Texas Repubs pass abortion bill

[RandFan]

I'm not suggesting you need to care. I'm just pointing out that as long as most Americans feel that strongly about abortion, it will continue to be highly regulated. That's just reality.

Because we live in a society and that is the way things work. You don't get to do whatever you want just because you think other people are irrational. I think it's highly irrational that I can't buy beer before 12pm on a Sunday. I think it is irrational that Marijuana is illegal. I think it's irrational that I'm being forced to buy Heath insurance that I don't need. But here we are....

you don't have to care. You just have to accept.

SCOTUS has not declared that you have a constitutional right to Marijuana. SCOTUS has not declared that you have a constitutional right to buy beer before 12pm on a Sunday. SCOTUS has ruled that women have a constitutional right to abortion until viability. SCOTUS set the date of viability and it ISN'T 20 weeks.

The majority does not get to vote away constitutional rights of the minority, unless and until SCOTUS changes it's mind, which is very possible, that's what you need to accept.

(see link for source above)

Twenty weeks is well before viability, the dividing line Kennedy himself helped set for when abortions cannot be banned.

THAT is the reality. You can accept it or not but it is the reality.

 

[R.A.F.]

I'm not suggesting you need to care.

Good...cause I don't...

I'm just pointing out that as long as most Americans feel that strongly about abortion, it will continue to be highly regulated.

Quantify "most Americans"...so far we've just been "taking your word" for that...

Cite please...

That's just reality.

You speak of reality, yet most people who think abortion "bad" believe in things not evidenced...

...so much for reality.

You don't get to do whatever you want just because you think other people are irrational.

...and on the flip side, if someone tries to force their irrationality onto me, well, there will be MAJOR trouble.

I think it's highly irrational that I can't buy beer before 12pm on a Sunday. I think it is irrational that Marijuana is illegal.

Here's a clue....buy your beer earlier, and don't tell everyone you are smoking pot.

See..."problems" solved.

I think it's irrational that I'm being forced to buy Heath insurance that I don't need. But here we are....

Sounds like a republican mantra.

you don't have to care. You just have to accept.

Wrong...I refuse to accept. See how easy that was.


On a side note...the idea that republicans are concerned re. the health of the Mother, or the unborn is ridiculous.

You know what the result of banning all abortions would be?...back alley abortion deaths for the Mothers and the unborn.

Why aren't the republs "concerned" about that? Because this isn't about "saving the unborn", it's about controlling women.

Republicans always have to have some portion of the population "under their thumb", be it minorities, women, or the GLBT community.

It makes them feel alive...and it is sick...

 

[Belz...]

Reversing Roe: The GOP’s ultimate abortion plan

These are just ad hoc moving of goal posts and have no basis in fact.

Ants feel pain, too.

 

[Dcdrac]

Why should I care what others think? why should I surrender my freedom to choose to some third person who likely believes that abortion is "bad", because of their beliefs in some god.

Why should I allow their irrationality to in any way influence personal decisions that "I" make?


No, seriously...why should I even care??

Seconded, the only opinon that counts in the end is the woman involved, it is her choice alone.

 

[xjx388]

Thank you. I just don't get it. Ask a conservative what they think of WIC? Food Stamps? Welfare? Section 8 housing?

I'm for all of those programs. They were invaluable for my family. We need a safety net, but we need to prevent it from becoming a bed.

When someone says "take responsibility" what they are really saying is that they have an idolized fantasy of a woman working two jobs to make a better life for her and her child.

What I mean is for people to live within their means. And if your means aren't enough, then increase them through education, hard work, etc. By the same token, don't make it harder on yourself and society. Exercise some freaking restraint. If you don't have the means to have a kid, then don't have sex. It is very simple and I don't understand why people make such vehement arguments to the contrary.

If only there were no public resources to weaken the moral fabric of these women they would rise to new heights and have dignity and understand that reward comes from hard work. Never mind that many if not most single women on WIC work a hell of a lot harder than most white collar office workers and damn sure much harder than trust fund babies.

A safety net is important. But there is a danger of dependence. That's what we have to eliminate.

Modern liberal Democracies provide universal health care and support for unwed mothers.

And those same MLDs often have even more limited abortion access than Texas.

We do so because as a social species we evolved to do so. That is why most of us are endowed with empathy and compassion.

What about empathy and compassion for the unborn?

 

[elbe]

What I mean is for people to live within their means. And if your means aren't enough, then increase them through education, hard work, etc. By the same token, don't make it harder on yourself and society. Exercise some freaking restraint. If you don't have the means to have a kid, then don't have sex. It is very simple and I don't understand why people make such vehement arguments to the contrary.

My biggest problem with it is the sheer arrogance of it. Obviously you know exactly how everyone should act.

 

[xjx388]

SCOTUS has not declared that you have a constitutional right to Marijuana. SCOTUS has not declared that you have a constitutional right to buy beer before 12pm on a Sunday. SCOTUS has ruled that women have a constitutional right to abortion until viability. SCOTUS set the date of viability and it ISN'T 20 weeks.

SCOTUS gave latitude to the States to set that date.

The point is that any rights to have abortions, drink beer and smoke marijuana are encompassed in the rights reserved to the people in the Ninth Amendment. Those rights can be restricted in the face of a compelling government interest. As long as enough people care about abortion/beer/marijuana there will continue to be a "compelling govt interest."

The majority does not get to vote away constitutional rights of the minority, unless and until SCOTUS changes it's mind, which is very possible, that's what you need to accept.

(see link for source above)

THAT is the reality. You can accept it or not but it is the reality.

I do accept it. But the fact remains that Constitutional rights are "voted away" all the time based on the "compelling interest," standard. The task of those who oppose abortion regulation is to convince the rest of us that there is no compelling interest: i.e., that the unborn's life is not worth protecting. I don't think you will find that to be an achievable task in the immediate future.

 

[xjx388]

My biggest problem with it is the sheer arrogance of it. Obviously you know exactly how everyone should act.

It has nothing to do with me. Actions have logical and natural consequences. We are evolved enough to understand that and to alter our behavior accordingly.

 

[elbe]

It has nothing to do with me.

You really start to come across as "I know how to keep it in my pants so I'm better than everyone who can't"

Actions have logical and natural consequences. We are evolved enough to understand that and to alter our behavior accordingly.

I think it's nice that you believe that. Do you believe in Santa Claus too?

The fact is we have a generally pretty good idea of how people act and trying to fight that for some nebulous "moral" reason is just sad.

 

[xjx388]

You really start to come across as "I know how to keep it in my pants so I'm better than everyone who can't"

I don't understand how you get to that conclusion. I didn't keep it in my pants. I got my 17 YO girlfriend pregnant.

Like I said, it has nothing to do with me. The plain biological fact is that intercourse leads to pregnancy. Humans have understood that for millennia. We have to control our behavior to control the outcome. If we don't, we have to accept the consequences of the behavior. This is true across the whole spectrum of human behavior. If I eat too much, I get fat. If I steal something to feed my family, I go to jail. Why is sex somehow exempted from this?

I think it's nice that you believe that. Do you believe in Santa Claus too?

It is simple fact: humans are capable of controlling their behavior. In the heat of the moment, I have wanted to kill before. It took restraint not to. Humans can control behavior. If they don't, there are consequences. How is this controversial?

The fact is we have a generally pretty good idea of how people act and trying to fight that for some nebulous "moral" reason is just sad.

But we do it all the time in every other sphere of human behavior. What makes sex different?

 

[elbe]

I don't understand how you get to that conclusion. I didn't keep it in my pants. I got my 17 YO girlfriend pregnant.

Like I said, it has nothing to do with me. The plain biological fact is that intercourse leads to pregnancy. Humans have understood that for millennia. We have to control our behavior to control the outcome. If we don't, we have to accept the consequences of the behavior. This is true across the whole spectrum of human behavior. If I eat too much, I get fat. If I steal something to feed my family, I go to jail. Why is sex somehow exempted from this?

It is simple fact: humans are capable of controlling their behavior. In the heat of the moment, I have wanted to kill before. It took restraint not to. Humans can control behavior. If they don't, there are consequences. How is this controversial?

But we do it all the time in every other sphere of human behavior. What makes sex different?

But we don't. Not really. Humans make poor and short sighted decisions all the time. People might know that keeping their current car would be far cheaper, but 0% APR?! We do stupid things for short term gains. We know that people are going to have sex and women will get pregnant, but forcing them to carry the baby to term is just punishing them for a stupid mistake as well as the child. That's just immoral.

The fact is abstinence just doesn't work. We know that from actual evidence. That's why we want to provide proper education, protection, and, as a failsafe, a way out to increase the chances that children being born will be born in the best possible situation. If conservatives really cared about the children they'd support these things, but it's pretty clear that the childrens' welfare is the least of their concerns.

 

[Mister Earl]

Like I said, it has nothing to do with me. The plain biological fact is that intercourse leads to pregnancy. Humans have understood that for millennia. We have to control our behavior to control the outcome. If we don't, we have to accept the consequences of the behavior. This is true across the whole spectrum of human behavior. If I eat too much, I get fat. If I steal something to feed my family, I go to jail. Why is sex somehow exempted from this?

Because it also punishes the child.

Why should more infants have to suffer lower quality childhoods just so a few fundie nutbags can feel secure on their moral pedestal? What kind of twisted thinking does it take that makes you think it is in any way acceptable to force a lower quality of life on babies just so a small group of kooks can feel smug?

#EDIT: It's fairly freakin' obvious that this situation you would prefer isn't about bettering the world. It isn't about bettering the care children receive. It isn't about improving quality of life. It's about punishing women who aren't living to your absurd moral code. That you are indifferent about the child also being punished says volumes.

 

[R.A.F.]

If you don't have the means to have a kid, then don't have sex.

Why stop there?...why not just sterilize all poor women?

 

[R.A.F.]

It's fairly freakin' obvious that this situation you would prefer isn't about bettering the world. It isn't about bettering the care children receive. It isn't about improving quality of life. It's about punishing women who aren't living to your absurd moral code. That you are indifferent about the child also being punished says volumes.

It's the height of hypocracy that there is such concern for the unborn until the birth....then the child is pretty much on their own.

 

[R.A.F.]

It is simple fact...

Please stop saying that....you are posting opinions nothing more...

 

[xjx388]

Please stop saying that....you are posting opinions nothing more...

So it's an opinion that people are capable of controlling their behavior? No. That is an obvious fact. I'd be willing to wager that many people who oppose me here are controlling their behavior right now.

Actions have consequences. This is simple obvious fact and I don't see how you can spin that into an opinion.

 

[Mister Earl]

So it's an opinion that people are capable of controlling their behavior? No. That is an obvious fact.

It's also obvious fact that while people are capable of controlling their behavior, they're also capable of failing to control their behavior. Otherwise we'd have no alcoholics, drug addicts, criminals, religious fundamentalists wishing to legislate abhorrent morality on everyone regardless of faith in a supposedly free country... I could go on.

 

[SomedayGirl]

xjx388, if I overeat and become fat as per your example the state doesn't come along and start feeding me celery and water. I can diet or not as I see fit. It's my responsibility to decide what will be best for me.

In the same manner, I'm not sure why if I am pregnant the state gets to insert itself in what I decide to do about that. It's my responsibility and I may decide to have the child or not.

You seem to think responsibility for the choice to have sex can only mean requiring a woman to have a child after an unplanned pregnancy is discovered when it can be equally responsible not to have a child.

 

[xjx388]

But we don't. Not really. Humans make poor and short sighted decisions all the time. People might know that keeping their current car would be far cheaper, but 0% APR?! We do stupid things for short term gains.

Yes, exactly. And then we feel the consequences. Why should our sexual behaviors be different?

We know that people are going to have sex and women will get pregnant, but forcing them to carry the baby to term is just punishing them for a stupid mistake

That's an opinion. (The following assumes consensual sex, of course.) No one forced her to have sex. No one forced her not to use birth control. No one forced her to avoid the issue until past the legal timeframe.

as well as the child. That's just immoral.

What's immoral is killing the child because he has crappy parents. There are plenty of loving parents who would adopt that child.

The fact is abstinence just doesn't work.

I think you need to review human reproduction again.

We know that from actual evidence. That's why we want to provide proper education, protection, and, as a failsafe, a way out to increase the chances that children being born will be born in the best possible situation.

But there are plenty of poor families having kids. In fact around 26% of kids are born to families who are below the poverty line. Most of these poor parents want and continue to have more children and those kids are not born in the best possible situation. So sex education, freely available birth control and abortion are already failing to control this. The only way to control it is to give people an incentive to control their behavior. Right now, our welfare and tax systems actually incentivize having kids. That needs to change.

If conservatives really cared about the children they'd support these things, but it's pretty clear that the childrens' welfare is the least of their concerns.

I support improving the adoption infrastructure so that children have a better situation, helping more families get out of poverty, strengthening our educational system so that the children of the poor have more opportunities and incentivizing people to control their behavior.

I do not support making it easier to make bad decisions.

 

[elbe]

I think you need to review human reproduction again.

Are you actually trying to argue that abstinence works? Or are you just trying to play a childish semantics game?

But there are plenty of poor families having kids. In fact around 26% of kids are born to families who are below the poverty line. Most of these poor parents want and continue to have more children and those kids are not born in the best possible situation. So sex education, freely available birth control and abortion are already failing to control this. The only way to control it is to give people an incentive to control their behavior. Right now, our welfare and tax systems actually incentivize having kids. That needs to change.

Lots of things need to change, but reducing peoples' options is not one of them. And incentivizing to have kids? Yeah, I know poor people with kids, they certainly aren't making things easier for them. Don't try to argue from outliers, it's sad.

I support improving the adoption infrastructure so that children have a better situation, helping more families get out of poverty, strengthening our educational system so that the children of the poor have more opportunities and incentivizing people to control their behavior.

And you think making women go through a pregnancy they don't want is going to aid any of that? Seriously?

I do not support making it easier to make bad decisions.

No, you support punishing people unduly. You keep making assertions about human behavior that just don't stand up to any scrutiny.


ETA: What's worse is the lack of consistency. First it was about protecting children, but that's demonstrably not true so suddenly it's about punishing parents for doing one of the few things we're biologically wired to do.