All_Pro_Bills Posted March 14 Share Posted March 14 21 hours ago, BillStime said: The reason Democrats focus on reproductive issues is they love screwing Americans. 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillStime Posted March 14 Author Share Posted March 14 2 hours ago, Tommy Callahan said: Changing the name cause this wedge topic isn't working. Oh, it's working because you noticed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillStime Posted March 15 Author Share Posted March 15 This is happening in the United States of America - jfc Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillStime Posted March 20 Author Share Posted March 20 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doc Posted March 20 Share Posted March 20 This thread title is a lie. 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillStime Posted March 23 Author Share Posted March 23 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillStime Posted March 27 Author Share Posted March 27 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Frankish Reich Posted March 27 Share Posted March 27 Huntsville, so really the only non-university town in Alabama with a decent percentage of college grads. Still - this is a very good sign for Democrats. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillStime Posted March 27 Author Share Posted March 27 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChiGoose Posted March 27 Share Posted March 27 11 hours ago, The Frankish Reich said: Huntsville, so really the only non-university town in Alabama with a decent percentage of college grads. Still - this is a very good sign for Democrats. The district lines changed a bit in 2022, but for context here are the most recent elections: 2024: D+25 2022: R+7 2018: R+13 2014: R won uncontested 2010: R won uncontested I don't know enough about Alabama to know how much of the (seemingly minor) district change would impact the demographics but it still seems like a huge swing to the Dems. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Frankish Reich Posted March 27 Share Posted March 27 Just now, ChiGoose said: The district lines changed a bit in 2022, but for context here are the most recent elections: 2024: D+25 2022: R+7 2018: R+13 2014: R won uncontested 2010: R won uncontested I don't know enough about Alabama to know how much of the (seemingly minor) district change would impact the demographics but it still seems like a huge swing to the Dems. Thanks. That is impressive. I imagine the Alabama reproductive rights/IVF thing really juiced DEM turnout, so there is that anomaly. But from the other side: it's not like that issue is magically going away by November ... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChiGoose Posted March 27 Share Posted March 27 4 minutes ago, The Frankish Reich said: Thanks. That is impressive. I imagine the Alabama reproductive rights/IVF thing really juiced DEM turnout, so there is that anomaly. But from the other side: it's not like that issue is magically going away by November ... My takeaway is that the IVF/abortion issue is a very good issue for the Dems and it is likely to still be a very live issue in November, but they cannot just rely on that winning it for them. They still need to do the work. There were only 5,951 votes in this election compared to 14,696 in 2022 and 20,948 in 2018. I don't think it's wise to extrapolate *too* much from such an unusually low turnout election. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillStime Posted March 27 Author Share Posted March 27 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillStime Posted March 29 Author Share Posted March 29 Look out Trumpies Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillStime Posted March 29 Author Share Posted March 29 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChiGoose Posted March 29 Share Posted March 29 ‘Morally dubious’: 4 House Republicans protest Biden's IVF expansion for veterans "WASHINGTON — A group of four House Republicans sent a letter to the Biden administration Wednesday protesting a policy to expand access to in vitro fertilization, or IVF, for veterans. The letter, addressed to Denis McDonough, the secretary of veterans affairs, was signed by Reps. Matt Rosendale of Montana, Mary Miller of Illinois, Josh Brecheen of Oklahoma and Bob Good of Virginia, who said they had "a plethora of ethical concerns and questions" about the policy. "IVF is morally dubious and should not be subsidized by the American taxpayer. It is well known that IVF treatments result in a surplus of embryos after the best ones are tested and selected. These embryos are then frozen — at significant cost to the parents — abandoned, or cruelly discarded," the lawmakers wrote." Fun facts about Illinois' own Mary Miller: She employed someone who had previously been convicted of attempting to solicit sex from a minor She quoted Hitler positively in a speech two days into her first term She voted against giving medals to the police officers who defended the Capitol on Jan 6 Her husband is an Illinois state rep who was at January 6th and has a 3%er decal on his car. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillStime Posted March 30 Author Share Posted March 30 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Frankish Reich Posted March 30 Share Posted March 30 On 3/28/2024 at 6:15 PM, BillStime said: Look out Trumpies To her credit: She worked like hell to get pregnant with Sergey Brin's child, ensuring her financial security forevermore. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SCBills Posted March 30 Share Posted March 30 (edited) Republicans need to chill tf out and compromise on a 15 week abortion ban with rational exceptions after that time period. Most women support a timeframe around that area and it’s what is typically the law in most of Europe. Abortion and J6 is really all it seems like Dems are currently running on. At the Presidential level, Trump coming out at 15 weeks .. especially if he has someone like Tulsi Gabbard as VP .. takes that issue off the table in a lot of areas. That doesn’t mean pro-lifers stop trying to win the battle on the merits .. but legality based off when a baby feels pain is something most of us should be able to agree on. Edited March 30 by SCBills Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillStime Posted April 1 Author Share Posted April 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tommy Callahan Posted April 2 Share Posted April 2 Let's just put them in the mail and send them to every household. They don't have any side affects. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChiGoose Posted April 2 Share Posted April 2 Good to see! Nevada abortion rights amendment surpasses signature threshold for ballot "The organization behind a proposed effort to enshrine abortion rights in Nevada's constitution says they've garnered enough signatures to qualify for the November ballot. Nevadans for Reproductive Freedom is pushing to change the state constitution to include the right to an abortion until fetal viability. In a release sent Tuesday, the campaign said they've gathered 110,000 signatures, which surpasses the 102,362 threshold to qualify for the ballot. Of those, 25,591 signatures need to be from each of the state's four congressional districts. The organization said they're actively collecting signatures from all congressional districts. Political groups often try to gather well over the minimum requirement of signatures because many signatures are invalid for various reasons. Nevadans for Reproductive Freedom says that the 110,000 signatures is 50% of their goal for this measure. “We are overwhelmed by Nevadans’ enthusiasm for protecting our reproductive rights and by the eagerness that voters across the political spectrum have shown for our petition. With more than 110,000 signatures gathered in less than six weeks, it’s a true testament to the fact that Nevadans recognize the importance in codifying reproductive freedom into our state constitution. As we continue to see new attacks on abortion access around the country, Nevadans recognize that there is real urgency to get this measure on the ballot and passed,” said president Lindsey Harmon. Abortion rights up to 24 weeks are already codified into Nevada law through a 1990 referendum vote, where two-thirds of voters were in favor. That can be changed with another referendum vote. Abortion rights have become a mobilizing issue for Democrats since the U.S. Supreme Court in 2022 overturned Roe v. Wade, the landmark 1973 court decision establishing a nationwide right to abortion. Public polling shows about two-thirds of Americans say abortion should generally be legal in the earliest stages of pregnancy. Since the overturning of Roe v. Wade in June 2022, that sentiment has been underscored in elections both in Democratic and deeply Republican states. The standards are higher for amending the constitution, which requires either approval from two legislative sessions and an election, or two consecutive elections with a simple majority of votes. In Nevada, reproductive rights were central to Democratic campaigns in the 2022 midterms. It is set to be a central issue for Democratic U.S. Sen. Jacky Rosen as she looks to defend her seat in 2024. Another broader proposed ballot question seeking to enshrine various reproductive freedoms in Nevada's constitution is awaiting a decision from the state supreme court. The deadline to collect signatures is June 26 and then it will head to the Secretary of State's office for verification." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiberius Posted April 3 Share Posted April 3 https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2024/04/02/republican-abortion-election-challenge/ Conservative groups like the Heritage Foundation are already urging Trump to issue an executive order on Day 1 banning medication abortion,” Slate’s Dahlia Lithwick and Mark Joseph Stern wrote last week. “Republican lawyers are preparing to use the Comstock Act to prohibit all abortions, not just pills.” In short, MAGA Republicans might try to apply this “zombie relic” law so widely that a Trump Justice Department could push to “make all abortion care a felony.” Democrats are bound to highlight that shocking prospect ahead of the November elections. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillStime Posted April 3 Author Share Posted April 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KDIGGZ Posted April 3 Share Posted April 3 (edited) My rule would be if you want to have an abortion then they get to sterilize you as you have clearly shown you can't be trusted with such rights. You can then apply in the future for a reversal once you are married and have a steady income and can show that you can support a family. Fair compromise? Edited April 3 by KDIGGZ 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChiGoose Posted April 3 Share Posted April 3 4 minutes ago, KDIGGZ said: My rule would be if you want to have an abortion then they get to sterilize you as you have clearly shown you can't be trusted with such rights. You can then apply in the future for a reversal once you are married and have a steady income and can show that you can support a family. Fair compromise? Apparently, abortion opponents will propose absolutely anything unless it addresses the root cause of the issue. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillStime Posted April 3 Author Share Posted April 3 12 minutes ago, KDIGGZ said: My rule would be if you want to have an abortion then they get to sterilize you as you have clearly shown you can't be trusted with such rights. You can then apply in the future for a reversal once you are married and have a steady income and can show that you can support a family. Fair compromise? Or all males post puberty can get a vasectomy and then get it undone when they are mature enough to be a father. It takes two, right? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KDIGGZ Posted April 3 Share Posted April 3 34 minutes ago, B-Man said: I've seen that movie. She will need an abortion after the outlaws in the homemade mad max pursuit vehicles come through town and have their way with the women 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillStime Posted April 8 Author Share Posted April 8 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillStime Posted April 8 Author Share Posted April 8 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillsFanNC Posted April 8 Share Posted April 8 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillStime Posted April 8 Author Share Posted April 8 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillStime Posted April 8 Author Share Posted April 8 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillStime Posted April 9 Author Share Posted April 9 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doc Posted April 9 Share Posted April 9 10 hours ago, BillStime said: Total lie. A miscarriage is an aborted fetus. They could absolutely have treated her. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillStime Posted April 9 Author Share Posted April 9 21 minutes ago, Doc said: Total lie. A miscarriage is an aborted fetus. They could absolutely have treated her. But they didn’t treat her because of the law - own it “Doc” 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doc Posted April 9 Share Posted April 9 8 hours ago, BillStime said: But they didn’t treat her because of the law - own it “Doc” They they were idiots. This is as disingenuous as the "they won't treat women with ectopic pregnancies." 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChiGoose Posted April 9 Share Posted April 9 8 hours ago, BillStime said: But they didn’t treat her because of the law - own it “Doc” Discharge paperwork when my wife had to be treated for miscarriages: “Spontaneous Abortion” Discharge paperwork when my wife thought she was having a miscarriage (but thankfully wasn’t): “Threatened Abortion” Basically every hospital looking at these laws: “life of the mother” means we are potentially liable if we terminate a pregnancy with a “heartbeat” (even if it’s nonviable) when the mother’s life is not at risk. Basically every lawyer looking at these laws: “life of the mother” means you are potentially liable if you terminate a pregnancy with a “heartbeat” (even if it’s nonviable) when the mother’s life is not at risk. MAGA: “nuh uh. Everyone is wrong except me, facts and logic be damned.” 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tommy Callahan Posted April 9 Share Posted April 9 (edited) The FARM has its talking points to run with. That medication should not be mail order., as it has bad side effects if used after certain dates. The courts ruled it's a state issue. Every voter has stronger representation at the local, state level than federal. Edited April 9 by Tommy Callahan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChiGoose Posted April 9 Share Posted April 9 I see Tommy Eyerolls has gotten his marching orders. 2 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts