Texas bans abortion.

Status
Not open for further replies.
Upchurch said:
Not to speak for Darat, but it's extreme in the sense it is a strawman that nobody actually wants outside medical emergencies.
Click to expand...

But it is a very real, and legislated possibility, in some states. "No abortion" is not legislated, afaik. But "no term limits" is.
 
Last edited:
Warp12 said:
Because legally being able to have an abortion at full-term isn't "extreme", right? :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

Given that 3rd-term abortions are overwhelmingly done for such "extreme" reasons as saving the life of the woman, making it illegal truly is an evil position.
 
ahhell said:
Now that it is in effect, it will be brought to court.
Click to expand...
Will that have to wait for someone suing someone on behalf of the law? Or can opponents of the law bring a suit on their own?
 
Warp12 said:
But it is a very real, and legislated possibility, in some states. "No abortion" is not legislated, afaik.
Click to expand...

Only because of Roe v Wade and even then, there are "trigger bans" on the books in something like 11 states to ban abortion should Roe v Wade be struck down.
 
Last edited:
Aridas said:
Given that 3rd-term abortions are overwhelmingly done for such "extreme" reasons as saving the life of the woman, making it illegal truly is an evil position.
Click to expand...

In some states, the law does not stipulate any need for cause.
 
Darat said:
I’m semi serious in this suggestion, if abortions are outlawed I would campaign for a woman being able to declare the baby unwanted and it will be put up for adoption if born and the state pays all medical costs and any other costs involved, such as maternity leave pay.

It really does seem that the extremists are only interested in the baby until the moment it is born, after that it can be brought up by the most unfit mother in the world and that doesn’t bother them.
Click to expand...
That's not extreme. That's not even as far as I would reasonably take it. The infrastructure we have for adoption and foster care in this country is absolutely abysmal. At a minimum we need socialized infrastructure for everything from day care through free public university. If the state is not responsible enough to raise conscientious adults from the children it is insisting be birthed, it should be more careful who it passes legislation with.

Here's an extreme take: mandatory abortions unless you can demonstrate fitness for parenthood. Provide a reference or two, take a class, have someone inspect your home for hygiene and safety issues, just basically demonstrate you have your **** together before a kiddo comes along to wreck it.
 
Aridas said:
And? There's separate reasonable discussion that could be had there, but that's not a defense for what you actually said.
Click to expand...

Because "Let's talk about something completely different" is a good tactic when you're wrong and can't defend your argument.

Clarity and consistancy is not a friend to the wrong.

It's why "One Man Gish Gallop" is so popular with... certain people.
 
Aridas said:
And? There's separate reasonable discussion that could be had there, but that's not a defense for what you actually said.
Click to expand...

Huh? Now that you have the clarification of my point, what are you arguing?

It was a debate of what could be considered "extreme".
 
Last edited:
Warp12 said:
I'm not certain what that response means.
Click to expand...

It means that nobody ever fights to have an abortion full-term. If they are having a full-term abortion it is easily the most tragic, terrible, heartbreaking decision they will ever have to make in their entire lives. No one carries a ******* baby to the 3rd trimester and then thinks "this isn't for me". The idea is asinine.
 
plague311 said:
It means that nobody ever fights to have an abortion full-term. If they are having a full-term abortion it is easily the most tragic, terrible, heartbreaking decision they will ever have to make in their entire lives. No one carries a ******* baby to the 3rd trimester and then thinks "this isn't for me". The idea is asinine.
Click to expand...

Amazingly, though, there are no limits on it in some states. People are whining about this law in Texas, but are ok with law allowing for abortion at 8.9 months without restriction.

It would be comical if it weren't so sick.
 
Last edited:
Warp12 said:
Amazingly, though, there are no limits on it in some states. People are whining about this law in Texas, but are ok with law allowing for abortion at 8.9 months without restriction.

It would be comical if it weren't so sick.
Click to expand...

You don't have to limit something nobody is ******* doing. This isn't complicated.

Women don't need you to make laws to keep them in check from getting too many abortions.
 
Warp12 said:
Amazingly, though, there are no limits on it in some states. People are whining about this law in Texas, but are ok with law allowing for abortion at 8.9 months without restriction.

It would be comical if it weren't so sick.
Click to expand...

It's comical because it never happens. Find me an example. Find me one ******* example of this ever happening.

You're bitching about something that never takes place and trying to use it as a a basis for your argument, and it's, frankly, a **** argument.
 
This is so goddamn pathetic.

Why in discourse do we let someone who literally making stuff up dictate the course of the discussion to us?

Now we have to sit here and jump through hoops proving to him that something that he already damn well knows doesn't happen doesn't happen just to get us back to the original discussion, which he was already totally wrong about.

We spend so much time dragging discussions back to "Okay here's the original wrong point you were already proven wrong on before you went of running drunk and naked through a dozen unrelated hijacks you made us walk you back from" just to get back to the original stupidity we were arguing about in the first place.

Weaponized fractal wrongness. The one man Gish gallop. The word can't say on this board because it doesn't exist because we have to pretend we can't define it.
 
Paul2 said:
Will that have to wait for someone suing someone on behalf of the law? Or can opponents of the law bring a suit on their own?
Click to expand...

Who are opponents going to sue? That is why the Supremes didn’t intervene. Opponents are suing state officials who are not enforcing anything.
 
what do you call a third trimester abortion?

birth


That's why Trump and others told lies about doctors killing newborns
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom