Overturning Roe v Wade?

[laterbloomer]

May 9, 2022 21:56:57 GMT -5 billisonboard said:

May 9, 2022 21:45:42 GMT -5 resolution said:

It doesn't really work that way though. I have consensual sex all the time with my husband. I love having sex with him. It doesn't stop me from viewing any man that I don't know with suspicion if there is no one else around besides me and him. It isn't the total number of times that you have sex that creates some percentage of consensual vs. nonconsensual, its that every man that I don't know is a potential threat if there is no one else around.

So how you view men is what determines how much sexual assault takes place in the world. And we are all potential threats so we assault you by existing.

bill a huge thing you can do to help is not get defensive when women tell you the reality and the impact it has.

[billisonboard]

May 9, 2022 21:54:02 GMT -5 laterbloomer said:

May 9, 2022 21:50:39 GMT -5 billisonboard said:

If women are that fucked up in their sexuality, nothing we guys with no ill intent can do. Oh well.

You can fight to have men held accountable for sexual assault and for women to have the right to abortion.

I will continue to vote to support those.

[pulmonarymd]

I thought this is a state issue. That’s what anti abortion activists have said all these years. But republicans are talking about a national ban. I bet scgal will support these same politicians despite her previous statement that this is a state issue

[scgal]

May 10, 2022 6:28:37 GMT -5 pulmonarymd said:

I thought this is a state issue. That’s what anti abortion activists have said all these years. But republicans are talking about a national ban. I bet scgal will support these same politicians despite her previous statement that this is a state issue

I think that would have some merit and as I do lean right. I would say I wouldn't support a national ban. I have said it her many times a medical abortion is ok, hell I will even say on a state level up until a heartbeat. 

Anything more you like to say about me!

[pulmonarymd]

May 10, 2022 7:17:13 GMT -5 scgal said:

May 10, 2022 6:28:37 GMT -5 pulmonarymd said:

I thought this is a state issue. That’s what anti abortion activists have said all these years. But republicans are talking about a national ban. I bet scgal will support these same politicians despite her previous statement that this is a state issue

I think that would have some merit and as I do lean right. I would say I wouldn't support a national ban. I have said it her many times a medical abortion is ok, hell I will even say on a state level up until a heartbeat. 

Anything more you like to say about me!

Yes. Most bans being passed in the states have no exceptions, despite your attempt to soften the blow to roe vs wade being overturned. You also are a hypocrite. You said this is a state issue. If it is, then you would have denounced the talk about a national ban. But you didn’t. It was a states issue as long as row vs wade was in effect. Once that changes, it appears it is no longer a states issue

[wvugurl26]

So too bad if you live in a crazy far right state, no appropriate health care for you? That's freaking ridiculous. These states are foaming at the mouth to make it illegal. And they are not carving out appropriate exemptions for medical reasons. They are politicians not physicians. They should not be making healthcare decisions.

I'm so tired of the obsession with regulating what women can do with their bodies. These far right nut jobs who want to force births are also opposed to any support for mothers and families. Pay up or shut up.

[happyhoix]

May 10, 2022 7:57:13 GMT -5 wvugurl26 said:

So too bad if you live in a crazy far right state, no appropriate health care for you? That's freaking ridiculous. These states are foaming at the mouth to make it illegal. And they are not carving out appropriate exemptions for medical reasons. They are politicians not physicians. They should not be making healthcare decisions.

I'm so tired of the obsession with regulating what women can do with their bodies. These far right nut jobs who want to force births are also opposed to any support for mothers and families. Pay up or shut up.

The draft referred to there being almost no newborn domestic infants available to adopt - so I guess the answer it to force women to have babies they don’t want or can’t afford so childless couples don’t have to import foreign babies to adopt.

Like women are breeding stock and babies are a commodity.

[happyhoix]

I don’t understand McConnell talking about how the GOP will make a law making abortion illegal if the GOP wins the midterms.

Yes it will galvanize anti abortion voters, but only 20 to 30 percent want to eliminate them. A big chunk of other voters will be motivated to vote against the GOP.

Normally McConnell very cannily plays to the voters. I would expect him to say nothing about this until after he wins back Congress.

[bean29]

May 10, 2022 9:12:01 GMT -5 happyhoix said:

May 10, 2022 7:57:13 GMT -5 wvugurl26 said:

So too bad if you live in a crazy far right state, no appropriate health care for you? That's freaking ridiculous. These states are foaming at the mouth to make it illegal. And they are not carving out appropriate exemptions for medical reasons. They are politicians not physicians. They should not be making healthcare decisions.

I'm so tired of the obsession with regulating what women can do with their bodies. These far right nut jobs who want to force births are also opposed to any support for mothers and families. Pay up or shut up.

The draft referred to there being almost no newborn domestic infants available to adopt - so I guess the answer it to force women to have babies they don’t want or can’t afford so childless couples don’t have to import foreign babies to adopt.

Like women are breeding stock and babies are a commodity.

I have always felt that my health came first.  Once I had one child, I felt I had a responsibility to maintain my ability to raise and care for them until they were old enough to live on their own.  I have 2 children.  I never considered having more.  I feel that you use birth control responsibly and if that fails then you decide your course forward. It makes no sense to continue a pregnancy when the baby has no chance of living, especially if continuing the pregnancy jeopardizes the Mother's life.  I don't understand why the Republicans are not making allowances for that, and now some of them are talking about banning birth control too.  I don't get it and I wonder what it will take for Republican Women and Men to wake up?

[bean29]

May 9, 2022 11:42:07 GMT -5 hurley1980 said:

May 9, 2022 8:00:43 GMT -5 laterbloomer said:

Do you need to get your husband to change his stand on women's rights?
I don't consider university attendance power of the cunny.

Not immediately, but in the long term it could be. If Ol Miss has a ratio of 6 guys for every girl in 10 years, then most guys aren't going to want to attend. College dudes want to get laid.  Same with general population. If young women refuse to live in these states, then after a period of time there are going to be more men than women, and most of the women there will be older, or already married. So prospects for relationships and marriage are going to be slim.  Its the same reason many young people don't want to live in small towns.  They want dating options.  These states are going to end up having way more men than women and eventually it won't be desirable to live there for anyone that is single or has a partner of child baring age.  But that will be way down the road.

My DD has been trying to get a promotion.  She applied for a job in Ohio.  Ohio stands to eliminate abortion if Roe v Wade is overturned.  Wisconsin will allow it only to save the life of the Mother.  Idk what I would tell her to do.  She probably needs to relocate to get promoted, and the more desirable places to work have more competition for the jobs.  I just pray that once they eliminate abortion rights they don't also go after contraceptives.  I think some republican voters are so far down the conspiracy rabbit hole they have lost the ability to think and project future consequences of a decision.  I keep thinking that both my kids should apply for Mexican Passports for a variety of reasons, but it is nuts that that may be our safe haven if things go to sh!t in the US.

[weltschmerz]

In light of what's happening in the USA, we're naming a park after Dr. Henry Morgantaler, our foremost abortionist who received the Order of Canada, our highest civilian honour.

www.thecanadianencyclopedia.ca/en/article/henry-morgentaler

[djAdvocate]

May 10, 2022 6:28:37 GMT -5 pulmonarymd said:

I thought this is a state issue. That’s what anti abortion activists have said all these years. But republicans are talking about a national ban. I bet scgal will support these same politicians despite her previous statement that this is a state issue

Trojan.....Horse......

the implication (Trojan Horse) is that this is all an elaborate lie to build a platform which will be used for Dominion.

[scgal]

May 10, 2022 7:49:28 GMT -5 pulmonarymd said:

May 10, 2022 7:17:13 GMT -5 scgal said:

I think that would have some merit and as I do lean right. I would say I wouldn't support a national ban. I have said it her many times a medical abortion is ok, hell I will even say on a state level up until a heartbeat. 

Anything more you like to say about me!

Yes. Most bans being passed in the states have no exceptions, despite your attempt to soften the blow to roe vs wade being overturned. You also are a hypocrite. You said this is a state issue. If it is, then you would have denounced the talk about a national ban. But you didn’t. It was a states issue as long as row vs wade was in effect. Once that changes, it appears it is no longer a states issue

What part about I wouldn't support a national ban that makes me a hypocrite? You just love personal attacks. 

[justme]

May 9, 2022 21:50:39 GMT -5 billisonboard said:

May 9, 2022 21:27:01 GMT -5 laterbloomer said:

You have to remember that we started this part of the conversation when someone said this could all be solved if women just withheld sex until we got our own way. They even had a cute name for it. My point is that women do not now and never have had the power to rule the world by withholding sex as they have never had total control over their own sexuality. Not having the right to have an abortion on demand is another way this plays out.
And bill you don't know what impact this has had on your own sex life. You don't really know if any of your partners had sex on any particular occasion or occasions because they felt they had to for some reason (they led you on and weren't allowed to change their mind, they had said yes before so they always had to agree) I'm not trying to depress you, but the number of times sexual assault happens (and it happens a lot) is just the tip of the ice berg on it's impact.

If women are that fucked up in their sexuality, nothing we guys with no ill intent can do. Oh well.

Regarding men with no ill intent...

Years ago I was dating a guy and we were making out and such, but I said no sex, this guy kept trying to push the boundary and the only thing that stopped him was luckily my body decided on fight and kicked him off me. If I froze it would have resulted in him sexually assaulting me. If he even remembers that incident now I 100% believe he would say he was a man with no ill intent and would not sexually assault a woman. When in fact my foot pushing on his chest was the only thing that stopped him because my arms weren't strong enough to move him.

I'm not saying every man has it within them to sexually assault someone. I'm saying there's a lot of men out there that think they never did anything questionable where if you talked with all their sexual partners they might not say the same thing. 1 in 4 women aren't being sexually assaulted by a handful of men - it's A LOT of men doing the sexual assault.

[billisonboard]

May 10, 2022 14:26:43 GMT -5 justme said:

May 9, 2022 21:50:39 GMT -5 billisonboard said:

If women are that fucked up in their sexuality, nothing we guys with no ill intent can do. Oh well.

Regarding men with no ill intent...

Years ago I was dating a guy and we were making out and such, but I said no sex, this guy kept trying to push the boundary and the only thing that stopped him was luckily my body decided on fight and kicked him off me. If I froze it would have resulted in him sexually assaulting me. If he even remembers that incident now I 100% believe he would say he was a man with no ill intent and would not sexually assault a woman. When in fact my foot pushing on his chest was the only thing that stopped him because my arms weren't strong enough to move him.

I'm not saying every man has it within them to sexually assault someone. I'm saying there's a lot of men out there that think they never did anything questionable where if you talked with all their sexual partners they might not say the same thing.

[pulmonarymd]

May 10, 2022 14:03:42 GMT -5 scgal said:

May 10, 2022 7:49:28 GMT -5 pulmonarymd said:

Yes. Most bans being passed in the states have no exceptions, despite your attempt to soften the blow to roe vs wade being overturned. You also are a hypocrite. You said this is a state issue. If it is, then you would have denounced the talk about a national ban. But you didn’t. It was a states issue as long as row vs wade was in effect. Once that changes, it appears it is no longer a states issue

What part about I wouldn't support a national ban that makes me a hypocrite? You just love personal attacks. 

You stated this was a state issue. If you truly believed that, you should not support any national law, either for or against it. You would continue to believe it should remain with the states. If you support a ban at a national level, then you lied with your original claim. Just asking for consistency, otherwise you are a hypocrite

[scgal]

May 10, 2022 14:41:40 GMT -5 pulmonarymd said:

May 10, 2022 14:03:42 GMT -5 scgal said:

What part about I wouldn't support a national ban that makes me a hypocrite? You just love personal attacks. 

You stated this was a state issue. If you truly believed that, you should not support any national law, either for or against it. You would continue to believe it should remain with the states. If you support a ban at a national level, then you lied with your original claim. Just asking for consistency, otherwise you are a hypocrite

I said it could have some merit but i wouldn't support it. I didn't go into detail about the merit. I would rather see it go to the state level. To me though if there would be a national ban I would hope they would put a medical provision in there. Is that better. And no it doesn't have to be just for or against. I would like to see some sort of compromise 

[tallguy]

May 10, 2022 14:50:27 GMT -5 scgal said:

May 10, 2022 14:41:40 GMT -5 pulmonarymd said:

You stated this was a state issue. If you truly believed that, you should not support any national law, either for or against it. You would continue to believe it should remain with the states. If you support a ban at a national level, then you lied with your original claim. Just asking for consistency, otherwise you are a hypocrite

I said it could have some merit but i wouldn't support it. I didn't go into detail about the merit. I would rather see it go to the state level. To me though if there would be a national ban I would hope they would put a medical provision in there. Is that better. And no it doesn't have to be just for or against. I would like to see some sort of compromise 

Do you want to get back to this question?

You do realize that there is no logical difference between government saying you MUST carry a fetus to term and government saying you CANNOT carry a fetus to term. If they can control it one way it is a small step to controlling it the other. You don't think women can be forced to undergo abortions or sterilizations? See China's one-child policy for examples. And if you don't believe the Republican Party can be just as overbearing and repressive as the Chinese Communist Party you aren't looking very hard. Again, personal or religious belief can never be justified as the sole basis for law.

ANY government involvement in the issue is wrong.  It does not become "right" because it agrees with your position, and "wrong" if you disagree with it.  It is wrong, period.  It infringes the rights of its citizens without any proof of a compelling state reason for doing so.  

[djAdvocate]

this is why systems of authority need to be challenged for legitimacy (and consistency).  the slow erosion of rights can and will occur when the majority simply sit back and allow it to happen.

[djAdvocate]

May 10, 2022 14:50:27 GMT -5 scgal said:

May 10, 2022 14:41:40 GMT -5 pulmonarymd said:

You stated this was a state issue. If you truly believed that, you should not support any national law, either for or against it. You would continue to believe it should remain with the states. If you support a ban at a national level, then you lied with your original claim. Just asking for consistency, otherwise you are a hypocrite

I said it could have some merit but i wouldn't support it. I didn't go into detail about the merit. I would rather see it go to the state level. To me though if there would be a national ban I would hope they would put a medical provision in there. Is that better. And no it doesn't have to be just for or against. I would like to see some sort of compromise 

a good compromise would have been allowing states to restrict access to abortions after 10 weeks, or viability.  this is, incidentally, how most countries (ie Turkey) work.  making abortion available right up until birth is uncompromising.  most Americans would take issue with that.  making abortion UNAVAILABLE is also uncompromising.  most Americans would take issue with that.  the middle ground is what will work for the majority.  unfortunately, in our entire history, the middle ground is NOT what has been under discussion.

[thyme4change]

May 7, 2022 13:35:42 GMT -5 justme said:

So can we not just start a religion where the central tenement is god telling women you have a god given right to decide when you carry a pregnancy, and this god created abortion and told doctors to help women.

And then sue the government for going against my religious beliefs.

I'm pretty sure we could get a few million signing up for this religion. Just need a name for it, maybe a messiah, and a couple other tenements to flesh it out.

www.politifact.com/article/2022/may/05/satanic-temples-fight-over-abortion-rights-roe-v-w/

The Satanic Temple, which is recognized by the IRS as a tax-exempt church, created a “Satanic Abortion Ritual” it says exempts its members from state abortion restrictions.

(They don't actually worship Satan)

[pulmonarymd]

May 10, 2022 14:50:27 GMT -5 scgal said:

May 10, 2022 14:41:40 GMT -5 pulmonarymd said:

You stated this was a state issue. If you truly believed that, you should not support any national law, either for or against it. You would continue to believe it should remain with the states. If you support a ban at a national level, then you lied with your original claim. Just asking for consistency, otherwise you are a hypocrite

I said it could have some merit but i wouldn't support it. I didn't go into detail about the merit. I would rather see it go to the state level. To me though if there would be a national ban I would hope they would put a medical provision in there. Is that better. And no it doesn't have to be just for or against. I would like to see some sort of compromise 

See, you cannot even say you do not want a national ban. Just shows your hypocrisy. If it is a state issue, the federal government needs to stay out of it. No ifs, ands, or buts. You will accept a national ban because you agree with it. Just accept that

[weltschmerz]

May 10, 2022 15:31:52 GMT -5 thyme4change said:

May 7, 2022 13:35:42 GMT -5 justme said:

So can we not just start a religion where the central tenement is god telling women you have a god given right to decide when you carry a pregnancy, and this god created abortion and told doctors to help women.

And then sue the government for going against my religious beliefs.

I'm pretty sure we could get a few million signing up for this religion. Just need a name for it, maybe a messiah, and a couple other tenements to flesh it out.

www.politifact.com/article/2022/may/05/satanic-temples-fight-over-abortion-rights-roe-v-w/

The Satanic Temple, which is recognized by the IRS as a tax-exempt church, created a “Satanic Abortion Ritual” it says exempts its members from state abortion restrictions.

(They don't actually worship Satan)

I love those guys.

[djAdvocate]

me too.  the Pastafarians are also way up on my "love list".

[thyme4change]

There is also these guys. No help with Roe, but worth supporting.

universalsuffragechurch.org/about

The Church of Universal Suffrage is an international, officially registered, non-profit religious institution that holds regular, weekly Sunday Service in meditation on the nature of voter suppression. We also observe every voting day in the United States to be an official holiday reserved for the celebration of our sacred right to vote, endowed to us by our Creator along with life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.

[teen persuasion]

May 10, 2022 20:50:49 GMT -5 thyme4change said:

There is also these guys. No help with Roe, but worth supporting.

universalsuffragechurch.org/about

The Church of Universal Suffrage is an international, officially registered, non-profit religious institution that holds regular, weekly Sunday Service in meditation on the nature of voter suppression. We also observe every voting day in the United States to be an official holiday reserved for the celebration of our sacred right to vote, endowed to us by our Creator along with life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.

[justme]

Just reminding myself that the crazy person I haven't unfriended on fb will just come up with some crazy reason why I'm wrong that a law forbidding a medical procedure is not in any way similar to encouraging people to get a vaccine while allowing those that don't to test.

She also thinks Biden is behind gas prices so it's not worth the electrons.

[minnesotapaintlady]

May 10, 2022 22:46:07 GMT -5 justme said:

Just reminding myself that the crazy person I haven't unfriended on fb will just come up with some crazy reason why I'm wrong that a law forbidding a medical procedure is not in any way similar to encouraging people to get a vaccine while allowing those that don't to test.

She also thinks Biden is behind gas prices so it's not worth the electrons.

Well, Biden is apparently behind the baby formula shortage too now.  The conspiracy is very deep!

[justme]

So watching news and some douche canoe politician was talking about liberals forcing abortion rights (might have been a different word) on people. Not the first time I've heard it. Still don't get it. Having the ability to get an abortion doesn't mean you must. Those anti abortion don't ever have to have one. I just don't get why they keep using "force" in their argument because the only one wanting to force people to do something are those wanting to outlaw abortion.

[minnesotapaintlady]

May 11, 2022 11:10:10 GMT -5 justme said:

So watching news and some douche canoe politician was talking about liberals forcing abortion rights (might have been a different word) on people. Not the first time I've heard it. Still don't get it. Having the ability to get an abortion doesn't mean you must. Those anti abortion don't ever have to have one. I just don't get why they keep using "force" in their argument because the only one wanting to force people to do something are those wanting to outlaw abortion.

Well, according to Ex 2.0 that is VERY pro-life, "Women should not have that kind of power.  At the very least the father should have a say in if his child is murdered"