Trump 2024

[Steam Flyer]

You may be confusing me for a RWNJ, proffering a strawman, or just being pissy, but you'll have to clarify for me if you want me to respond with substance.

Sorry, Just trying to clarify.

You think that the gov't has a place in deciding what a woman tells her doctor, and what procedures the doctor can carry out.

Can you tell the difference between a DNC for fibroids or an abortion? At what point should a woman having a miscarriage be prosecuted for seeking medical aid?

 

[Pertinacious Tom]

I don't see a government interest here.

It's the regulation of interstate commerce, according to the federal partial birth abortion ban.

Ron Paul voted for it. He wrote an article saying it was soooo important that abusing the commerce power that way was justified. The same can be said about any issue that seems soooo important to a politician, which is why he was wrong to vote for it.

Daniel Patrick Moynihan also voted for it, saying it was "too close to infanticide" or something like that. I guess you think the government interest starts after birth but he thought it starts a bit before. He wouldn't have Ron Paul's objection to calling anything and everything "interstate commerce" so he supported the ban.

 

[Marty Gingras]

Sorry, Just trying to clarify.

Much appreciated.

You think that the gov't has a place in decided what a woman tells her doctor, and what procedures the doctor can carry out.

I do indeed. The devil is in the details. How late in the development of a healthy fetus in a healthy mother conceived in a loving fashion (not incest, rape, or anything horrible like that) do you think an elective abortion should be allowed?

Can you tell the difference between a DNC for fibroids or an abortion?

I can.

At what point should a woman having a miscarriage be prosecuted for seeking medical aid?

Never.

 

[hasher]

It's the regulation of interstate commerce, according to the federal partial birth abortion ban.

Ron Paul voted for it. He wrote an article saying it was soooo important that abusing the commerce power that way was justified. The same can be said about any issue that seems soooo important to a politician, which is why he was wrong to vote for it.

Daniel Patrick Moynihan also voted for it, saying it was "too close to infanticide" or something like that. I guess you think the government interest starts after birth but he thought it starts a bit before. He wouldn't have Ron Paul's objection to calling anything and everything "interstate commerce" so he supported the ban.

I thought the war of Yankee aggression answered the question.

Personally I believe we'd be better off sending our southern cousins to Mexico. But the enemy you know is better than...

 

[Steam Flyer]

You think that the gov't has a place in decided what a woman tells her doctor, and what procedures the doctor can carry out.

I do indeed. The devil is in the details. How late in the development of a healthy fetus in a healthy mother conceived in a loving fashion (not incest, rape, or anything horrible like that) do you think an elective abortion should be allowed?

Can you tell the difference between a DNC for fibroids or an abortion?

I can.

At what point should a woman having a miscarriage be prosecuted for seeking medical aid?

Never.

How are you going to draw the line between miscarriage and abortion?

Women with fibroids often have irregular periods, how can you be 100% sure she's not pregnant?

Basically, you trust women with their own bodies, and doctors to give appropriate care, or you don't. By trying to insert law into GYN care, you're saying that you don't.

 

[Marty Gingras]

How are you going to draw the line between miscarriage and abortion?

Women with fibroids often have irregular periods, how can you be 100% sure she's not pregnant?

Basically, you trust women with their own bodies, and doctors to give appropriate care, or you don't. By trying to insert law into GYN care, you're saying that you don't.

I answered your first three questions and will answer the latest two after you answer the one I posed to you.

How late in the development of a healthy fetus in a healthy mother conceived in a loving fashion (not incest, rape, or anything horrible like that) do you think an elective abortion should be allowed?

 

[hasher]

I answered your first three questions and will answer the latest two after you answer the one I posed to you.

How late in the development of a healthy fetus in a healthy mother conceived in a loving fashion (not incest, rape, or anything horrible like that) do you think an elective abortion should be allowed?

Let's cut the baby in half ala Solomon.

 

[Steam Flyer]

I answered your first three questions and will answer the latest two after you answer the one I posed to you.

How late in the development of a healthy fetus in a healthy mother conceived in a loving fashion (not incest, rape, or anything horrible like that) do you think an elective abortion should be allowed?

I don't think it's my business to impose any kind of law on pregnant females, specifically regarding what they have to do or not do with their state of pregnancy.

In other words: safe, legal, rare.

How many pages are you going to devote, in your law, to "healthy mother" and "conceived in a loving fashion" and "elective abortion"?

At some point, your law will put pregnant women at risk and put policement in doctors' offices.

 

[Marty Gingras]

I don't think it's my business to impose any kind of law on pregnant females, specifically regarding what they have to do or not do with their state of pregnancy.

OK. To be very clear then, are you an 'abortion absolutist' who'd be OK (though maybe sad or shocked) if a money-grubbing Physician (you know the type) aborted a healthy 8.95 month-old fetus conceived in a loving fashion to a physically healthy but recently-delusional mother who suddently says she doesn't want to give birth? I know it's nanny-state territory, like helmet requirements, seatbelt laws, and mandatory K-12 education.

In other words: safe, legal, rare.

It's the 'rare' part where you and I may be at odds. Not sure yet, because we are still working to understand each other.

How many pages are you going to devote, in your law, to "healthy mother" and "conceived in a loving fashion" and "elective abortion"?

Should take about 27.33 pages. Making laws like that clear is very important.

At some point, your law will put pregnant women at risk and put policement in doctors' offices.

Pretty sure it's been that way for on the order of 5 decades and --- until this year in RWNJ states, because of an unscrupulous SCOTUS majority --- had been working OK.

 

[Marty Gingras]

How are you going to draw the line between miscarriage and abortion?

Much (probably most) of it would be easy to stipulate. Leave the rest fuzzy.

Women with fibroids often have irregular periods, how can you be 100% sure she's not pregnant?

Blood test is pretty reliable.

 

[tybee]

I can.

assumes facts not in evidence

 

[Steam Flyer]

OK. To be very clear then, are you an 'abortion absolutist'

Really? You need to impose a label on people when you fail to impose your morality on them?

I'm not an "abortion" anything. My belief is that medical care of pregnant women should be decided upon by those women, and their doctors. If you're a GYN doctor, then you can give advice on the topic.

"Abortion" is an insult-word hurled at the presumed guilty. It really should not even be used in this debate.

Women with fibroids often have irregular periods, how can you be 100% sure she's not pregnant?

Blood test is pretty reliable.

So, women must take mandatory pregnancy tests and turn the results over to the gov't? And in the rare case of a testing error, you prosecute?

I suspect that you would really not like the results of the laws you propose to impose, all because the word "ABORTION!" is so fraught.

 

[Ishmael]

In the meantime...

 

[Marty Gingras]

Really? You need to impose a label on people when you fail to impose your morality on them? I'm not an "abortion" anything. My belief is that medical care of pregnant women should be decided upon by those women, and their doctors.

'Abortion absolutist' is term used by a respectable leftie here. I've adopted it because it makes things pretty damn clear and that's a good thing. You go to extremely long lengths not to answer questions posed. It's so severe that it looks like posturing and hurts understanding. Why do you do that?

So, women must take mandatory pregnancy tests and turn the results over to the gov't? And in the rare case of a testing error, you prosecute?

Were I writing laws, pregnancy tests wouldn't be mandatory, there'd be no requirement to turn a pregnancy test over to the government, and testing error would be irrelevant.

I suspect that you would really not like the results of the laws you propose to impose, all because the word "ABORTION!" is so fraught.

I suspect you are mistaken. Shall we take a look at California's laws on-topic and see if they help move the discussion in a useful manner?

 

[Ishmael]

Take it to Abortion Anarchy. Please.

 

[Marty Gingras]

Take it to Abortion Anarchy. Please.

Something something a dog and his bone.

 

[Keith]

 

[βhyde]

I call BS. TFG would never loan money to anyone.

 

[Marty Gingras]

Trump Owed Hidden Debt While In Office

Donald Trump’s business attracted so much scrutiny during his time in office that it would be easy to conclude that all information about its foreign entanglements must be out by now. It is not.

www.forbes.com

 

[Navig8tor]

Beginning to understand the love letters now.