• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

The Roe Countdown

When will Roe v Wade be overturned

  • Before 31 December 2020

    Votes: 20 18.3%

  • Before 31 December 2022

    Votes: 27 24.8%

  • Before 31 December 2024

    Votes: 9 8.3%

  • SCOTUS will not pick a case up

    Votes: 16 14.7%

  • SCOTUS will pick it up and decline to overturn

    Votes: 37 33.9%
  • Total voters
    109
Status
Not open for further replies.
RecoveringYuppy said:
I'm asking you why if you agree with her on one thing then don't agree her conclusion. What step in your reasoning loads to your difference of opinion with her?

Which says the embryo/fetus is a child. You then use the word "babies".

So for some reason you haven't told me, despite me asking, you support killing children and babies when their father is a rapist. Why? Is that really where you want to leave this?


Your beliefs do fit conservative stereotypes and my question has nothing to do with conservative stereotypes. And I don't know if it would even lead to a debate. Why would I expect it to? You realize we actually agree on this point, right? I am asking you why we agree because it seems odd given that you agree with her fetus and children. If I agreed with her about that I would change my mind about abortion.
Click to expand...

I don't agree with women being forced to carry rape babies. I also don't have a problem with Roe. I guess we agree on the important relevant points, which is good enough for me.
 
bruto said:
But if you agree that women shouldn't be forced to carry rape babies to term you are explicitly stating that she is wrong in the policy she advocates, even if you agree that she can be right about the feelings of some rape victims. You, allowing for a possibility, support a law that mandates an absolute impossibility. And in so contradicting yourself, you admit that you don't even know how prevalent the choice being denied might be.

Your beliefs may not fit what you consider conservative stereotypes, but when policy is at issue, your beliefs seem to be set aside and the conservative stereotypes win the day.

Of course we all make compromises and vote sometimes holding our noses, but I think there is a real, significant and important difference in supporting something that is incomplete or insufficient, which many of us do often, and in supporting something that is flawed in the opposite way, not granting fewer rights or benefits than we'd like, but removing more.
Click to expand...

What are you talking about, Bruto? I don't support her policy. I supported her one quote, which was that a woman has an opportunity to choose life by not aborting. And if so, the child may have a bright future...like any other.

I don't believe in mandating that choice, however. And I would be interested in how many victims of rape choose to carry a baby to term.
 
Last edited:
Warp12 said:
I don't agree with women being forced to carry rape babies.
Click to expand...
But you haven't said why.

Warp12 said:
I guess we agree on the important relevant points, which is good enough for me.
Click to expand...
You just said you're OK with killing babies and children. We do not agree on that. If I thought embryos and fetuses were babies or children I would change my mind.

Why in the world will you not explain your reasoning but rather leave me with the words you said which support the killing of babies and children? Is you explanation going to be worse than that? Why are you so completely resistant to explaining yourself?
 
Last edited:
Warp12 said:
What are you talking about, Bruto? I don't support her policy. I supported her one quote, which was that a woman has an opportunity to choose life by not aborting. And if so, the child may have a bright future...like any other.

I don't believe in mandating that choice, however. And I would be interested in how many victims of rape choose to carry a baby to term.
Click to expand...

Apologies, then, if I misinterpreted what you meant when you said "she isn't wrong." I might have voiced that partial disagreement differently, given that the statement one might agree with was in aid of a policy we do not, but will settle for the not.
 
Warp12 said:
Some probably do choose to keep the baby, depending on the circumstances. I wonder how prevalent that choice is?
Click to expand...

Difficult one to know, I imagine. I doubt those women shout about it.

I only know of one - a christian woman I discussed the subject with on another forum many years ago. She kept the baby because she wasn't going to have one otherwise, given she'd never had a boyfriend at age 30. I suspect that was due to a physical deformity she had.
 
Warp12 said:
“It is a shame that it happens, but there’s an opportunity for that woman – no matter how young or old she is ― to make a determination about what she’s going to do to help that life be a productive human being. … That child can grow up and be something magnificent, a wonderful family person, cure cancer, etc.,” she continued.
Click to expand...
Well, she isn't wrong. But women shouldn't be forced to carry rape babies to term. Some probably do choose to keep the baby, depending on the circumstances. I wonder how prevalent that choice is?
Click to expand...

Nonsense! The context of that comment was that it is alleged to be defending her proposed bill. The bill does not provide any opportunity that was not there before. It removes choice and self-determination. It's as simple as that.
 
cosmicaug said:
Nonsense! The context of that comment was that it is alleged to be defending her proposed bill. The bill does not provide any opportunity that was not there before. It removes choice and self-determination. It's as simple as that.
Click to expand...


As I have already stated, I don't support the bill.

Warp12 said:
What are you talking about, Bruto? I don't support her policy. I supported her one quote, which was that a woman has an opportunity to choose life by not aborting. And if so, the child may have a bright future...like any other.

I don't believe in mandating that choice, however. And I would be interested in how many victims of rape choose to carry a baby to term.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
Warp12 said:
As I have already stated, I don't support the bill.
Warp12 said:
What are you talking about, Bruto? I don't support her policy. I supported her one quote, which was that a woman has an opportunity to choose life by not aborting. And if so, the child may have a bright future...like any other.

I don't believe in mandating that choice, however. And I would be interested in how many victims of rape choose to carry a baby to term.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...

My point was that mandating a choice is not a thing. A mandate implies a restriction of choice; therefore that was never what this politician was doing.
 
Worm said:
Starting to see reports that a leaked draft opinion has SCOTUS moving to striking down Roe vs. Wade

https://www.politico.com/news/2022/05/02/supreme-court-abortion-draft-opinion-00029473
Click to expand...
Correct me if I'm wrong, right now they don't actually have a case about this, right? Without this leak we wouldn't have heard a peep until after the midterm election, then bam. Seems like that's Democrat's 2022 and 2024 election strategy sorted.

This might be the best chance for Dems to actually vote in a majority (they'll need two more than you think because Manchin and Sinema WILL flip R) and do some ******* good for a change instead of pissing away every opportunity not to be spineless centrist cowards. Nuke the filibuster, stack the court to even it up, pass some of those voting rights laws they've been sitting on since the seventies, etc.
 
Last edited:
Well, that kinda blew all that Ukraine stuff off the front page, didn't it? One thing I dread is that after this initial report, it will be repeated and dissected ad infinitum for the next several weeks, with nothing new actually being said.
 
alfaniner said:
Well, that kinda blew all that Ukraine stuff off the front page, didn't it? One thing I dread is that after this initial report, it will be repeated and dissected ad infinitum for the next several weeks, with nothing new actually being said.
Click to expand...


There's plenty about Ukraine. Putin is still killing a lot of people for no reason.

But re: Roe, despite the SC's claims that this is a matter for the states, there will be a big push for a national ban on abortion.
Leading antiabortion groups and their allies in Congress have been meeting behind the scenes to plan a national strategy that would kick in if the Supreme Court rolls back abortion rights this summer, including a push for a strict nationwide ban on the procedure if Republicans retake power in Washington.

The effort, activists say, is designed to bring a fight that has been playing out largely in the courts and state legislatures to the national political stage — rallying conservatives around the issue in the midterms and pressuring potential 2024 GOP presidential candidates to take a stand.
Click to expand...
https://www.washingtonpost.com/nation/2022/05/02/abortion-ban-roe-supreme-court-mississippi/
 
DailyBeast: Barricades Quietly Erected Around Supreme Court After Roe Draft Decision Leaks Link
Seems like a prudent decision to me.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom