The New Yorker just ran its second big negative piece on Ron DeSantis in a week, proof of how much the woke media fears the governor of Florida. (Yes, I read the New Yorker so you don’t have to.)
The article is nominally about DeSantis’s support for age-appropriate teaching of gender and sexuality in public schools. Or, as the Democrats like to call it, “Don’t Say Gay.” The wokesters have not figured out that label is not quite the devastating comeback they think.
Plenty of parents of six-year-olds are fine with not having teachers say “gay” - they think that even if they support same-sex marriage (as I do), they and not outsiders should decide what their first- or second-graders hear about sex and family structures. Then again, these are the people who thought “defund the police” was an electoral winner, so their political instincts may not be the best.
But I digress, briefly. As you would expect, the article treats DeSantis as a political opportunist. But, unlike most woke media reporters these days, the author actually took the time both to talk to conservatives who support DeSantis’s views and to try to understand why those views are gaining so much ground right now. (As opposed to just repeating Fox News misinformation racism misogyny America is the worst endlessly.)
The result was something close to the truth - and the best explanation I have seen for the way Covid continues to drive our politics, even if no one is talking about it anymore. I urge you to read these three paragraphs - especially the sentence I have bolded - closely:
When I asked Republican activists and operatives about the rise of the school issues, they told a very similar story, one that began with the pandemic, during which many parents came to believe that their interests (in keeping their kids in school) diverged with those of the teachers and administrators. As Roberts, the Heritage Foundation president, put it to me, parents who were in many cases apolitical “became concerned about these overwrought lockdowns, and then when they asked question after question, there was no transparency about them, which led them to pay more attention when their kids were on Zoom. They overheard things being taught. They asked questions about curricula. They were just stonewalled every step of the way.” The battles regarding the covid lockdowns, Roberts told me, opened the way for everything that came after. “This is the key thing,” he said. “It started with questions about masking and other aspects of the lockdowns.”
Both parties right now are trying to answer the question of how fundamentally covid has changed politics. “From 2008 to 2020, elections were decided on the question of fairness—Obama ’08, Obama ’12, and Trump ’16 were all premised on the idea that someone else was getting too much, and you were getting too little, and it was unfair,” Danny Franklin, a partner at the Democratic strategy firm Bully Pulpit Interactive and a pollster for both Obama campaigns, told me. But the pandemic and the crises that followed (war, inflation, energy pressures) were not really about fairness but an amorphous sense of chaos. “People are looking for some control over their lives—in focus groups, in polls, once you start looking for that you see it everywhere,” Franklin said.
Both parties had shifted, in his view. Biden had sought to reassure Americans that the government, guided by experts, could reassert its control over events, from the pandemic to the crisis in energy supply. Republicans, meanwhile, had focussed on assuring voters that they would deliver control over a personal sphere of influence: schools that would teach what you wanted them to teach, a government that would make it easier, not harder, to get your hands on a gun. A moral panic about gender identity might seem anachronistic, but it served a very current political need. Franklin said, “It’s a way for Republicans to tell people that they can have back control of their lives.”
The problem - for Biden, for AOC, for the New York Times, for all the people in Park Slope who went to the right schools and believe in the current thing and know paradise is just around the corner if only we raise our taxes a little more - is that “the government, guided by experts” hasn’t had a great couple of years.
To say the least.
The profound failure of lockdowns and now vaccines have woken many average folks to the dangers of bureaucratic overreach, expert overconfidence, and authoritarianism in the name of safety.
They took our rights. The media and public health authorities would like you to forget the closed playgrounds and shuttered malls and mask mandates of 2020. And the vaccine mandates of last fall. They want you to forget that for a while, the federal government tried to take the right to work from tens of millions of unvaccinated people. State and local governments went even further; and countries like Canada and Australia further still. UNTIL 10 DAYS AGO, CANADA DID NOT ALLOW UNVACCINATED PEOPLE ON PLANES - effectively curtailing their right to travel in a country that stretches more than 4,000 miles from British Columbia to Newfoundland.
And they took our rights FOR NOTHING.
You and I and they know everything they did failed.
The proof sits in super-cold freezers where millions of vials of mRNA shots, the greatest medical breakthrough since fentanyl, sit slowly decaying. The proof is in the hospitals and pharmacies that are not offering those jabs to kids under 5, because demand is near-zero… and maybe because some of the physician-administrators who make millions of dollars a year running those hospitals know in their hearts that the risk-benefit analysis for mRNA shots for kids is all risk/no benefit and actually want to do the right thing for once. Not enough to say anything publicly, let’s not get crazy, but enough to make the shots a little harder to get.
And Dr. Anthony Fauci - double-boosted Anthony Fauci - gave us some more proof today.
It couldn’t have happened to a nicer megalomaniac. (This is your excuse to retire, Tony! You got yerself the long Covid!)
So, no, I don’t plan to let Covid and the vaccines go anytime soon. Those of us on Team Reality can’t let the Faucis of the world run from their failure, we can’t pretend it didn’t happen. No mulligans here. Especially because the mRNA shots may have long-run risks we are still just beginning to see.
So the New Yorker frames the proposition the two parties are offering exactly right. The Democrats offer expertise, Ivy League brilliance, the smartest folks in the room; the Republicans personal control.
But why wouldn’t people trust their own judgment over that of “experts” after the disaster of the last couple of years? What the left cannot seem to understand is that I’m not the problem - which is why kicking me off Twitter didn’t save the mRNA shots or the mandates. Ron DeSantis is not the problem either.
Reality is the problem for the left. Reality wants a course correction, and in four months voters are set to deliver that message to the Democratic Party with a foghorn blast.
The court's decision did not ban abortions! It gave the responsibility back to the states, where it belongs. Most states allow abortions if the mother's life is in danger or if the pregnancy is not viable.
Because ol' J.Roc here doesn't think in those terms. He's still stuck in the Democrat mental vice that results in regrettable mistakes but having no idea of the root cause. He only knows he'll course correct after being burned by touching that hot stove, but can't figure out how to avoid the burn in the first place.
Still trapped in the verifiably anti-science and obtuse Democrat talking point that the body inside the mother is the same as the body of the mother. Conflation of true bodily autonomy issues such as vaccine mandates with blatantly false bodily autonomy issues such as the taking of the life and destruction of body that is not the mother's life or body to take. As such, he has no interest in sending it back to states or limitations on abortion, he's only interested in guaranteeing the "right" to take the life of the unborn as birth control as some kind of virtue on par with individual liberty.
Just a guess, but I'm guessing the ol' wife is pretty hard core "women's right to abortion" and he knows where he needs to be on it if he knows what's good for him.
Wow I really dislike it when people mind-read someone they disagree with. The woman who gets pregnant is facing the prospect of raising that child for 18+ years. Guess why there were so-called shotgun marriages. How about we bring that back. The man who contributed the sperm needs to step up if we’re going to require that child come into this world. If you’re against that, you’re dooming that baby you so self righteously saved. If you’re ready to step up and adopt a child, then I’ll listen to you. Otherwise not.
I really dislike it when people strip women of all agency for who they decide to be impregnated by and then resort to absurdly obtuse false choice logic in order to justify their lust for killing babies in the womb.
How about we bring back making the father part of the decision related to his own unborn child and then maybe you can talk about restricting his choice to leave?
I don't need to step up and do anything to have a valid opinion on killing babies in the womb. I'm not responsible for the choices and actions of complete strangers no mater how much you wish your lizard brain logic made any sense there. I also don't need to be ready to adopt since there is a long waiting list of people trying, wanting, praying to adopt babies that outstrips supply. If you'd been anywhere near this situation in your life rather than spending your life with your head firmly implanted in your ass, you'd know this.
Agreed. The father should be required to have the same responsibility as he also exercised agency. How about we have a lien put on all his assets for the next 18 years? Sounds fair to me. (You might not care what happens when that unwanted child is born, but I do.) If the father wants to help arrange the adoption and the new family agrees to let him off the hook, fine. But pretending this is simple is a luxury one only has when one is not pregnant. It’s pretty easy to look on and shout murderer! How about fix it instead? I say criminal penalties for men who contribute to that child’s existence without taking responsibility for it.
You care so much about what happens "when that unwanted child is born" you want it's mother to kill it instead. What a guy/gal!
You can't tell the man he has no say in what happens to his child before its born, and clowns like you do, and then tell him that if it's born it's his responsibility. If the baby is truly "unwanted" by it's parents, that does not mean the baby is unwanted. This is the abortion as birth control cult rhetorical tactic designed to get the abortions they want instead of the baby to parents that want it. There is no shortage of waiting parents out there who either can't or don't want to have their own but are literally buried on wait lists waiting anxiously for months, sometimes years, on end for the phone to ring.
Finally, can't help but comment on your last bit of lizard brain logic, where you favor no criminal charges for killing babies in the womb while making a criminal out of a men who've been told they have no say in the matter and walk away. Once again, what a guy/gal!
Child support already exists in all 50 states, and not paying it can result in jail time. I can't speak to other states, but in Florida (and probably many other states), a father can't just decide to give up his parental rights to his kid either. Even if he and the mother both agreed to it, a judge won't grant a termination of rights unless there is someone stepping up to adopt the kiddo in his absence. We are in the process right now, so my husband can adopt our kiddo, since he has been her daddy for most of her life.
You seem to think the conservative platform is "no abortion" AND "no responsibility for fathers", which is... not a thing. We believe in personal responsibility on the part of both the mother and the father of the child.
You also seem to think conservatives aren't willing to adopt, which is statistically incorrect. The vast majority of adoptive families lean right. There are 38 sets of adoptive parents for every newborn available to be adopted in the US. Furthermore, if the government eases the requirements (especially cost) of adoption, many more would adopt.
There are long waiting lists for adoption of these "unwanted" babies. Many states have laws allowing the mother to drop the baby off at a hospital and walk away. The men should step up... you betcha! But only as far as the women do. Adoption is a loving answer.
The pro-abortionists either know this and don't care or don't know this because they don't care. Either way, they have a morbid preference for killing babies in the womb over more ethical options.
You are definitely right, in that it is harder to place children than babies. I see the comment by Hornit that explains it very well. If more people who were not really ready (or would never want kids at all) would put those kids up for adoption when they were babies, it certainly would be easier on everyone! (My husband was adopted at age 2; he was in foster care until then. We have never looked for his biological parents, but we are eternally grateful that they made the choice they did.)
This is a disingenuous narrative. People going through the baby adoption process are NOT the people who bring home new puppies because they're cute and then abandon them when they become inconveniences. And they are not the people who do foster care for the money. The process of adopting a baby is grueling and often heart breaking, not to mention expensive.
The problem with adopting children that are not given up for adoption as babies is that they are primarily children that have been taken from their parent(s) by the state. They have already been born and raised for some time in complete dysfunctional, often abusive environments and now there are also all sorts of other complications that come with attempting to adopt them and be parents to them with other or another parent and family looming in the background. Yeah, they need love but now they need a whole lot more than just that.
As a conservative, your terms are acceptable to me. I also agree we should not presume someone's motivation for supporting abortion, but the rest of his argument is still solid, even if delivered with a crappy attitude.
So, she should have known she was pregnant by 8 weeks...why would she wait any longer? Most likely missed a period, so maybe better education...miss a period get pregnancy tested...
The test strips cost as low as $.50/each. The "women are toddlers" crowd insist telling us all the reasons women didn't know they were pregnant, so since they are admitting there's no way to know from one's symptoms, if one is sexually active then test once/week year-round. That can cost about $24/yr and problem is solved.
Anyone who wants an abortion can get one. You know that. However, if you don't want the clot-shot, you can lose your job, lose your career, and, if you have no income, maybe lose your home. Have a little perspective.
The sticky part about abortions is that it's not just your wife's body; there's also the body of the person growing inside her. That is not a religious issue; it's a legal one. If a pregnant woman is murdered, and the baby inside her also dies, the law considers that a double murder. The constitution doesn't address abortion, so now the people can work it out through the voting process.
And, unlike catching COVID, there are actions that can be taken to avoid pregnancy in the first place. Most of these mitigations have zero negative side effects, so there's no excuse for not using them.
Well, up until a couple of days ago, big daddy government said that it was okay! No worries, go for it! Now you are inconvenienced even more! Not fair!
It’s also a scientific reality - it is alive at some point in the gestational process. I personally don’t think that “life” starts at conception, but I know there’s life there well before birth. And reasonable people agree that this general framework is true - just look at the polling. Even Roe had a “viability” clause. So the middle ground is widely supported across the board. It’s the assholes on the ends of both spectrums that are drowning out a reasonable agreed upon solution. I’d go as far as saying that the ‘73 Roe ruling was part of the problem if not the worst thing that happened to the conversation that needed to occur around the topic. And it gave false hope to a few generations of women, leading them actually to believe that the constitution supported the (unexpressed but obvious) viewpoint that there was a split view on human life.
Maybe those people supporting abortion at any age, even post birth, disgusted so many people that they made the abortion issue what it is today.
Denying a fetus is alive. Saying it is just a bunch of cells makes people sound like ghouls. Every human couple is attatched to the baby as soon as it is a bumb in the womans stomach, and people morn the loss of the fetus no matter how early it is in developement. So hearing people celebrate the destruction is just disgusting to the public.
Did you see the very noticeably pregnant protester that wrote across her stomach, "Not yet a human!" And another female protester had her two kids with her and a sign saying, "don't force this on anyone!" I'm sure those two kids will love seeing that picture in a few years.
I am not an asshole just because I don’t agree with you. Life starts at conception and the baby is pretty much developed by 12 weeks. Heart beating way before that. Just look at any ultrasound, please. If you want to kill babies because it’s convenient then at least be honest about it.
Looking at a picture is not the best way to make a judgment since the human embryo looks very similar to other mammalian embryos. This is why pig embryos are used for dissection. Since you state life starts at conception then it follows you would want to make IVF illegal. An embryo is an embryo, whether fertilization/conception happens in a dish or in the fallopian tubes. The fetus isn't "pretty much developed" by 12 weeks but the neural system is starting to develop and most Americans (and almost the entire western world) support 1st trimester abortions and IVF.
I guess I'm one of the assholes, then, because I know that the middle-ground still fails to deal with the reality of abortion - i.e. the killing of an innocent, defenseless human being. While I recognize there may be a different political reality, the physical reality of abortion is death of a human being.
Well stated. I believe the assholes at both ends of the spectrum are trying to destroy this country, and both ends treat women as morons unable to add 2+2. If one is sexually active then do a strip pregnancy test once/week year-round. That can cost as low as $24/year. That eliminates the "I didn't know I was pregnant" until too late argument.
In a search of state level abortion laws I couldn’t find one that didn’t have a carve-out for saving the mothers life. There’s obviously states that don’t have exceptions for rape/incest. Interestingly I found that most states, even blue states, had a “until viable” clause which is set around 24 weeks. Only Oregon didn’t (I admit that CA may as well). So this hub-bub seems more political to me than real in broad terms.
Bottom line, the constitution was twisted to some oboe support the idea that there was a difference between born and unborn humans. A preposterous assumption. That’s why abortion can’t be “constitutional.” It’s actually as simple as that.
That's how it is in Maryland too. They tried to pass an Infanticide bill, where the mother had twenty-eight days to abort her baby after it was born. That bill didn't pass.
There are 6 states including Colorado, the state I currently reside in, that allows an abortion during the entire gestational process, ie up to and until the baby's head "crowns". Colorado uses weasel words in their law to spare their ignorant voters. Such states are not concerned about the mother or the unborn.
And the states that dont have, say a rape/incest clause, if the people dont like that, its on them to change it. States now have the right to fine tune the law to fit the conscience of their people, rather than having people on the coasts, who decorate the Empire State Building in pink lights to celebrate late term abortion passing in NYS tellling people in the Bible Belt what their abortion law is to be.
The court's decision was not about abortion, but about legislating from the bench, magically discovering principles which were never enshrined in the constitution, which resulted in opening the gateway to a lot of other bad laws and interpretations of the law in entirely unrelated matters. It was about the Constitution, which protects the rights and liberties of people of both sexes against government overreach.
That's the problem of the left. They don't know, or care, what the law actually says. They only care what some hyped talking head says it says. They're lazy.
Everyone is lazy. That's why talking points, heuristics, and smear campaigns are so effective. It gives people the justification for making snap decisions without effort.
... and we can all be scammed and guilty of making bad decisions, especially when we are afraid and under pressure to act quickly.
SCOTUS said the Constitution had no opinion, so it's up to the states, but the Founding Fathers didn't think it warranted even mentioning since abortion was codified into law in the early 1600s in England. Heck, it was totally legal into the late 19th century in America when the AMA decided to oppose it....
There has ALWAYS been contraception and abortion and always will. Abortion isn't easy, but neither are lots of things about the lives we live. We should be allowed to live those lives without undue interference by pontificating narcissists.
Did you learn your history from AOC? Most of what you said is either blatantly false or lacking the useful context to actually be true.
Contraception isn't even part of this issue, so you need not include it at all. People have (mostly) always taken measures to prevent pregnancy. And abortion has been a thing for a long time. What's newer is abortion as a form of contraception, which is of course, what this is all about.
Don't follow AOC, but I was drawing from memory. Apparently abortion was codified in England in the 13th century rather than the 16th.
"The first references to abortion in English law appeared in the 13th Century. The law followed Church teaching that abortion was acceptable until ‘quickening’, which, it was believed, was when the soul entered the fetus. The legal situation remained like this for centuries." https://abortionrights.org.uk/history-of-abortion-law-in-the-uk/
But my memory was on point re America's history.
"In U.S. history, abortion wasn't always controversial. In fact, in colonial America, it was considered a fairly common practice, a private decision made by women and aided mostly by midwives. But in the mid-1800s, a small group of physicians set out to change that."
100% revisionist and creative history from your abortion activist sources that depends on the abject ignorance of their minions to understand any historical realities outside the context as what they know as their personal, current reality. The absence of formal law does not equal the "codification" of it in law, which is willfully conflated in such propaganda. England did not exist in any shape, manner or form in the 13th century as it does today, which is again what the propaganda depends on you thinking. There was no formal central government of England to codify such "rights" or laws. There was a semblance of a monarchy that was constantly in flux and challenged and an array of mostly independent kingdoms that were also constantly in flux and challenged by perpetual civil war. Such social rules and laws changed as the local rulers changed. And the concept of individual liberty and rights, such as rights to life, didn't exist on any meaningful scale. It was essentially a feudal system of lords (tiny elite minority) and serfs (masses) with very different standards of "justice."
Attempting to compare some imagined codified right to an abortion in 13th century England to the world we live in today is a fool's errand, which again is what the propaganda depends on. Suffice it to say, "quickening" was simply when a woman first became aware there was a life inside her in those times. They didn't know what they didn't know, of course, so rules and mores were extensions of what they knew or understood. And Saxon mores at that time were very Christian and very unfriendly to the ideas of sexual and reproductive liberties.
If there is a God and he had any sense of humor, he'd drop these clowns back in 13th century England and tell them to behave in the manner they believe (assuming they actually believe it) people and society did back then.
Who says I either "trust" NPR or use them as my only news source?
We are not debating POV or agendas in this small thread. We can disagree on that, but to disagree that abortion has always been practiced and largely tolerated in North America, the British Isles, and the rest of the world in previous times is akin to denying that conception is a result of sexual intercourse.
"Instructions for inducing an abortion appear in the Bible. In Numbers 5:11-31"
BTW: I disagree that abortion is being used as a form of contraception. No woman would chose abortion (or Plan B) over the pill, a condom, or diaphragm.
Yup, legislating from the bench is not Supreme Court Justices job contrary to what liberal justices believe. A lot of these people who are upset about Roe v Wade decision don't seem to understand this point. Also to J.Roc, the difference of bodily autonomy in these two cases is.. that the latter involves another life.. see those murder cases when victim is pregnant? murderer gets to be charged for two murders? One for the mother, and one for the baby in her womb. So, it is not the same with the bodily autonomy of the vaccine case. People on the right is fighting for the life of unborn who does not have the voice. (my personal opinion is.. women should be given the choice of abortion up to say 12 weeks. or till the baby has heart beat. You are fully aware the chance of your pregnancy if you miss your period!).
I remember when Roe vs. Wade was passed, they said in forty years the states will have the responsibility for abortions. This has been the plan al along.
That's a nasty thing to say. I listened to it. You really think that's for intellectuals? It's just a bunch of angry lefties belly-aching about things they clearly don't understand. I think I lost some IQ points just listening to that nonsense. Now, I'm going to have to read some Thomas Sowell, some Walter Williams, and some Milton Friedman just to get my IQ points back. But, if you like that sort of thing, more power to you.
Mdog, the definition of intellect is the faculty of objectively reasoning and understanding, especially regarding abstract or academic matters. Your learned comment is; “...lefties belly-aching about things they clearly don’t understand.” Which directly implies that you’re more intelligent than three law professors and John Stewart? I think that’s called delusions of grandeur: an inflated sense of intelligence. Although it doesn’t surprise me, libertarians don’t live in the real world.
Buch of sophistic nonsense punctuated by the standard lizard brain leftist appeal to authority canard,
"Lefties bellyaching" is a verifiably accurate account of what that display of anti-intellectual histrionics was. Mdog may or may not be "more intelligent" than those three law professors and John Stewart. But he is one thing for certain. Correct in his assertion that they don't understand this Constitutional issue. They, apparently like you, are capable only of feeling it. This is self evidently true of anybody who imagines a right to abortion where none exists simply because they want it to.
Hornlt, so you’re the arbiter of what is a constitutional right. In the original Roe v. Wade decision, seven of the nine judges concurred. In 1989, 1992, 2007, and 2016 the Supreme Court upheld the essence of Roe versus Wade. 330 Human Life Amendment proposals have been introduced in Congress, but only one made it to the floor of the Senate in 1983, and it failed. The above belies your assertion: “This is self evidently true of anybody who imagines a right to abortion where none exists simply because they want it to.” For almost 50 years, abortion was a constitutional right until the Republicans decided to have a theocratic Supreme Court that believes in a theocracy instead of a democracy
I have certainly noted that extended college stays have lately resulted in a marked reduction in intelligence and reasoning skills.
These people make assertions, say its "insane" or "old white men" "dead people" "fundamentalism" ... I do like how one equivalated reverting abortion to states to "slavery" "Its a form of rape" Compare this to something like Robert Barnes who drops truth bombs. "A state believing that life begins at conception" is a "laugh test"
"pass the laugh test" its all "theocratic" "Returning this to the states is pure gaslighting" "The people can't decide" "Minority rule" "The Senate is affirmative action for rural white Christians" "We made the states supermajorities [for republicans]" I cant take any more of this i am done.
DSkzzz, you were forewarned that you needed, Intellect: (the faculty of reasoning and understanding objectively, especially with regard to abstract or academic matters.) Your comment indicates you have difficulty with abstract thinking: (Thinking characterized by the ability to use concepts and to make and understand generalizations, such as of the properties or patterns shared by a variety of specific items or events.) Better luck next time.
Holding up some random college professors and a washed up comedian as the end-all intellectuals is hilarious. I've known FAR too many professors from my time at the university to believe they have the end say with their "scholarly arguments". 🤣 What a hoot.
It's the standard leftist "trust my experts" reasoning, which is just their preferred confirmation bias orgy, because they are absolutely incapable of independent, objective thought. We see this in the COVID and vaccines debacle too, of course, because it is the indelible mark of leftism.
They didn't celebrate the loss of bodily autonomy. They celebrated the return of the issue to the People, where it belongs.
They also celebrated, because it's NOT about bodily autonomy. It's about bodilies autonomy. There's a second body involved, and it's about time the People speak up for the second body.
Some People will still allow that second, innocent body to be killed - the People of NYS and California, for example. They who celebrated the "loss of bodily autonomy" understand that.
I find it hard to believe that you cannot tell the difference between government DEMANDING that you shoot up your children with experimental, untested drugs, and government LETTING the People in the 50 separate, discrete States decide what will happen inside each State.
Because remember, if the federal government mandates jabs for kids, there's no OTHER federal government you can go to and still remain in America. If a state government bans your wife from having an abortion, she can go across a state line and get it done.
I find it hard to believe you cannot distinguish the difference between the two.
I’m always fascinated by liberals who get upset when a pregnant woman is murdered (think Scott/Lacy Peterson), and the murderer can face two murder charges, yet aspirating a viable fetus on demand is not a problem.
I’m glad to finally see someone else point out the absurdity of the “my truth” “his truth” “her truth” “their truth” language that has become annoyingly pervasive in today’s speech. I’ve yet to see someone point this out, outside of my own personal conversations, until now.
Yeah, I’ve pretty much struck the word fetus from my vocabulary. Someone once so poignantly pointed out that in the unfortunate case that a woman has a miscarriage, one wouldn’t say “Oh, I’m so sorry you lost the fetus.” No. You’d say “I’m so sorry you lost the baby.”
What is worse is the hard pro-lifers who actually vote against those double murder laws. That happens A LOT. Though I guess you have to give them points for consistency
Of course, it's also a cynical method of getting people fired up enough to vote. No one has my vote. Pelosi worth $141 million, Schumer $69 million (I think it's mostly in his wife's name), McConnell worth $150 million. Do they have your interests at heart or is it only their continued wealth they're worried about?
It most certainly is. Most of these women up in arms don’t realize they’re tools for these political aims. I saw someone post on that little blue fowl truth-squelching platform that women have been brainwashed, at one turn, to allow men open access to their bodies (sexual revolution, female empowerment) and, at the other, that a growing baby can be excised from their bodies at will by insidiously linking the word abortion with rights. Of course, this propaganda was carried out over time via repetitive language and it was all wrapped up in the god-forsaken bow of feminism, you know, to give it some real demonic staying power.
the funniest part of feminism is that in several communities it has been completely co-opted by men wearing dresses & all the women who protest this are kicked out
it's like some strange play on female compassion that they have to stand for the mentally ill man at the expense of their more logical (and less compassionate) sisters
if i had a scholarship-eligible daughter i would be upset, but if i had sons i would celebrate that their opportunities doubled!
The irony of the backfiring is not lost on me. I, too, find it comedic. And I don’t feel bad about it. You take up the false mantle of feminism, a movement intended to undermine and dismantle the nuclear family, you get your just desserts. Good old reaping and sowing.
yeah, it's like you're more of a woman if you work on powerpoints in an office than if you're a mother raising her kids somehow or if you have casual sex with random men with no consequences
whose ideas were these?
men's! they were obviously men's idea in the first place & the first women decided to feel bad for the mentally deranged men that brought them forward instead of standing with their more logical & less compassionate sisters, and i can't wait to see what happens in the next generation
here's another one to tickle your irony bone. It strike you yet that all 3 of Trump's judges were approved by less than 60 Senate votes? I.e. because the Dems blew up the filibuster.
The rich have eaten the left and men dressed as a crude caricature of women have eaten feminism. But if you disagree with them, then you are a follower of the only German Chancellor worse than Angela Merkel (can we say the 'H' word here?) Clown World!
Of course they don’t care about America! We were sold out during Woodrow Wilson’s term. Everything the government does is not legal (property taxes, income taxes, mortgages, etc.) I want to become an American National (it takes time and lots of research, court filings, etc.). We should be called The United States FOR America, not OF America…it was changed. Thirteen families run America.
Do you refer to the Federal Reserve act, alleged ratification of the 16th amendment which provided no new power of taxation, popular "election" of Senators, or what? Yep; the diabolocrats had a heyday!
At what child's age does that decision NOT belong with the mother with guidance from her physician? One-week-old newborn? Six-month-old baby? 20-week-old fetus? Two-year-old toddler?
There is no easy or happy answer, here, but since when has life been all easy and happy?
I believe the Catholic Church once regarded male masturbation as akin to murder. It has certainly felt that way about the Pill and other female contraception.
"Quickening" which is at about 20 weeks has been the traditional response. I can live with that. I can't live with women having unsafe abortions that could kill them or make them infertile or being forced to have an unwanted child that they can't properly care for and for whom they sacrifice their lives.
That said, I respect the pro-life position and wish they'd respect the pro-choice position because, again, there is no easy or happy answer.
There sure as heck ARE "easy" and "happy" answers.
One-week-old, six-month-old, two-year-old - those are EASY answers. You don't kill children who are those ages.
You don't find those to be easy answers? If not, then that's disturbing.
"I can't live with women having unsafe abortions that could kill them or make them infertile or being forced to have an unwanted child that they can't properly care for and for whom they sacrifice their lives." is an enormous straw man, NONE of which would have to happen with the issue being returned to the States, as it has been. Abortion will *never* be banned nationally.
I suggest a parameter is 20 weeks gestation and you equate it with a 2 year old? That's a red herring.
Having states make the decisions isn't a totally unreasonable legal process, it's just a totally unnecessary increase of polarization within our already beleaguered country.
Your daughter can still get an abortion... she just has to put more effort into it than making a next day appointment down the street. I find it demeaning and disrespectful that people look at women and assume they all need abortions and can't figure out how to handle their own lives - as if they are too dumb to do so.
If an on demand, next day abortion is your highest priority, then, yes, you need to remain with the Democrats. I hope that is consolation in the event the next forced school closure, lockdown and vaccine mandate occurs. They showed their true colors and will do all this again to us.
Just how many women are truly trying NOT to get pregnant as well as the men involved being responsible "in the moment"? Where is self responsibility? How many pregnancies could easily be avoided on responsibility awareness alone? Sure things happen, but just sayin. Kind of similar to the over reliance on medications for so many Americans who are so overly prescribed...it's lunacy. Where is the self accountability and personal responsibility for living well in healthy ways. Every time I shop in a supermarket I am taken aback by what people are doing with their bodies and then fall into the big Pharma bowl of "here you poor thing take this med and it will take care of it" Just sayin...there endeth the lesson.
Spot on. People act as if the modern women getting pregnant is a case of ‘Oops. How did that happen?’ Have all the brain cells of those with this 1+?=2 thinking been uploaded to the cloud?
When I was growing up, being on welfare and get an abortion was abhorrent (and people fall on rough times). My how times have changed! Where’s the shame? There’s your problem!
I hope this results in an abstinence wave and women shunning the embracing of whore-culture spread by the media and groups invested in keeping their coffers fat with the selling of the body parts of murdered babies from mothers who drank the embrace your sexuality/sexual freedom kool-aid. The more they brainwash women with this, the more they can keep the discards of their bad decisions coming. ‘Come on ladies, get with the times. You’re a modern women and we need the cast-offs of your progeny to make us unethically rich.’
Men need to step up too as we all know it's a two way street. Sex is wonderful and a gift from God, but he gave us all a mind to use and choose how to live a life of abundance through living responsibly...
Agree, Brogan12. There is no pregnancy without a male involved, however that involvement may occur. Women were created with the physical capacity to bring new life into the world ... but we can't exercise that capacity without assistance. Just because we were chosen as the child-bearing gender, doesn't give us the right to ignore the "participation" of either the father or the unborn child in the project. We can't get pregnant by ourselves, and once pregnant, are no longer by ourselves. Sorry, ladies. Time to GROW UP and accept responsibility for PREVENTING pregnancy if you don't want or aren't ready for it. Yes, guys should also be responsible, but if you roll the dice with some dude you just met, it's on you. It's really not at all complicated. Pick a birth control method and practice it consistently like an adult, and voila! ... no pregnancy.
One thing is certain (it goes both ways), if you’re single, good luck finding someone that wants to screw you after you’ve been jabbed four times. Hell no!
I did enough dating to last me two lifetimes-lol! I’d NEVER go out with a guy that was jabbed. Luckily, I have a wonderful bf (he lost his job because of not getting jabbed, I retired years early for the same). Dating was great growing up in the ‘80’s on…now? No thanks!
Lucky YOU.! I am still in the new world of dating. As a man it's interesting what is now in profiles women post. I'm sure women could say the same of men's. It IS what it is though. I remain hopeful though there is that special woman who is on the wavelengths I need to endure :)
I hope you are 18 yrs + 27 months old. Because if you were a Dem as an adult male prior to 27 months ago then, my goodness, being a slow learner is a tough slog through life. Unless you were on the "inside" as are our adult male politicians, bureaucrats, media, or entertainers. The number of non-government employee/non-lawyer white male taxpayers who vote democrat is vanishingly small. Adult male blacks, asians, and hispanics are showing this same tendency as they mature. Real men don't eat quiche and real men know how to vote.
Oh great, with that logic, whether I am directed to get a vaccine should be left to a majority vote of fellow citizens or the government of the state I live in. The analogy is apt: medical autonomy My body my choice should lead, but not be the last word. We should all focus on health and getting rid of unwanted pregnancy so we don’t need vaccines or abortions, so choice is 100% and life is 100%. That should be where we put our efforts, not on restriction or prescription.
No, you have the logic backwards. States are not *mandating* abortion so it’s not analogous to states mandating vaccination. The proper analogy is having states permit abortion and having states permit vaccination. But not mandating either one of them.
No you have the logic backwards. This would be like states mandating that you COULDN'T take a vaccine just as they are mandating you cannot have access to your bodily choices via abortion bans. Desantis tried this overreach with masks, initially trying to mandate NO mask wearing, then backtracked because of the obvious backlash and contradiction. Choice is where you don't have the vaccine mandated FOR or AGAINST, or abortion FOR or AGAINST. Get it now?
Your logic is clear. The only variable is the unique unborn child. Roe vs Wade was ultimately struck down because of the Left's complete unwillingness to allow the unborn child any protection, at all.
True that. There must be moral and legal weight accorded a being entering this world. Historically, even among Catholics before the Industrial revolution, this line was midterm, around 18 weeks or so, defined by the quickening. That’s reasonable, but then we must make not only the fetus viable but the raising of the child, with affordable child care, raised salaries for moms and dads, and universal, accessible medical care. That will get serious pushback from corporate interests which control both parties.
I pray that in the very least, women won’t pretend they want the baby until 6 months and then have a late term abortion...actually I’m not necessarily against the Abortion Pill as it is only used earlier in pregnancy, but personal awareness and responsibility need to be taught and WITNESSED.
Very few women don’t know they are pregnant at 8 weeks and instead they wait months and months because they are taught this weird progressive “total life system” where the government guarantees “equity”..
Shoot, I forgot to add that the “day after” pill would cover rape and incest...they wait months to decide they don’t want the rapist or daddy’s child...
They go on and on about these two, but they should never require late term abortions, unless it’s a child and being held captive by the family...
One might hope that a woman who is raped would have the presence of mind to get a morning after pill, well, the morning after. Hopefully. Some will be too traumatized to think about that, especially if they're very young.
Incest is a completely different matter, in that it usually involves young girls and is not a one-time thing. Dad starts raping daughter when she's 11 years old. At 14, she finally winds up pregnant. I don't see how a morning after pill would figure into it. She'd need to keep taking the thing on a regular basis, and if it's on a regular basis, she might as well just take the regular pill. "Doctor, could you please prescribe the pill to me because daddy likes to fool around with me?" Err, right.
Guttmacher Institute, which is pro-choice, informs us that more than 92% of abortions are elective. Fewer than 1% involve fetal abnormalities. So that argument really doesn’t get you very far.
This should be the constant retort for those raging about the extremes. There’s also the disturbing revelation that the abortion industry keeps the traffickers in business. I learned that disturbing aspect fairly recently. Haven’t been the same since.
Love how you pinned this divisive garbage, Alex, to drown out the top comment. The FDA and CDC trying to inject their lethal vaccine into babies and toddlers is maybe a little more important than this red vs blue mind control political toxic waste, eh?
I suggest you get your facts straight. If a baby is malformed, or the life of the mother is at risk, an abortion is suggested. I speak from experience.
Dear J.Roc, I have faith that reflection will resolve what you currently regard as a dilemma.
The most important priority is to make sure that the government can't force you or your child to be injected with a drug that has caused injuries and death.
The next priority is to be involved in the democratic process. I have no idea what state you are in, but are you reacting to your present situation or the concept that citizens of individual states have had their rights to determine the laws of their states returned to them?
If there is one thing that is a fact, abortions are still accessible in the United States of America. Let's make sure that protection from authoritarian mandates remain as well.
Well said. And if everyone here is actually against an all out ban on abortion and realizes the slippery slope risk (some states now trying to outlaw contraception) then I stand corrected.
Which state is trying to outlaw contraception? I've read people touting that line a few times. I've seen no articles that list any state that is actually attempting to do that; nor do I believe that any state would do so succesfully. Which state government has enough political support to pull that off? I find that dubious at best.
In fact, I think Republicans have been pushing for OTC oral contraceptives for quite some time now and Democrats are also now starting to support the idea.
The abortion issue is a little bit more complicated than "my body my choice." The whole point is that it is not just your body when you're pregnant, there's another body involved too.
Actually, in one case the government is forcing you to put something into your body. In the other case, that choice was freely made by the woman. Just black and white.
Infanticide is not “bodily autonomy” it’s purposely taking a human life. The way people that live abortion so much, as you do have reacted to this decision has been telling. You want unfettered abortion up to 9 months. Many states that want to put limits on abortion, after roe will only ban abortion after 12-15 weeks. The far left run he’ll holes will allow abortion unrestricted. At least understand the issue before wandering lost into the wilderness over your politics. You are misinformed, and if you think abortion is about health care or bodily autonomy up to 9 months pregnant, you are also sick in the head.
When you have reason on your side, deliver it with respect or it comes across as something to avoid. Winning the point isn't the point, we want to win them over.
not sure of the attack in my comment. Just the way I feel as a person who is 100% pro life. To me, people who want abortion with no limits are sick individuals. Killing a baby for convenience in the last trimester is barbaric and inhumane.
I agree that it is monstrous. But calling someone a monster is less persuasive that presenting the monstrous aspects of the reality of late-term abortion. "Sick in the head" will not persuade. We're on the same side.
It is scientifically indisputable that a human zygote is an individual human, growing and developing as we all do for the extent of our lives. Politically, we as a people have to come up with a societal compromise that neither side will embrace 100%. But we have to have a functioning society.
I agree with you on most of your statements. The abortion hot trigger point is seen by the dems as a way to stimulate votes for them. Like you, I cannot vote for either party. They don't care about ethics or the health of the country or the individual. They care about increasing their wealth. Pelosi is worth $141 million, Schumer (on paper) $69 million, McConnell $150 million. How on earth did they get so rich on their salaries (sarcasm)? Do you suppose insider trading of stocks of companies they are supposed to regulate could have anything to do with it?
How are public servants even allowed to remain in office with the accumulation of this sort wealth? It’s absurd. Acting in their own interests is a given. Add to the question of ‘public servant, how does your illegal/unethical garden grow?’ the intel that many (possibly) all of them own/have interests in Chinese shell companies. Go figure.
The FDA and CDC should be immediately dissolved, and everyone involved put in handcuffs. Here is how evil this covid agenda really is:
The FDA recently approved the pfizer injection for 0-4 year olds knowing full well how extremely deadly the poison is. During the public comment section of the approval panel debate, Sam Dodson called in and ripped the panelists a new asshole--citing a number of sinister health risks:
The trials the FDA based the 0-4 approval on were a ludicrously fraudulent atrocity. In the end only 3 children were used to determine the injection's safety and efficacy:
Once approved, CDC director Walensky put out a video smirking, smiling, and overtly jubilant that the injection had been approved for babies and toddlers. Here she is gleaming into the camera and encouraging parents to get the poison into their children knowing full well it will kill and maim them in enormous numbers:
Since everyone else is getting it that was vaxxed! One vaxxed friend called me and said, “I hope you’re not mad, I have covid!” I asked why she thought I (unvaxxed) would be mad, and added, if anyone’s mad, it should be YOU!
I have often wondered where the anger is from the vaccine faithful. "They" promised it would "end covid" and stop transmission (they said it would!) and it didn't. Why isn't anyone mad they didn't keep their promise? Fauci et al also said to wear cloth masks for a year and a half (two of them, even!) and then CNN says 'Cloth masks are mere facial decoration." and now cloth masks are out. The fact is, there were numerous studies available online in the NIH library that concluded cloth is ineffective against respiratory viruses. These studies are dated pre-covid! So they keep making fools of people...."Oh, I wore a mask for a year that was ineffective, probably caught covid through it....no biggie....OK what are they telling me to do next?".....the brainwashing/denial thing is massive!!
I glad you mentioned that. I was almost not going to link to dm since their ads without a blocker are downright obnoxious, but the fact that they failed to mention in the article if the moms were jabbed during pregnancy should scream out to everyone.
i tend to think that if they don't mention it, it's because it would reflect unfavorably on the vaccines. for example, there was an article about a NYC art gallery owner, mid 30's, who got covid and died. no where in the article did it mention her vaccine status, although i fail to see how she could have navigated the hip NYC art world without being fully vaccinated (this was a while back before mandates started dropping).
my guess is that if she had died unvaccinated, it would have been in the headline and in every paragraph of the article with some gloating, shaming and blaming
Bingo! And, remember, Australia kept Covid largely out of the country, until later in the Delta wave, after they had rolled out the jabs across much of the country. The vaxx came first, then Covid - and now this is the result. Original antigenic sin.
Babies born of vaccinated moms who did not bring them along while running errands as the expert advice was for only one family member to do the shopping. Nor take them to the park as they were all closed down. Nor set up play dates with other moms because authorities limited gatherings.
Gee, you wonder why 'covid babies' have zero immunity. 'Experts' can claim hindsight, but I had two covid babies and did everything in my power to live a normal life as I knew the danger of keeping your newborn in a bubble... because common sense. People around here have already forgotten all the crazy draconian measures that were(are) put in place by our Supreme Leader Trudeau and the other levels of government. But I won't, the disgusted looks from other shoppers because we were out with a newborn, the Karens calling the city on kids playing outside, or not parking in driveways because gathering with family members was verboten.
Good on you. You looked after your children's future needs. I have heard that Canada was under the jack-boot of Trudeau. Australia and New Zealand had their versions of "a fresh hell", too. I live in Chicago. Our little neighborhood had children playing outside. Not everyone was covid-crazy. But our psycho mayor was threatening to have people arrested for daring to walk outside at the lakefront. Just a tyrannical flexing of muscle. Hopefully we will kick her to the curb in the next election.
Thanks for posting that. Sweet Lord, what are they doing to children. I talked to a nurse yesterday who said she has a friend who had her 3-year-old jabbed. The nurse said she would never jab her children. I talked with her about those who are getting jabbed are immune-compromised. My children are vaccinated. I worry about them constantly. Our daughter got covid. Fortunately it was a mild case: tired and a headache and congestion. I pray they stay healthy. We aren't jabbed (won't use vaccine because real vaccines prevent illness). Haven't got sick but keeping on vitamin D and B and C.
The court's decision did not ban abortions! It gave the responsibility back to the states, where it belongs. Most states allow abortions if the mother's life is in danger or if the pregnancy is not viable.
Because ol' J.Roc here doesn't think in those terms. He's still stuck in the Democrat mental vice that results in regrettable mistakes but having no idea of the root cause. He only knows he'll course correct after being burned by touching that hot stove, but can't figure out how to avoid the burn in the first place.
Still trapped in the verifiably anti-science and obtuse Democrat talking point that the body inside the mother is the same as the body of the mother. Conflation of true bodily autonomy issues such as vaccine mandates with blatantly false bodily autonomy issues such as the taking of the life and destruction of body that is not the mother's life or body to take. As such, he has no interest in sending it back to states or limitations on abortion, he's only interested in guaranteeing the "right" to take the life of the unborn as birth control as some kind of virtue on par with individual liberty.
Just a guess, but I'm guessing the ol' wife is pretty hard core "women's right to abortion" and he knows where he needs to be on it if he knows what's good for him.
Wow I really dislike it when people mind-read someone they disagree with. The woman who gets pregnant is facing the prospect of raising that child for 18+ years. Guess why there were so-called shotgun marriages. How about we bring that back. The man who contributed the sperm needs to step up if we’re going to require that child come into this world. If you’re against that, you’re dooming that baby you so self righteously saved. If you’re ready to step up and adopt a child, then I’ll listen to you. Otherwise not.
I really dislike it when people strip women of all agency for who they decide to be impregnated by and then resort to absurdly obtuse false choice logic in order to justify their lust for killing babies in the womb.
How about we bring back making the father part of the decision related to his own unborn child and then maybe you can talk about restricting his choice to leave?
I don't need to step up and do anything to have a valid opinion on killing babies in the womb. I'm not responsible for the choices and actions of complete strangers no mater how much you wish your lizard brain logic made any sense there. I also don't need to be ready to adopt since there is a long waiting list of people trying, wanting, praying to adopt babies that outstrips supply. If you'd been anywhere near this situation in your life rather than spending your life with your head firmly implanted in your ass, you'd know this.
Agreed. The father should be required to have the same responsibility as he also exercised agency. How about we have a lien put on all his assets for the next 18 years? Sounds fair to me. (You might not care what happens when that unwanted child is born, but I do.) If the father wants to help arrange the adoption and the new family agrees to let him off the hook, fine. But pretending this is simple is a luxury one only has when one is not pregnant. It’s pretty easy to look on and shout murderer! How about fix it instead? I say criminal penalties for men who contribute to that child’s existence without taking responsibility for it.
You care so much about what happens "when that unwanted child is born" you want it's mother to kill it instead. What a guy/gal!
You can't tell the man he has no say in what happens to his child before its born, and clowns like you do, and then tell him that if it's born it's his responsibility. If the baby is truly "unwanted" by it's parents, that does not mean the baby is unwanted. This is the abortion as birth control cult rhetorical tactic designed to get the abortions they want instead of the baby to parents that want it. There is no shortage of waiting parents out there who either can't or don't want to have their own but are literally buried on wait lists waiting anxiously for months, sometimes years, on end for the phone to ring.
Finally, can't help but comment on your last bit of lizard brain logic, where you favor no criminal charges for killing babies in the womb while making a criminal out of a men who've been told they have no say in the matter and walk away. Once again, what a guy/gal!
Child support already exists in all 50 states, and not paying it can result in jail time. I can't speak to other states, but in Florida (and probably many other states), a father can't just decide to give up his parental rights to his kid either. Even if he and the mother both agreed to it, a judge won't grant a termination of rights unless there is someone stepping up to adopt the kiddo in his absence. We are in the process right now, so my husband can adopt our kiddo, since he has been her daddy for most of her life.
You seem to think the conservative platform is "no abortion" AND "no responsibility for fathers", which is... not a thing. We believe in personal responsibility on the part of both the mother and the father of the child.
You also seem to think conservatives aren't willing to adopt, which is statistically incorrect. The vast majority of adoptive families lean right. There are 38 sets of adoptive parents for every newborn available to be adopted in the US. Furthermore, if the government eases the requirements (especially cost) of adoption, many more would adopt.
That's racist.
Temper temper.
Lizard brain, lizard brain.
Ever heard of "contraception" or "abstenance" ?
There are long waiting lists for adoption of these "unwanted" babies. Many states have laws allowing the mother to drop the baby off at a hospital and walk away. The men should step up... you betcha! But only as far as the women do. Adoption is a loving answer.
The pro-abortionists either know this and don't care or don't know this because they don't care. Either way, they have a morbid preference for killing babies in the womb over more ethical options.
Too bad older kids aren't as cute as babies...they need love... So, lots of children ready to be adopted but they aren't cute babies.
You are definitely right, in that it is harder to place children than babies. I see the comment by Hornit that explains it very well. If more people who were not really ready (or would never want kids at all) would put those kids up for adoption when they were babies, it certainly would be easier on everyone! (My husband was adopted at age 2; he was in foster care until then. We have never looked for his biological parents, but we are eternally grateful that they made the choice they did.)
This is a disingenuous narrative. People going through the baby adoption process are NOT the people who bring home new puppies because they're cute and then abandon them when they become inconveniences. And they are not the people who do foster care for the money. The process of adopting a baby is grueling and often heart breaking, not to mention expensive.
The problem with adopting children that are not given up for adoption as babies is that they are primarily children that have been taken from their parent(s) by the state. They have already been born and raised for some time in complete dysfunctional, often abusive environments and now there are also all sorts of other complications that come with attempting to adopt them and be parents to them with other or another parent and family looming in the background. Yeah, they need love but now they need a whole lot more than just that.
As a conservative, your terms are acceptable to me. I also agree we should not presume someone's motivation for supporting abortion, but the rest of his argument is still solid, even if delivered with a crappy attitude.
So, she should have known she was pregnant by 8 weeks...why would she wait any longer? Most likely missed a period, so maybe better education...miss a period get pregnancy tested...
The test strips cost as low as $.50/each. The "women are toddlers" crowd insist telling us all the reasons women didn't know they were pregnant, so since they are admitting there's no way to know from one's symptoms, if one is sexually active then test once/week year-round. That can cost about $24/yr and problem is solved.
Stop it...
...being logical is not allowed
I think they have a word that sums it up perfectly...
...Victimhood
Anyone who wants an abortion can get one. You know that. However, if you don't want the clot-shot, you can lose your job, lose your career, and, if you have no income, maybe lose your home. Have a little perspective.
The sticky part about abortions is that it's not just your wife's body; there's also the body of the person growing inside her. That is not a religious issue; it's a legal one. If a pregnant woman is murdered, and the baby inside her also dies, the law considers that a double murder. The constitution doesn't address abortion, so now the people can work it out through the voting process.
And, unlike catching COVID, there are actions that can be taken to avoid pregnancy in the first place. Most of these mitigations have zero negative side effects, so there's no excuse for not using them.
I'm game as long as I don't have to wear a condom.
Condom or Child Support - it's your body, your choice . . .
Oh God…you’re one of those.🤦♀️
Well, up until a couple of days ago, big daddy government said that it was okay! No worries, go for it! Now you are inconvenienced even more! Not fair!
It’s also a scientific reality - it is alive at some point in the gestational process. I personally don’t think that “life” starts at conception, but I know there’s life there well before birth. And reasonable people agree that this general framework is true - just look at the polling. Even Roe had a “viability” clause. So the middle ground is widely supported across the board. It’s the assholes on the ends of both spectrums that are drowning out a reasonable agreed upon solution. I’d go as far as saying that the ‘73 Roe ruling was part of the problem if not the worst thing that happened to the conversation that needed to occur around the topic. And it gave false hope to a few generations of women, leading them actually to believe that the constitution supported the (unexpressed but obvious) viewpoint that there was a split view on human life.
Maybe those people supporting abortion at any age, even post birth, disgusted so many people that they made the abortion issue what it is today.
Denying a fetus is alive. Saying it is just a bunch of cells makes people sound like ghouls. Every human couple is attatched to the baby as soon as it is a bumb in the womans stomach, and people morn the loss of the fetus no matter how early it is in developement. So hearing people celebrate the destruction is just disgusting to the public.
Did you see the very noticeably pregnant protester that wrote across her stomach, "Not yet a human!" And another female protester had her two kids with her and a sign saying, "don't force this on anyone!" I'm sure those two kids will love seeing that picture in a few years.
Why are they so upset about ending Roe vs. Wade? It is just a bunch of words, after all!
yup the left wing overreach was epic on abortion
I am not an asshole just because I don’t agree with you. Life starts at conception and the baby is pretty much developed by 12 weeks. Heart beating way before that. Just look at any ultrasound, please. If you want to kill babies because it’s convenient then at least be honest about it.
Looking at a picture is not the best way to make a judgment since the human embryo looks very similar to other mammalian embryos. This is why pig embryos are used for dissection. Since you state life starts at conception then it follows you would want to make IVF illegal. An embryo is an embryo, whether fertilization/conception happens in a dish or in the fallopian tubes. The fetus isn't "pretty much developed" by 12 weeks but the neural system is starting to develop and most Americans (and almost the entire western world) support 1st trimester abortions and IVF.
I guess I'm one of the assholes, then, because I know that the middle-ground still fails to deal with the reality of abortion - i.e. the killing of an innocent, defenseless human being. While I recognize there may be a different political reality, the physical reality of abortion is death of a human being.
Well stated. I believe the assholes at both ends of the spectrum are trying to destroy this country, and both ends treat women as morons unable to add 2+2. If one is sexually active then do a strip pregnancy test once/week year-round. That can cost as low as $24/year. That eliminates the "I didn't know I was pregnant" until too late argument.
In a search of state level abortion laws I couldn’t find one that didn’t have a carve-out for saving the mothers life. There’s obviously states that don’t have exceptions for rape/incest. Interestingly I found that most states, even blue states, had a “until viable” clause which is set around 24 weeks. Only Oregon didn’t (I admit that CA may as well). So this hub-bub seems more political to me than real in broad terms.
Bottom line, the constitution was twisted to some oboe support the idea that there was a difference between born and unborn humans. A preposterous assumption. That’s why abortion can’t be “constitutional.” It’s actually as simple as that.
I believe my state of Massachusetts allows abortion up until 9 months. Or later. It’s appalling.
That's how it is in Maryland too. They tried to pass an Infanticide bill, where the mother had twenty-eight days to abort her baby after it was born. That bill didn't pass.
There are 6 states including Colorado, the state I currently reside in, that allows an abortion during the entire gestational process, ie up to and until the baby's head "crowns". Colorado uses weasel words in their law to spare their ignorant voters. Such states are not concerned about the mother or the unborn.
New Mexico Also. Dr. Curtis Boyd is the late term abortion doctor in our state. Late term abortion capital, Albuquerque, NM
And the states that dont have, say a rape/incest clause, if the people dont like that, its on them to change it. States now have the right to fine tune the law to fit the conscience of their people, rather than having people on the coasts, who decorate the Empire State Building in pink lights to celebrate late term abortion passing in NYS tellling people in the Bible Belt what their abortion law is to be.
Here you go.
https://justthenews.com/government/state-houses/post-roe-v-wade-abortion-laws-broken-down-state
The court's decision was not about abortion, but about legislating from the bench, magically discovering principles which were never enshrined in the constitution, which resulted in opening the gateway to a lot of other bad laws and interpretations of the law in entirely unrelated matters. It was about the Constitution, which protects the rights and liberties of people of both sexes against government overreach.
Roe was a cancer, it was bad law masquerading as legitimate law and metastisizing to infect other parts of our body politic.
That's the problem of the left. They don't know, or care, what the law actually says. They only care what some hyped talking head says it says. They're lazy.
Everyone is lazy. That's why talking points, heuristics, and smear campaigns are so effective. It gives people the justification for making snap decisions without effort.
... and we can all be scammed and guilty of making bad decisions, especially when we are afraid and under pressure to act quickly.
SCOTUS said the Constitution had no opinion, so it's up to the states, but the Founding Fathers didn't think it warranted even mentioning since abortion was codified into law in the early 1600s in England. Heck, it was totally legal into the late 19th century in America when the AMA decided to oppose it....
There has ALWAYS been contraception and abortion and always will. Abortion isn't easy, but neither are lots of things about the lives we live. We should be allowed to live those lives without undue interference by pontificating narcissists.
Did you learn your history from AOC? Most of what you said is either blatantly false or lacking the useful context to actually be true.
Contraception isn't even part of this issue, so you need not include it at all. People have (mostly) always taken measures to prevent pregnancy. And abortion has been a thing for a long time. What's newer is abortion as a form of contraception, which is of course, what this is all about.
Don't follow AOC, but I was drawing from memory. Apparently abortion was codified in England in the 13th century rather than the 16th.
"The first references to abortion in English law appeared in the 13th Century. The law followed Church teaching that abortion was acceptable until ‘quickening’, which, it was believed, was when the soul entered the fetus. The legal situation remained like this for centuries." https://abortionrights.org.uk/history-of-abortion-law-in-the-uk/
But my memory was on point re America's history.
"In U.S. history, abortion wasn't always controversial. In fact, in colonial America, it was considered a fairly common practice, a private decision made by women and aided mostly by midwives. But in the mid-1800s, a small group of physicians set out to change that."
https://www.npr.org/2022/06/06/1103372543/abortion-was-once-common-practice-in-america-a-small-group-of-doctors-changed-th
100% revisionist and creative history from your abortion activist sources that depends on the abject ignorance of their minions to understand any historical realities outside the context as what they know as their personal, current reality. The absence of formal law does not equal the "codification" of it in law, which is willfully conflated in such propaganda. England did not exist in any shape, manner or form in the 13th century as it does today, which is again what the propaganda depends on you thinking. There was no formal central government of England to codify such "rights" or laws. There was a semblance of a monarchy that was constantly in flux and challenged and an array of mostly independent kingdoms that were also constantly in flux and challenged by perpetual civil war. Such social rules and laws changed as the local rulers changed. And the concept of individual liberty and rights, such as rights to life, didn't exist on any meaningful scale. It was essentially a feudal system of lords (tiny elite minority) and serfs (masses) with very different standards of "justice."
Attempting to compare some imagined codified right to an abortion in 13th century England to the world we live in today is a fool's errand, which again is what the propaganda depends on. Suffice it to say, "quickening" was simply when a woman first became aware there was a life inside her in those times. They didn't know what they didn't know, of course, so rules and mores were extensions of what they knew or understood. And Saxon mores at that time were very Christian and very unfriendly to the ideas of sexual and reproductive liberties.
If there is a God and he had any sense of humor, he'd drop these clowns back in 13th century England and tell them to behave in the manner they believe (assuming they actually believe it) people and society did back then.
Always ,always trust NPR as your only news if you want to confirm a left-wing bias. Happens every time.
Who says I either "trust" NPR or use them as my only news source?
We are not debating POV or agendas in this small thread. We can disagree on that, but to disagree that abortion has always been practiced and largely tolerated in North America, the British Isles, and the rest of the world in previous times is akin to denying that conception is a result of sexual intercourse.
"The earliest written record of abortion is more than 4,000 years old... " https://truthout.org/articles/abortion-is-as-old-as-pregnancy-4-000-years-of-reproductive-rights-history/
"Instructions for inducing an abortion appear in the Bible. In Numbers 5:11-31"
BTW: I disagree that abortion is being used as a form of contraception. No woman would chose abortion (or Plan B) over the pill, a condom, or diaphragm.
He knows that. He comes off as just another over the top, garden variety Prog grievance collector.
Yup, legislating from the bench is not Supreme Court Justices job contrary to what liberal justices believe. A lot of these people who are upset about Roe v Wade decision don't seem to understand this point. Also to J.Roc, the difference of bodily autonomy in these two cases is.. that the latter involves another life.. see those murder cases when victim is pregnant? murderer gets to be charged for two murders? One for the mother, and one for the baby in her womb. So, it is not the same with the bodily autonomy of the vaccine case. People on the right is fighting for the life of unborn who does not have the voice. (my personal opinion is.. women should be given the choice of abortion up to say 12 weeks. or till the baby has heart beat. You are fully aware the chance of your pregnancy if you miss your period!).
I remember when Roe vs. Wade was passed, they said in forty years the states will have the responsibility for abortions. This has been the plan al along.
For those who have intellect, all the rest need not try!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Twb_v78C1q4
That's a nasty thing to say. I listened to it. You really think that's for intellectuals? It's just a bunch of angry lefties belly-aching about things they clearly don't understand. I think I lost some IQ points just listening to that nonsense. Now, I'm going to have to read some Thomas Sowell, some Walter Williams, and some Milton Friedman just to get my IQ points back. But, if you like that sort of thing, more power to you.
Mdog, the definition of intellect is the faculty of objectively reasoning and understanding, especially regarding abstract or academic matters. Your learned comment is; “...lefties belly-aching about things they clearly don’t understand.” Which directly implies that you’re more intelligent than three law professors and John Stewart? I think that’s called delusions of grandeur: an inflated sense of intelligence. Although it doesn’t surprise me, libertarians don’t live in the real world.
Buch of sophistic nonsense punctuated by the standard lizard brain leftist appeal to authority canard,
"Lefties bellyaching" is a verifiably accurate account of what that display of anti-intellectual histrionics was. Mdog may or may not be "more intelligent" than those three law professors and John Stewart. But he is one thing for certain. Correct in his assertion that they don't understand this Constitutional issue. They, apparently like you, are capable only of feeling it. This is self evidently true of anybody who imagines a right to abortion where none exists simply because they want it to.
Hornlt, so you’re the arbiter of what is a constitutional right. In the original Roe v. Wade decision, seven of the nine judges concurred. In 1989, 1992, 2007, and 2016 the Supreme Court upheld the essence of Roe versus Wade. 330 Human Life Amendment proposals have been introduced in Congress, but only one made it to the floor of the Senate in 1983, and it failed. The above belies your assertion: “This is self evidently true of anybody who imagines a right to abortion where none exists simply because they want it to.” For almost 50 years, abortion was a constitutional right until the Republicans decided to have a theocratic Supreme Court that believes in a theocracy instead of a democracy
I have certainly noted that extended college stays have lately resulted in a marked reduction in intelligence and reasoning skills.
These people make assertions, say its "insane" or "old white men" "dead people" "fundamentalism" ... I do like how one equivalated reverting abortion to states to "slavery" "Its a form of rape" Compare this to something like Robert Barnes who drops truth bombs. "A state believing that life begins at conception" is a "laugh test"
"pass the laugh test" its all "theocratic" "Returning this to the states is pure gaslighting" "The people can't decide" "Minority rule" "The Senate is affirmative action for rural white Christians" "We made the states supermajorities [for republicans]" I cant take any more of this i am done.
DSkzzz, you were forewarned that you needed, Intellect: (the faculty of reasoning and understanding objectively, especially with regard to abstract or academic matters.) Your comment indicates you have difficulty with abstract thinking: (Thinking characterized by the ability to use concepts and to make and understand generalizations, such as of the properties or patterns shared by a variety of specific items or events.) Better luck next time.
If you think that was an exhibit of intellectualism rather than hysteria, you are a verifiable lizard brain fool.
Yes indeed, Hornlt, I can hear a superior intellect saying: “...you are a verifiable lizard brain fool.” I mean, it’s so witty, definitely scholarly.
It's not witty nor scholarly. It's simply accurate and true.
Holding up some random college professors and a washed up comedian as the end-all intellectuals is hilarious. I've known FAR too many professors from my time at the university to believe they have the end say with their "scholarly arguments". 🤣 What a hoot.
It's the standard leftist "trust my experts" reasoning, which is just their preferred confirmation bias orgy, because they are absolutely incapable of independent, objective thought. We see this in the COVID and vaccines debacle too, of course, because it is the indelible mark of leftism.
So much vocal fry and uptalk which makes listening to them difficult.
They didn't celebrate the loss of bodily autonomy. They celebrated the return of the issue to the People, where it belongs.
They also celebrated, because it's NOT about bodily autonomy. It's about bodilies autonomy. There's a second body involved, and it's about time the People speak up for the second body.
Some People will still allow that second, innocent body to be killed - the People of NYS and California, for example. They who celebrated the "loss of bodily autonomy" understand that.
I find it hard to believe that you cannot tell the difference between government DEMANDING that you shoot up your children with experimental, untested drugs, and government LETTING the People in the 50 separate, discrete States decide what will happen inside each State.
Because remember, if the federal government mandates jabs for kids, there's no OTHER federal government you can go to and still remain in America. If a state government bans your wife from having an abortion, she can go across a state line and get it done.
I find it hard to believe you cannot distinguish the difference between the two.
I’m always fascinated by liberals who get upset when a pregnant woman is murdered (think Scott/Lacy Peterson), and the murderer can face two murder charges, yet aspirating a viable fetus on demand is not a problem.
Because this would be called thinking critically. Reasoning from first principles. Rational consistency.
You know, all the intellectual qualities that are anathema to leftists who seek only "their" truth rather than the truth.
I’m glad to finally see someone else point out the absurdity of the “my truth” “his truth” “her truth” “their truth” language that has become annoyingly pervasive in today’s speech. I’ve yet to see someone point this out, outside of my own personal conversations, until now.
"Their" truth doesn't hold water in a ocean. How did this happen? I get 10-15% of the population acting and speaking as mental cases, but almost 35%?
Someday maybe we'll wake up from this nightmare.
“…doesn’t hold water in an ocean.” I like that. I’m going to add that to my own phraseology, if you don’t mind.
And that day can’t come soon enough, God-willing.
"Their truth" = lies
Delusions from mental cases. There's no other way to sum it up. Real honest to goodness mental cases.
And delusion via self-importance.
My Truth is that I am Napoleon Bonaparte. Now give me command of ze French army!
I chuckled a bit.
B-I-N-G-O Bingo!
viable fetus=baby
Yeah, I’ve pretty much struck the word fetus from my vocabulary. Someone once so poignantly pointed out that in the unfortunate case that a woman has a miscarriage, one wouldn’t say “Oh, I’m so sorry you lost the fetus.” No. You’d say “I’m so sorry you lost the baby.”
Also, I've never been invited to a "Fetus Shower"...only Baby Showers.
Exactly. I’m going to add that to my pro-choice conversation refutation arsenal, thank you very much.
Baby = person.
Interesting point!
What is worse is the hard pro-lifers who actually vote against those double murder laws. That happens A LOT. Though I guess you have to give them points for consistency
Please cite examples of this so called "a lot."
I would also love to see examples of this.
Of course, it's also a cynical method of getting people fired up enough to vote. No one has my vote. Pelosi worth $141 million, Schumer $69 million (I think it's mostly in his wife's name), McConnell worth $150 million. Do they have your interests at heart or is it only their continued wealth they're worried about?
It most certainly is. Most of these women up in arms don’t realize they’re tools for these political aims. I saw someone post on that little blue fowl truth-squelching platform that women have been brainwashed, at one turn, to allow men open access to their bodies (sexual revolution, female empowerment) and, at the other, that a growing baby can be excised from their bodies at will by insidiously linking the word abortion with rights. Of course, this propaganda was carried out over time via repetitive language and it was all wrapped up in the god-forsaken bow of feminism, you know, to give it some real demonic staying power.
the funniest part of feminism is that in several communities it has been completely co-opted by men wearing dresses & all the women who protest this are kicked out
it's like some strange play on female compassion that they have to stand for the mentally ill man at the expense of their more logical (and less compassionate) sisters
if i had a scholarship-eligible daughter i would be upset, but if i had sons i would celebrate that their opportunities doubled!
The irony of the backfiring is not lost on me. I, too, find it comedic. And I don’t feel bad about it. You take up the false mantle of feminism, a movement intended to undermine and dismantle the nuclear family, you get your just desserts. Good old reaping and sowing.
yeah, it's like you're more of a woman if you work on powerpoints in an office than if you're a mother raising her kids somehow or if you have casual sex with random men with no consequences
whose ideas were these?
men's! they were obviously men's idea in the first place & the first women decided to feel bad for the mentally deranged men that brought them forward instead of standing with their more logical & less compassionate sisters, and i can't wait to see what happens in the next generation
here's another one to tickle your irony bone. It strike you yet that all 3 of Trump's judges were approved by less than 60 Senate votes? I.e. because the Dems blew up the filibuster.
The rich have eaten the left and men dressed as a crude caricature of women have eaten feminism. But if you disagree with them, then you are a follower of the only German Chancellor worse than Angela Merkel (can we say the 'H' word here?) Clown World!
lol blue fowl truth squelching forum
Exactly
Bastards are so beholden to China...we have to drain Congressional leadership, as well as the Intelligence and Bureaucrat garbage..
That Lindsay Graham is first on my list. How many needless deaths has he caused?
He's a walking pharmaceutical company without the drugs.
He’s a walking something. He reminds me of a guy you’d see at a rest stop men’s room who puts his hand under the stall. Ewwww!
Imagine Adam Schiff's ping-pong ball eyes appearing under the stall. Blech!
Of course they don’t care about America! We were sold out during Woodrow Wilson’s term. Everything the government does is not legal (property taxes, income taxes, mortgages, etc.) I want to become an American National (it takes time and lots of research, court filings, etc.). We should be called The United States FOR America, not OF America…it was changed. Thirteen families run America.
1913 is cringe worthy
Do you refer to the Federal Reserve act, alleged ratification of the 16th amendment which provided no new power of taxation, popular "election" of Senators, or what? Yep; the diabolocrats had a heyday!
So, you think Blackrock et al. should own all property? Read Henry George's Progress and Poverty.
I don’t understand the ? Her stance wasn’t favorable to these players.
Renee thinks Blackrock's holding cost should be zero. (It's already zero cost to create currency.) You will own nothing, and you will be happy!
Exactly!!!!
Whew. Nice reply!!!👍
I go round and round with this very issue with Dems in my area. How is it not easy to understand. Its what democracy is.
What a great, reasonable comment. There's no way you attended college after 92, no way.
LOL, escaped in '83.
Great response!!
The decision belongs with the mother with guidance from her physician.
At what child's age does that decision NOT belong with the mother with guidance from her physician? One-week-old newborn? Six-month-old baby? 20-week-old fetus? Two-year-old toddler?
At what age, and WHY at that age?
There is no easy or happy answer, here, but since when has life been all easy and happy?
I believe the Catholic Church once regarded male masturbation as akin to murder. It has certainly felt that way about the Pill and other female contraception.
"Quickening" which is at about 20 weeks has been the traditional response. I can live with that. I can't live with women having unsafe abortions that could kill them or make them infertile or being forced to have an unwanted child that they can't properly care for and for whom they sacrifice their lives.
That said, I respect the pro-life position and wish they'd respect the pro-choice position because, again, there is no easy or happy answer.
There sure as heck ARE "easy" and "happy" answers.
One-week-old, six-month-old, two-year-old - those are EASY answers. You don't kill children who are those ages.
You don't find those to be easy answers? If not, then that's disturbing.
"I can't live with women having unsafe abortions that could kill them or make them infertile or being forced to have an unwanted child that they can't properly care for and for whom they sacrifice their lives." is an enormous straw man, NONE of which would have to happen with the issue being returned to the States, as it has been. Abortion will *never* be banned nationally.
I suggest a parameter is 20 weeks gestation and you equate it with a 2 year old? That's a red herring.
Having states make the decisions isn't a totally unreasonable legal process, it's just a totally unnecessary increase of polarization within our already beleaguered country.
Your daughter can still get an abortion... she just has to put more effort into it than making a next day appointment down the street. I find it demeaning and disrespectful that people look at women and assume they all need abortions and can't figure out how to handle their own lives - as if they are too dumb to do so.
If an on demand, next day abortion is your highest priority, then, yes, you need to remain with the Democrats. I hope that is consolation in the event the next forced school closure, lockdown and vaccine mandate occurs. They showed their true colors and will do all this again to us.
Just how many women are truly trying NOT to get pregnant as well as the men involved being responsible "in the moment"? Where is self responsibility? How many pregnancies could easily be avoided on responsibility awareness alone? Sure things happen, but just sayin. Kind of similar to the over reliance on medications for so many Americans who are so overly prescribed...it's lunacy. Where is the self accountability and personal responsibility for living well in healthy ways. Every time I shop in a supermarket I am taken aback by what people are doing with their bodies and then fall into the big Pharma bowl of "here you poor thing take this med and it will take care of it" Just sayin...there endeth the lesson.
Spot on. People act as if the modern women getting pregnant is a case of ‘Oops. How did that happen?’ Have all the brain cells of those with this 1+?=2 thinking been uploaded to the cloud?
Exactly, abortion is NOT birth control.
Why don’t they get this? I find it exasperating.
Me too. They say, "my body, my choice so why can't they choose birth control?
Right. Especially when the methods of such are so plentiful.
When I was growing up, being on welfare and get an abortion was abhorrent (and people fall on rough times). My how times have changed! Where’s the shame? There’s your problem!
Correct!
I hope this results in an abstinence wave and women shunning the embracing of whore-culture spread by the media and groups invested in keeping their coffers fat with the selling of the body parts of murdered babies from mothers who drank the embrace your sexuality/sexual freedom kool-aid. The more they brainwash women with this, the more they can keep the discards of their bad decisions coming. ‘Come on ladies, get with the times. You’re a modern women and we need the cast-offs of your progeny to make us unethically rich.’
Men need to step up too as we all know it's a two way street. Sex is wonderful and a gift from God, but he gave us all a mind to use and choose how to live a life of abundance through living responsibly...
Indeed. Men and women have to work in concert to turn the tide on this issue.
Agree, Brogan12. There is no pregnancy without a male involved, however that involvement may occur. Women were created with the physical capacity to bring new life into the world ... but we can't exercise that capacity without assistance. Just because we were chosen as the child-bearing gender, doesn't give us the right to ignore the "participation" of either the father or the unborn child in the project. We can't get pregnant by ourselves, and once pregnant, are no longer by ourselves. Sorry, ladies. Time to GROW UP and accept responsibility for PREVENTING pregnancy if you don't want or aren't ready for it. Yes, guys should also be responsible, but if you roll the dice with some dude you just met, it's on you. It's really not at all complicated. Pick a birth control method and practice it consistently like an adult, and voila! ... no pregnancy.
One thing is certain (it goes both ways), if you’re single, good luck finding someone that wants to screw you after you’ve been jabbed four times. Hell no!
Believe me as one in the dating pool...the world of dating has changed HUGEly
I did enough dating to last me two lifetimes-lol! I’d NEVER go out with a guy that was jabbed. Luckily, I have a wonderful bf (he lost his job because of not getting jabbed, I retired years early for the same). Dating was great growing up in the ‘80’s on…now? No thanks!
Lucky YOU.! I am still in the new world of dating. As a man it's interesting what is now in profiles women post. I'm sure women could say the same of men's. It IS what it is though. I remain hopeful though there is that special woman who is on the wavelengths I need to endure :)
I love being a Pureblood!! I feel horrible for the people that allowed themselves to be duped or were ordered to take an untested treatment.
Let's hope "they" do not use mosquito's, water or food to make sure the pure-bloods cannot escape the EUA gene therapy meds
I used to be a Dem. After how they've done in the past 27 months, I won't ever vote for another. even for dogcatcher..
Scamdemic, to the hilt, victimizing the young. I'll never forget it.
https://markoshinskie8de.substack.com/p/scamdemic-solitude-sucked
I hope you are 18 yrs + 27 months old. Because if you were a Dem as an adult male prior to 27 months ago then, my goodness, being a slow learner is a tough slog through life. Unless you were on the "inside" as are our adult male politicians, bureaucrats, media, or entertainers. The number of non-government employee/non-lawyer white male taxpayers who vote democrat is vanishingly small. Adult male blacks, asians, and hispanics are showing this same tendency as they mature. Real men don't eat quiche and real men know how to vote.
Welcome, brother! Live and let live!
Great response!
also abortion is not outlawed it is just turned over to the states to be voted on by state....that's called democracy.
Oh great, with that logic, whether I am directed to get a vaccine should be left to a majority vote of fellow citizens or the government of the state I live in. The analogy is apt: medical autonomy My body my choice should lead, but not be the last word. We should all focus on health and getting rid of unwanted pregnancy so we don’t need vaccines or abortions, so choice is 100% and life is 100%. That should be where we put our efforts, not on restriction or prescription.
No, you have the logic backwards. States are not *mandating* abortion so it’s not analogous to states mandating vaccination. The proper analogy is having states permit abortion and having states permit vaccination. But not mandating either one of them.
No you have the logic backwards. This would be like states mandating that you COULDN'T take a vaccine just as they are mandating you cannot have access to your bodily choices via abortion bans. Desantis tried this overreach with masks, initially trying to mandate NO mask wearing, then backtracked because of the obvious backlash and contradiction. Choice is where you don't have the vaccine mandated FOR or AGAINST, or abortion FOR or AGAINST. Get it now?
Your logic is clear. The only variable is the unique unborn child. Roe vs Wade was ultimately struck down because of the Left's complete unwillingness to allow the unborn child any protection, at all.
True that. There must be moral and legal weight accorded a being entering this world. Historically, even among Catholics before the Industrial revolution, this line was midterm, around 18 weeks or so, defined by the quickening. That’s reasonable, but then we must make not only the fetus viable but the raising of the child, with affordable child care, raised salaries for moms and dads, and universal, accessible medical care. That will get serious pushback from corporate interests which control both parties.
I pray that in the very least, women won’t pretend they want the baby until 6 months and then have a late term abortion...actually I’m not necessarily against the Abortion Pill as it is only used earlier in pregnancy, but personal awareness and responsibility need to be taught and WITNESSED.
Very few women don’t know they are pregnant at 8 weeks and instead they wait months and months because they are taught this weird progressive “total life system” where the government guarantees “equity”..
Shoot, I forgot to add that the “day after” pill would cover rape and incest...they wait months to decide they don’t want the rapist or daddy’s child...
They go on and on about these two, but they should never require late term abortions, unless it’s a child and being held captive by the family...
One might hope that a woman who is raped would have the presence of mind to get a morning after pill, well, the morning after. Hopefully. Some will be too traumatized to think about that, especially if they're very young.
Incest is a completely different matter, in that it usually involves young girls and is not a one-time thing. Dad starts raping daughter when she's 11 years old. At 14, she finally winds up pregnant. I don't see how a morning after pill would figure into it. She'd need to keep taking the thing on a regular basis, and if it's on a regular basis, she might as well just take the regular pill. "Doctor, could you please prescribe the pill to me because daddy likes to fool around with me?" Err, right.
Hopefully people like school counselors will give up the pronoun debate and start caring for children…
I imagine many incest victims do get found out early…
…obviously at significantly young ages, that may be the case, but then whose doing abortions on 10yo without notifying police
Anyways I imagine they will always allow for incest…
Guttmacher Institute, which is pro-choice, informs us that more than 92% of abortions are elective. Fewer than 1% involve fetal abnormalities. So that argument really doesn’t get you very far.
This should be the constant retort for those raging about the extremes. There’s also the disturbing revelation that the abortion industry keeps the traffickers in business. I learned that disturbing aspect fairly recently. Haven’t been the same since.
Love how you pinned this divisive garbage, Alex, to drown out the top comment. The FDA and CDC trying to inject their lethal vaccine into babies and toddlers is maybe a little more important than this red vs blue mind control political toxic waste, eh?
i think alex himself is conflicted
"i've been a good person for supporting abortion & the ukraine this whole time & i couldn't possibly be wrong, right? RIGHT?"
Looks like Alex found a new bestie in JRoc.
It’s all the same spirit for their genocide
"forcing my daughter to carry a malformed baby to term when she is likely to die if she does so" LOL, like that ever happens....
I suggest you get your facts straight. If a baby is malformed, or the life of the mother is at risk, an abortion is suggested. I speak from experience.
A friend's baby was "malformed." She did not abort her daughter rather she held her lovingly in her arms before she (the baby) passed.
That is beautiful. What a loving soul(s).
I agree with Dennis. It is back to the States. And whatever happened to birth control?
And personal responsibility (for both woman AND men.)
Crucial point. I wonder if the words ‘responsibility’ and ‘accountability’ have been erased from the lexicon and I didn’t get the notice.
Dear J.Roc, I have faith that reflection will resolve what you currently regard as a dilemma.
The most important priority is to make sure that the government can't force you or your child to be injected with a drug that has caused injuries and death.
The next priority is to be involved in the democratic process. I have no idea what state you are in, but are you reacting to your present situation or the concept that citizens of individual states have had their rights to determine the laws of their states returned to them?
If there is one thing that is a fact, abortions are still accessible in the United States of America. Let's make sure that protection from authoritarian mandates remain as well.
Well said. And if everyone here is actually against an all out ban on abortion and realizes the slippery slope risk (some states now trying to outlaw contraception) then I stand corrected.
Which state is trying to outlaw contraception? I've read people touting that line a few times. I've seen no articles that list any state that is actually attempting to do that; nor do I believe that any state would do so succesfully. Which state government has enough political support to pull that off? I find that dubious at best.
In fact, I think Republicans have been pushing for OTC oral contraceptives for quite some time now and Democrats are also now starting to support the idea.
Ridiculous! Are you still watching CNN, MSNBC, other liberal lying, fake news?
Agree!
Well said!!
The abortion issue is a little bit more complicated than "my body my choice." The whole point is that it is not just your body when you're pregnant, there's another body involved too.
well if it helps, in red states the baby gets autonomy
Actually, in one case the government is forcing you to put something into your body. In the other case, that choice was freely made by the woman. Just black and white.
This comment, coming from someone who appears to be thoughtful, is so misinformed as to be shocking.
Infanticide is not “bodily autonomy” it’s purposely taking a human life. The way people that live abortion so much, as you do have reacted to this decision has been telling. You want unfettered abortion up to 9 months. Many states that want to put limits on abortion, after roe will only ban abortion after 12-15 weeks. The far left run he’ll holes will allow abortion unrestricted. At least understand the issue before wandering lost into the wilderness over your politics. You are misinformed, and if you think abortion is about health care or bodily autonomy up to 9 months pregnant, you are also sick in the head.
Attacking people never wins a debate.
When you have reason on your side, deliver it with respect or it comes across as something to avoid. Winning the point isn't the point, we want to win them over.
not sure of the attack in my comment. Just the way I feel as a person who is 100% pro life. To me, people who want abortion with no limits are sick individuals. Killing a baby for convenience in the last trimester is barbaric and inhumane.
I agree that it is monstrous. But calling someone a monster is less persuasive that presenting the monstrous aspects of the reality of late-term abortion. "Sick in the head" will not persuade. We're on the same side.
It is scientifically indisputable that a human zygote is an individual human, growing and developing as we all do for the extent of our lives. Politically, we as a people have to come up with a societal compromise that neither side will embrace 100%. But we have to have a functioning society.
I agree with you on most of your statements. The abortion hot trigger point is seen by the dems as a way to stimulate votes for them. Like you, I cannot vote for either party. They don't care about ethics or the health of the country or the individual. They care about increasing their wealth. Pelosi is worth $141 million, Schumer (on paper) $69 million, McConnell $150 million. How on earth did they get so rich on their salaries (sarcasm)? Do you suppose insider trading of stocks of companies they are supposed to regulate could have anything to do with it?
Look at how Florida and CA both handled the pandemic and then tell me there is no difference between the parties. Ridiculous
You have a point. But the Congress and Senate are filled with mostly corporate shills on both sides.
Leadership in both parties is rotten to the core.
"Appropriation" = GRAFT
We pour money down foreign ratholes and it flows back to DC Bank Accounts.
How are public servants even allowed to remain in office with the accumulation of this sort wealth? It’s absurd. Acting in their own interests is a given. Add to the question of ‘public servant, how does your illegal/unethical garden grow?’ the intel that many (possibly) all of them own/have interests in Chinese shell companies. Go figure.
The FDA and CDC should be immediately dissolved, and everyone involved put in handcuffs. Here is how evil this covid agenda really is:
The FDA recently approved the pfizer injection for 0-4 year olds knowing full well how extremely deadly the poison is. During the public comment section of the approval panel debate, Sam Dodson called in and ripped the panelists a new asshole--citing a number of sinister health risks:
https://www.bitchute.com/video/CDPaS98LipNP/
The trials the FDA based the 0-4 approval on were a ludicrously fraudulent atrocity. In the end only 3 children were used to determine the injection's safety and efficacy:
https://www.bitchute.com/video/pLqCvTlyifMS/
Once approved, CDC director Walensky put out a video smirking, smiling, and overtly jubilant that the injection had been approved for babies and toddlers. Here she is gleaming into the camera and encouraging parents to get the poison into their children knowing full well it will kill and maim them in enormous numbers:
https://www.bitchute.com/video/DARrVJoP2aL9/
I see you and raise you:
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10958689/Covid-19-Australia-Pandemic-babies-no-immunity-viruses-ending-ICU.html
How many of these mothers were vaxxed while pregnant?
Since everyone else is getting it that was vaxxed! One vaxxed friend called me and said, “I hope you’re not mad, I have covid!” I asked why she thought I (unvaxxed) would be mad, and added, if anyone’s mad, it should be YOU!
I have often wondered where the anger is from the vaccine faithful. "They" promised it would "end covid" and stop transmission (they said it would!) and it didn't. Why isn't anyone mad they didn't keep their promise? Fauci et al also said to wear cloth masks for a year and a half (two of them, even!) and then CNN says 'Cloth masks are mere facial decoration." and now cloth masks are out. The fact is, there were numerous studies available online in the NIH library that concluded cloth is ineffective against respiratory viruses. These studies are dated pre-covid! So they keep making fools of people...."Oh, I wore a mask for a year that was ineffective, probably caught covid through it....no biggie....OK what are they telling me to do next?".....the brainwashing/denial thing is massive!!
Pretty convenient how they left that part out, the most important part.
I glad you mentioned that. I was almost not going to link to dm since their ads without a blocker are downright obnoxious, but the fact that they failed to mention in the article if the moms were jabbed during pregnancy should scream out to everyone.
i tend to think that if they don't mention it, it's because it would reflect unfavorably on the vaccines. for example, there was an article about a NYC art gallery owner, mid 30's, who got covid and died. no where in the article did it mention her vaccine status, although i fail to see how she could have navigated the hip NYC art world without being fully vaccinated (this was a while back before mandates started dropping).
my guess is that if she had died unvaccinated, it would have been in the headline and in every paragraph of the article with some gloating, shaming and blaming
Bingo! And, remember, Australia kept Covid largely out of the country, until later in the Delta wave, after they had rolled out the jabs across much of the country. The vaxx came first, then Covid - and now this is the result. Original antigenic sin.
Probably almost all of them, since they’re in Auschtralia.
Ah, that explains why Moderna is working on a new flu/covid/RSV mRNA shot!
Babies born of vaccinated moms who did not bring them along while running errands as the expert advice was for only one family member to do the shopping. Nor take them to the park as they were all closed down. Nor set up play dates with other moms because authorities limited gatherings.
Gee, you wonder why 'covid babies' have zero immunity. 'Experts' can claim hindsight, but I had two covid babies and did everything in my power to live a normal life as I knew the danger of keeping your newborn in a bubble... because common sense. People around here have already forgotten all the crazy draconian measures that were(are) put in place by our Supreme Leader Trudeau and the other levels of government. But I won't, the disgusted looks from other shoppers because we were out with a newborn, the Karens calling the city on kids playing outside, or not parking in driveways because gathering with family members was verboten.
Good on you. You looked after your children's future needs. I have heard that Canada was under the jack-boot of Trudeau. Australia and New Zealand had their versions of "a fresh hell", too. I live in Chicago. Our little neighborhood had children playing outside. Not everyone was covid-crazy. But our psycho mayor was threatening to have people arrested for daring to walk outside at the lakefront. Just a tyrannical flexing of muscle. Hopefully we will kick her to the curb in the next election.
Thanks for posting that. Sweet Lord, what are they doing to children. I talked to a nurse yesterday who said she has a friend who had her 3-year-old jabbed. The nurse said she would never jab her children. I talked with her about those who are getting jabbed are immune-compromised. My children are vaccinated. I worry about them constantly. Our daughter got covid. Fortunately it was a mild case: tired and a headache and congestion. I pray they stay healthy. We aren't jabbed (won't use vaccine because real vaccines prevent illness). Haven't got sick but keeping on vitamin D and B and C.
Sweet Jesus!! And that's a fervent prayer!
Yeah but they sure stopped that virus.