Ah, now we are in another gray area.

50 years ago, the SCOTUS determined that it was not a human life prior to viability. Oh, there's that pesky concept of viability again. They determined that it was around 23-24 weeks, right? That's still pretty close to viability, depending upon the capabilities of the closest hospital. So what is it? Is the start of human life at the moment when a fetus can survive outside the womb?


Oh, and then there's this argument: Why can I not take out a life insurance policy on a fetus? Because insurance companies do not consider a fetus viable. It's not yet a human.

Then there's the complication that I cannot take a dependent deduction on a child prior to birth. The government does not consider a child in the womb as a human life. It's only after the fetus is removed from the womb that it can be claimed on taxes.

What about child support? Oh, that too, only begins after birth, since it's not yet a human life until removed from the womb.

What about the census count? A child in the womb is not counted, because... That's right, the government does not consider it a human.

So, you see, it's not so simple as "when does life begin."


What I cannot understand is how conservatives are not up in arms over the removal of a right from the populace. For close to 50 years, people have structured their lives around this right, lived their lives with this right, and now POOF it has been RESCINDED. I thought conservatives were all about rights. Don't tread on me?

Make no mistake - Associate Justice Thomas has signaled that more rights are on the chopping block. You should be concerned about that. Are you not? Next SCOTUS session, some extremist will bring a suit against gay marriage and then that will be gone. Then will come your right to choose your contraception, Then interracial marriage. Next thing you know, we will be back in 1850, with more rights taken away.

Don't be fooled by this court - they are undoing the progress of our society and civilization.

koobookie wrote:
When you keep posting the same stuff for months about "trusted sources" and TDS and laptops, it's not conducive to discussion.

Well Koobookie, if you'll look back at the last 6 years, you'll see a very similar situation from your side. Trump was evil, a racist, Hitler, a Russian asset... it just never ended and still continues today. It gets old but I'm still here trying to figure out how to deal with ideas I think are crazy. I'm sure you think the same about us, which is why you're here (I'm guessing).

So I tell ya what, if you decide to stick around I'll give you my word that I'll talk to you like I would talk to one of my Democrat poker buddies. We get a little fired up now and then but we don't get all snarky and we don't hurl direct or indirect insults... we save the insults for the politicians, just like you all do with Trump and we do with Biden. Somehow we've all become better friends because nobody crosses that line where the political insults become personal.

I'm not perfect so there's always the chance that I slip up in a heated conversation, but you can then remind me of our deal, if you're willing to make that deal. Our country is headed for very bad times and I think some sort of civil conflict is inevitable, but I'd rather try to be civil, if only at a micro level.

Situational morality, " it is not so simple as when does life begin." This then is the fundamental difference.

As to your examples, 1. an ectopic pregnancy is not viable as the zygote is not implanted in the uterus, rather on the abdominal wall or the ovary itself.
When the diagnosis is made there is no way to save the zygote.
2. With regard to IVF, embryos that are not implanted are not viable. I know of no one who is promulgating forced implantation.
3.Anencephaly, a rare defect of the neural tube, incidence approx 1:10,000 live births results in the dead of the infant within hours of delivery. You choose to kill this infant in utero, I do not.
4. That "pesky concept of viability" Perhaps you are confused, conception is not based upon viability.
5. Life insurance for a fetus is a business decision on the part of the insurance company.
6. Tax deduction for a fetus, an interesting concept, what incurred costs would you cite, maternity clothing, eating for two, perhaps?
7. Child support, again what are the incurred costs?
8. the census. Interestingly it is the anti abortion groups that are calling for inclusion of a fetus in the census "Various anti-abortion groups also are calling for fetuses to be counted in the 2020 Census, based on the belief that a fetus is a separate person from a pregnant woman. They argue that children who will be born in 2020 should be included in the Census count, which only happens every ten years. In February, a Tennessee lawmaker introduced a bill to give cities and counties a “special census” that would count fetuses towards distribution of state funds."
It is good to see that you are in agreement with them.

As stated in this post, do not confuse conception with viability. Conception is when life begins, viability refers to the ability to survive. No infant or child is viable if left on its own.

Great point. The pro-abortion opinions here are all using examples that happen one percent or less in an attempt to justify partial birth abortions at any time.

Just like the foster care system which they say is over loaded. But foster care is very complicated. Many of those children, the birth parents still have claims on. They hope one day to get their lives together and get back their kids. I know one couple that adopted a child and took care of her for five years and now the birth mother wants her back. The daughter even visited the mom and realized she still wasn't capable of providing a stable home life and returned to those who adopted her.

I have another friend whose parents abandoned him and his brothers but after five years they did get back on a firm foundation and took back their boys.

Just because killing late term babies is rare, that doesn't mean it should be legal. It's also rare for women to kill their babies and toddlers, but it happens al the time. Everyone here would agree that it should be illegal and the woman should be punished.

I'll say it again, this ruling probably wouldn't have happened if the left hadn't put no limits on abortion in many states like ours. Give them an inch...

AND if all men could get pregnant.......watch how rapidly the rules would change....the scenario would be stunning ,in it's "turn around"...."my right to my body,fuck u for EVEN thinking u can "rule me".