Jump to content

Stake your position on abortion

Over 29 years of fanhood
 Share

Abortion where do people stand?   

27 members have voted

  1. 1. Abortion - what should be legal? (excluding rape and incest)

    • Never
      4
    • Upon detection by a medical entity but then immediately
      1
    • 6 weeks along, if un aware you miss the window.
      2
    • First trimester at latest
      6
    • Second trimester at latest
      7
    • Full term assuming no risk to birthing human (Mother for people who are normal)
      1
    • Only in certain health situations for the berthing human at any time
      2
    • Bruh I’m woke and identify as male so I cant pretend be in this conversation and don’t want to exacerbate things 😉
      1
    • Other-what else is there?
      3

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 128
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Popular Posts

Doc Brown
Doc Brown

Twenty weeks has always been my answer before there's any chance of fetus viability.  I'm not going to take away someone's freedom to choose before then.  I'm more concerned about stopping a woman fro

frostbitmic
frostbitmic

As a man, I don't feel I have a right to tell a woman what she can and can't do with her body other than to those angry, ugly azz Karen's who need to put their masks back on for society's benefit.

sherpa
sherpa

Without getting into one of the most contentious issues of our time, I do know one thing. When my wife informed me she was pregnant, each time, we considered it "life."

Posted Images

LeviF Hall of Famer

LeviF

Posted
Posted

As a man, it is my birthright to tell people what they can or can’t do to innocents and enforce those provisions by whatever means necessary. 
 

18 hours ago, frostbitmic said:

As a man, I don't feel I have a right to tell a woman what she can and can't do with her body other than to those angry, ugly azz Karen's who need to put their masks back on for society's benefit.

 

By that logic Roe should never have been heard because it was an all-male court. 

  • Like (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Irv Veteran

Irv

Posted
Posted (edited)

A couple of thoughts:

 

  1. I can't understand how anyone could demand a woman give birth after being raped or in the case of insist  (The correct spelling gets starred out as bad word on TBD.  Odd).
  2. I don't like that the father not required to be consulted if not rape or insist.  He has a stake.  

 

Edited by Irv
  • Like (+1) 1
  • Agree 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Buffarukus RFA

Buffarukus

Posted
Posted (edited)

i could care less but we as a nation need to come to a consensus here. 9-12 weeks seems long enough imo.

 

i will say there are issues i think the republicans need to back away from and this is one. pick a reasonable point at which a woman can perform this action and then do what the party states it upholds..individual personal freedom and responsability. it doesnt effect you so if the woman can live with that decision then so be it. 

 

at the same time liberals cannot scream my body my choice stay out of it...but can you help me pay for it? unless in obvious circumstances where the pregnancy was not avoidable and or is life threatening to the mother

 

its a issue that shows hypocracy from both sides.

 

 

Edited by Buffarukus
  • Agree 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Doc Brown Hall of Famer

Doc Brown

Posted
Posted (edited)

Twenty weeks has always been my answer before there's any chance of fetus viability.  I'm not going to take away someone's freedom to choose before then.  I'm more concerned about stopping a woman from having to make that decision in the first place.  The fact that we now have less abortions per capita since Roe v. Wade shows we've done an excellent job on that front.  Increased education, more access to contraceptives, more males getting vasectomies, etc...

Edited by Doc Brown
  • Like (+1) 3
  • Agree 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Tenhigh Veteran

Tenhigh

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, Thurmal34 said:

The hypocrisy is on point - my body my choice - oh, wait. 

So many idiots. I stand with women. 
 

Imagine the government telling someone what to do with their bodies?

 

 

 

So can you clearly spell put your position here?  I haven't had coffee yet.

  • Haha (+1) 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Niagara Bill Veteran

Niagara Bill

Posted
Posted
14 hours ago, B-Man said:

 

 

It is much more than "morally sad"

 

Whatever you think that is.

Sad I think because it may seem wrong, but necessary. So I see his "SAD"  as a real good descriptor. As a man I believe this is a woman's choice. 

Pushing your own morals in these types of decisions is difficult. We are not talking speed limits here. 

This is a very personal decision like assisted death. For some it is unthinkable. For others not so much. 

Erring on the side of choice for a woman is proper I think. 

Religion should have no bearing on the law. If your religion forbids it, then practice your beliefs and I will practice mine.

  • Agree 1
  • Thank you (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Over 29 years of fanhood Hall of Famer

Over 29 years of fanhood

Posted
  • Author
Posted
On 9/2/2021 at 7:49 PM, frostbitmic said:

As a man, I don't feel I have a right to tell a woman what she can and can't do with her body other than to those angry, ugly azz Karen's who need to put their masks back on for society's benefit.

Are you ok telling men what to do with their bodies? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
SectionC3 Veteran

SectionC3

Posted
Posted (edited)
On 9/1/2021 at 11:33 PM, Over 29 years of fanhood said:

Please comment if something is missing.

 

it’s an aweful process, but it’s a complicated conversation 

You need to work on your spelling.  Especially if you want to be our resident grammarian.  
 

I don’t agree with the act, but we live in a secular society.  Safe, legal, and rare.  Roe stays.  

Edited by SectionC3
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Numark3 Veteran

Numark3

Posted
Posted

It’s two entirely different questions?

 

what are your personal thoughts on abortion?

 

what do you think the government’s role should be with abortions?

 

 

as someone who believes in small government and limited government interference, I can’t reconcile that with believe in the government should be meddling with abortions.  The hypocrisy is laughable.

 

I love living in Texas for a lot of reasons, and one is because the limited government.  The state’s abortion law is very un-texas

 

 

  • Agree 1
  • Thank you (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Over 29 years of fanhood Hall of Famer

Over 29 years of fanhood

Posted
  • Author
Posted
1 hour ago, SectionC3 said:

You need to work on your spelling.  Especially if you want to be our resident grammarian.  
 

I don’t agree with the act, but we live in a secular society.  Safe, legal, and rare.  Roe stays.  


goood- your the knew board spelling gramer guy. God spede . Enjoy

Spelling and grammar  is for school work and nerds. 

1 hour ago, Crayola64 said:

It’s two entirely different questions?

 

what are your personal thoughts on abortion?

 

what do you think the government’s role should be with abortions?

 

 

as someone who believes in small government and limited government interference, I can’t reconcile that with believe in the government should be meddling with abortions.  The hypocrisy is laughable.

 

I love living in Texas for a lot of reasons, and one is because the limited government.  The state’s abortion law is very un-texas

 

 


Love this point. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Over 29 years of fanhood Hall of Famer

Over 29 years of fanhood

Posted
  • Author
Posted
1 hour ago, SectionC3 said:

Looks like you've rejected your commission as chief of the local grammar police already.  Sad. 

Your starting to get it. 

Nerd

1 hour ago, frostbitmic said:

No... Other peoples bodies are none of my business unless they can have an effect on me.

So you would have been opposed to you being aborted. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Motorin' Veteran

Motorin'

Posted
Posted (edited)
On 9/5/2021 at 10:11 AM, B-Man said:

 

 

President Joe Biden made an irrational statement, could be the lead of every White House story these days.

 

 

 

 

 

A heartbeat does not make a developing set of cells a human being. 

 

At the minimum, until the developing cells in and of the woman's body reach a point of development in which it can breathe and live on its own, it is not a separate biological entity endowed with its own inalienable rights. 

 

Roe and the subsequent SC rulings that clarified a woman's right to choose, found that the right to decide for oneself when life begins rests "at the heart of liberty."

 

How a society determines its laws are always based on beliefs. Religious beliefs answer the question "when does life begin." And people who take those beliefs to guide their life are 100% within their rights to practice those beliefs. 

 

Science can not answer questions like, "when is a developing fetus a separate biological entity from the mother? Or, when is a developing fetus endowed with full rights and protection under the law as an individual human being?"

 

Those are ontological, ethical and legal questions. Ontology, ethics and legal theory ought to be informed by the most up to date scientific evidence. But science can not, not should not seek to answer philosophical and ethical questions. These are not the type of scientific questions that can be answered by the scientific method. 

 

At the same time, based on the US Constitution, religious beliefs that provide answers to these difficult questions can not provide the basis for US law...

 

So Texas is playing politics with a tenuous scientific assertion, that once a developing cells has been found to have a heart beat the state must protect the inalienable rights of the individual. 

 

Unfortunately that assertion fails to consider all of the scientific evidence. The developing cells at 10 weeks with a heart beat cannot breathe on its own. It cannot live on its own. Ontologically, it is not just dependent on the mother for life, it is not a separate human entity. Not until it has to capacity to live on its own. 

 

And the Supreme Court has been very clear that a woman has the right to choose what occurs in and to her body...

 

Texas is going to lose badly...

 

FYI there is no contradiction in holding religious beliefs as one's own while simultaneously holding the belief that the government can not use those religious beliefs as the basis for law. 

 

 

 

 

Edited by Motorin'
  • Like (+1) 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • 1 month later...
B-Man Hall of Famer

B-Man

Posted
Posted

 

 

The Obsolete Science Behind Roe v. Wade

 

My youngest patients are unborn babies, and today’s ultrasounds show they are fully alive and human.

 

https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-obsolete-science-behind-roe-v-wade-abortion-fetus-supreme-court-ultrasound-11635449644

 

https://hotair.com/headlines/2021/10/29/the-obsolete-science-behind-roe-v-wade-n425597

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Big Blitz Hall of Famer

Big Blitz

Posted
Posted

Demonstrating what a garbage human and fake Catholic Biden is, the man lies about what the POPE and him talked about:

 

 

 

 

Joe Biden said that Pope Francis told him during a meeting at the Vatican on Friday that he should keep receiving communion even as some church officials at home seek to punish him for his political beliefs.

 

“We just talked about the fact he was happy that I was a good Catholic and I should keep receiving communion,” Biden told reporters after the meeting, which he described as a private conversation. Biden, the second U.S. Catholic president, said that the issue of abortion didn’t come up during the meeting with Francis.

 

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-10-29/biden-says-pope-told-him-to-continue-receiving-communion

 

 

 

Private conversation stays private except for the fake narrative news he decides to lie about.   

 

 

Trump needs "evidence" for everything or proof.   You can't question the origins of Covid.  

 

But Biden tells a yarn about what the POPE allegedly tells him and it's reported without criticism like:

 

"Did he tell you to receive communion only if there are no mortal sins on your soul - which actively supporting abortion is - did he remind you of that and that it's a good idea as a 'good' Catholic you claim you are to be more outspoken against it?  Or is this the first pope to ever be good with these things?'   

  • Like (+1) 1
  • Thank you (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
LeviF Hall of Famer

LeviF

Posted
Posted
51 minutes ago, unbillievable said:

Development starts at conception and ends around 26years of age.

 

We can debate when it's okay to terminate the progression at anytime during that period.

 

 


There’d be a lot of people taking advantage of those safe, legal ~60th trimester abortions. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
JaCrispy All Pro

JaCrispy

Posted
Posted

I like the “Dave Chapelle rule” on abortion- It is only fair that women should have control over their own bodies, and the right to an abortion...but if they decide to have the child, it is only fair that a man should have the right to abandon him...”My money, my choice.” 🤣🤣🤣

Link to comment
Share on other sites
ALF All Pro

ALF

Posted
Posted

The Supreme Court made it legal in 1973 . They will soon rule on the Texas law to see how much leeway states have. Biden said he was against abortion, him being Catholic and he can't over rule the Supreme Court.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
LeviF Hall of Famer

LeviF

Posted
Posted
6 minutes ago, ALF said:

The Supreme Court made it legal in 1973 . They will soon rule on the Texas law to see how much leeway states have. Biden said he was against abortion, him being Catholic and he can't over rule the Supreme Court.


He’s the leader of a political party who has staked out unlimited access to abortion up through the third trimester  as their party line. Spare me the “catholic” *****. 
 

It’s high time the court did away with Roe and Griswold. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
ALF All Pro

ALF

Posted
Posted

I'm surprised pro life groups have not yet challenged in the SC late term abortions in some states. The 6-3 conservative division would be the time. Unless the court allows state rights or decides to set limits either way. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
 Share
Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...