Jump to content
Binghamton Beast

New York State abortion bill now allows babies, At any point of pregnancy, to be aborted

Recommended Posts

15 hours ago, Doc Brown said:

I don't mean to be this combative as abortion is a sensitive issue.  I actually am against abortion after 20 weeks with the exception of rape or *****.  If there was another organization besides pp with the infrastructure in low income areas then I'd be fine with funding them but there isn't.  I think all you'd see with defunding planned parenthood is an increase of death among young women due to back alley abortions, higher rates of actual infanticide, and an actual increase in abortion rates because of a lack of access to contraception.  They saw an increase in abortion rates in Texas a few years back when they defunded most of planned parenthood there. 

 

Edit - Really: In-cest is blocked but rape is fine.

 

I'll reiterate from a couple weeks ago that late term abortions beyond 24 weeks represent 1.3% of all abortions in the US, of which many are performed because the fetus isn't viable due to severe birth defects. 

 

Based off of the data available, 50-250 abortions happen each year after 28 weeks. Hardly any of which are actually done in the final weeks of a pregnancy. The right would lead you to believe that number is actually in the thousands. That babies that are 39 weeks along are being aborted in mass when reality is that isn't even remotely the truth. 

10 hours ago, TakeYouToTasker said:

I’m honestly not at all morally conflicted over the idea of women who are trying to murder children dying in the process.

 

It’s certainly not the ideal, and preventable death is always tragic; but a woman willing to murder one child will likely be willing to murder more, so at least it puts an end to the cycle.  Also, it’s the choices of the woman which led to her demise.  Not much different than suicide.

 

I'm fairly certain there's zero evidence to support this opinion. 

 

Saying it's a woman's choice to get pregnant due to being raped or molested by a family member is a bit much. 

Edited by jrober38

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, Doc Brown said:

It's not that black and white since there's no clear definition of when life begins.

 

Lack of access to cheap contraceptives leads to a higher rate of unwanted pregnancies causing more women to seek abortions. 

Then I would presume that you are making the determination 20 weeks is when life begins unless the kid is a product of rape or *****.

7 minutes ago, jrober38 said:

 

I'll reiterate from a couple weeks ago that late term abortions beyond 24 weeks represent 1.3% of all abortions in the US, of which many are performed because the fetus isn't viable due to severe birth defects. 

 

Based off of the data available, 50-250 abortions happen each year after 28 weeks. Hardly any of which are actually done in the final weeks of a pregnancy. The right would lead you to believe that number is actually in the thousands. That babies that are 39 weeks along are being aborted in mass when reality is that isn't even remotely the truth. 

 

I'm fairly certain there's zero evidence to support this opinion. 

 

Saying it's a woman's choice to get pregnant due to being raped or molested by a family member is a bit much. 

As usual you post statistics without links.

Edited by 3rdnlng

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, 3rdnlng said:

As usual you post statistics without links.

 

I googled how many late term abortions and this came up as the first link. The data is taken straight from the CDC.

 

http://www.johnstonsarchive.net/policy/abortion/late_term_abortion_usa.html

 

https://www.cdc.gov/reproductivehealth/data_stats/abortion.htm

 

Based off what I've read, 90% of all abortions are done before 3 months into the pregnancy. 98.7% are done by the 21st week. 50-250 abortions happen per year after 28 weeks with the due date being 39 weeks after conception, meaning you're likely dealing with a handful of situations per year around the 39 week mark. 

 

The notion by the right that babies are being aborted in mass in the delivery room couldn't be farther from the truth. 

Edited by jrober38
  • Like (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, jrober38 said:

I'm fairly certain there's zero evidence to support this opinion. 

 

Saying it's a woman's choice to get pregnant due to being raped or molested by a family member is a bit much. 

 

What kind of half-assed logic is this?  Women choosing to murder their children will lead to increased deaths of the women who murdered their children.  Nothing to do with rape and *****.  But you know what?  Nevermind that.

 

I’ve been hoping you’d eventually come back with that argument, Mr. “I don’t care about 1.3%”.

 

Only 0.69% (that’s roughly half the 1.3% figure you’re dismissing as too minuscule to care about) of all abortions are, combined, to save the life/health of the mother (0.36%), because of fetal birth defects (0.24%), and rape/***** (0.09%).

 

https://www.hli.org/resources/why-women-abort/

 

Reconcile.

Edited by TakeYouToTasker
  • Thanks! (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Doc Brown said:

It's not that black and white since there's no clear definition of when life begins.

 

Lack of access to cheap contraceptives leads to a higher rate of unwanted pregnancies causing more women to seek abortions. 

 

That's because we live in a completely amoral society.

 

If we had ANY kind of coherent morality in this country, it wouldn't be so vague.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

4 hours ago, Doc Brown said:

 

Lack of access to cheap contraceptives leads to a higher rate of unwanted pregnancies causing more women to seek abortions. 

 

 

 

And say Doc, which party is causing that ??......................and ask yourself why ?

 

Jun 11, 2019 - You might think that Republicans are the ones keeping birth control from being over-the-counter. You would be wrong.
 
 
 
Jun 9, 2015 - A bill from Sen. Murray would force insurers to cover over-the-counter birth control.
 
 
 
 
Jan 16, 2019 - Democrats often wax on about a woman's right to take control of her .... who had urged the FDA to stop stalling and threatening to block then–President Bush's ... Making birth control available over the counter played well with ...
 
 
.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, B-Man said:

 

 

 

 

And say Doc, which party is causing that ??......................and ask yourself why ?

 

Jun 11, 2019 - You might think that Republicans are the ones keeping birth control from being over-the-counter. You would be wrong.
 
 
 
Jun 9, 2015 - A bill from Sen. Murray would force insurers to cover over-the-counter birth control.
 
 
 
 
Jan 16, 2019 - Democrats often wax on about a woman's right to take control of her .... who had urged the FDA to stop stalling and threatening to block then–President Bush's ... Making birth control available over the counter played well with ...
 
 
.

From the four year old Hill article, why didn't Republicans propose a bill at the time making over the counter contraceptives like the morning after pill available and maintain the mandate that insurance companies also cover it?  

 

Sen. Patty Murray (D-Wash.) on Tuesday unveiled a bill to keep in place the rule that insurance companies must cover contraception, even if certain methods, like birth control pills, become available without a prescription.

 

The bill is a direct rebuke to Senate Republicans who are trying to champion the issue of over-the-counter birth control. That GOP bill has drawn fire from reproductive health groups like Planned Parenthood Action Fund, however, that warn the legislation would force women to again pay out of pocket for their birth control.

 

“If something is too expensive, it doesn’t matter how easy it is to get. It might as well be on the moon,” Murray told reporters Tuesday.

Unlike the Republican bill, Murray’s bill would not provide incentives for insurance companies to offer birth control available over the counter.

 

“We have to be very careful not to put political pressure on the FDA without going through the regular process,” Murray said.

“I do think at some point, birth control will be offered over the counter, and when that happens, our bill makes sure insurance companies still cover it,” she said.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So I should be able to have sex whenever I want, and if birth control is too expensive, I won't let that keep me from having sex, I just demand that I'm able to get an abortion?

 

So between a woman and her partner, they can't raise the money to purchase a condom?  When 2 people can't raise 50 cents, maybe sex shouldn't be what they're focused on?  And maybe if your partner isn't willing to help with birth control you shouldn't be ***** him in the first place? 

 

This is dumbass argument that entirely skips  over the concept of killing a baby.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
45 minutes ago, Joe Miner said:

So I should be able to have sex whenever I want, and if birth control is too expensive, I won't let that keep me from having sex, I just demand that I'm able to get an abortion?

 

So between a woman and her partner, they can't raise the money to purchase a condom?  When 2 people can't raise 50 cents, maybe sex shouldn't be what they're focused on?  And maybe if your partner isn't willing to help with birth control you shouldn't be ***** him in the first place? 

 

This is dumbass argument that entirely skips  over the concept of killing a baby.

 

It also entirely skips over the fact that contraception is "free" under Obamacare.  

  • Like (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Doc Brown said:

From the four year old Hill article, why didn't Republicans propose a bill at the time making over the counter contraceptives like the morning after pill available and maintain the mandate that insurance companies also cover it?  

 

Sen. Patty Murray (D-Wash.) on Tuesday unveiled a bill to keep in place the rule that insurance companies must cover contraception, even if certain methods, like birth control pills, become available without a prescription.

 

The bill is a direct rebuke to Senate Republicans who are trying to champion the issue of over-the-counter birth control. That GOP bill has drawn fire from reproductive health groups like Planned Parenthood Action Fund, however, that warn the legislation would force women to again pay out of pocket for their birth control.

 

“If something is too expensive, it doesn’t matter how easy it is to get. It might as well be on the moon,” Murray told reporters Tuesday.

Unlike the Republican bill, Murray’s bill would not provide incentives for insurance companies to offer birth control available over the counter.

 

“We have to be very careful not to put political pressure on the FDA without going through the regular process,” Murray said.

“I do think at some point, birth control will be offered over the counter, and when that happens, our bill makes sure insurance companies still cover it,” she said.

So, over the counter birth control might prevent more pregnancies, thus reducing the amount of abortions and cutting into PP's bottom line? What other purpose would PP have to cut down on unwanted pregnancies?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Joe Miner said:

So I should be able to have sex whenever I want, and if birth control is too expensive, I won't let that keep me from having sex, I just demand that I'm able to get an abortion?

 

So between a woman and her partner, they can't raise the money to purchase a condom?  When 2 people can't raise 50 cents, maybe sex shouldn't be what they're focused on?  And maybe if your partner isn't willing to help with birth control you shouldn't be ***** him in the first place? 

 

This is dumbass argument that entirely skips  over the concept of killing a baby.

 

Condoms are only 85% effective.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, jrober38 said:

 

Condoms are only 85% effective.

 

Condoms are 98% effective.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, DC Tom said:

 

Condoms are 98% effective.

 

If used correctly, which they're not all the time.

 

Also, think about how many millions of times Americans have sex each year.

 

2% of those encounters results in a LOT of unplanned babies.

Edited by jrober38

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, jrober38 said:

 

If used correctly, which they're not all the time.

 

People are idiots.  Condoms aren't. 

  • Haha (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, DC Tom said:

 

People are idiots.  Condoms aren't. 

 

...And just like that, a campaign slogan was born. 

 

:lol: 

  • Haha (+1) 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Deranged Rhino said:

 

...And just like that, a campaign slogan was born. 

 

:lol: 

 

I should sell it to Church & Dwight.

  • Haha (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, DC Tom said:

 

People are idiots.  Condoms aren't. 

 

Even if used correctly everytime, which they aren't, a 2% failure rate will result in a ton of unwanted pregnancies. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, jrober38 said:

 

Even if used correctly everytime, which they aren't, a 2% failure rate will result in a ton of unwanted pregnancies. 

 

Which is 49 tons less than not used at all.  

 

People are idiots, you're living proof.

  • Like (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, DC Tom said:

 

Which is 49 tons less than not used at all.  

 

People are idiots, you're living proof.

 

49 tons?

 

LMAO

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, jrober38 said:

 

49 tons?

 

LMAO

 

 

Geez Tom, you're right.

 

 

 

 

 

Let's leave the squirrel of condom use, and return to the subject of of abortion.

 

Tulsi Gabbard Breaks With Fellow Democrats: Supports Regulating Abortion in Third Trimester.

 

So............minimal amount, or not, the leading Democrats with killing what would be a viable child.

 

Vote for that,

 

 

 

.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, jrober38 said:

 

49 tons?

 

LMAO

 

If a 2% failure rate is a ton of unwanted pregnancies, then none at all is fifty tons of unwanted pregnancies, the difference being 49 tons.  

 

I honestly hadn't expected my demonstrating your stupidity by the extension of your metaphor to be as effective as it was.  :lol:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This guy was a big anti-choice voice for the Christians 

 

A penthouse, limousines and private jets: The globe-trotting life of Bishop Michael Bransfield

ZFD7B3RLVZB6PHWLBH67QGVJWE
 
The Catholic cleric spent millions of dollars of his diocese’s money on sumptuous travel during his 13 years in largely impoverished West Virginia before he was barred from public ministry in July, a Post investigation found.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

🐿️ 🐿️ 🐿️'s spotted above..........🙄

 

 

 

Buttigieg Distorts Logic and Scripture on Abortion

https://townhall.com/columnists/davidlimbaugh/2019/09/13/buttigieg-distorts-logic-and-scripture-on-abortion-n2553018

 

 

 

Planned Parenthood Exec Makes Major Admission About Baby Body Part Harvesting

https://www.dailywire.com/news/51710/planned-parenthood-exec-makes-major-admission-amanda-prestigiacomo

 

 

 

Judge Denies AG’s Request for Gag Order Censoring Pro-Life Reporting on Bogus Trial of David Daleiden

https://www.lifenews.com/2019/09/11/judge-denies-ags-request-for-gag-order-censoring-pro-life-reporting-on-bogus-trial-of-david-daleiden/

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, B-Man said:

 

 

Geez Tom, you're right.

 

 

 

 

 

Let's leave the squirrel of condom use, and return to the subject of of abortion.

 

Tulsi Gabbard Breaks With Fellow Democrats: Supports Regulating Abortion in Third Trimester.

 

So............minimal amount, or not, the leading Democrats with killing what would be a viable child.

 

Vote for that,

 

 

 

.

 

 

 

I have no problem with that. I agree with her. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, jrober38 said:

 

If used correctly, which they're not all the time.

 

Also, think about how many millions of times Americans have sex each year.

 

2% of those encounters results in a LOT of unplanned babies.

 

Don't do the crime of you can't do the time. 

  • Haha (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

×
×
  • Create New...