Roe is dead

[WorsterMan]

If 1.4% are the ones that are for a good reason, yeah. Otherwise, I’d like some bumpers around the first trimester. Is that a suitable answer for you to respond like a Tom Herman disciple?

we aren’t getting that because everyone is back in their corner. Libs are at 22 weeks and you guys are at a twinkle in your daddy’s eye. There is a vast middle ground.

The Bible would be more than 22 weeks.

No, (stopped at calling you the name I wanted to express) at conception!

 

[ProdigalHorn]

Is the common perception in the pro-life community that a proportion higher than 1.4% are after the first term? I sure think so. I think if you polled every mental midget celebrating the ruling on their social media accounts they would put the % at 50% or higher.

I love how you act like you want to be conciliatory and reasonable but can't help but insult people who disagree with you. I assume that "Tom Herman disciple" is supposed to be a HornFans version of "mental midget?" Classy as always...

Since I know a bunch of those people, I can say that's not the case, but that's irrelevant. But let's look at the numbers: 7.2 percent of abortions occur from 14 weeks and later - only about 2.6 after 18 weeks. (Oooh, wait, that means that you got the number wrong by almost 50 percent. How tall are you on the mental midget scale?) In 2020, that translated to 70,692 and 24,184 abortions respectively.

If you extrapolate Florida's numbers out, rape, incest and life endangerment would have accounted for 3,349 (.01, .15 and .2 percent.) That's 3,349 out of 930,160. But yeah... this is all about making sure a woman who has been raped is being protected. How many "mental midgets" on the left do you think know THAT number? I'm betting a bunch of them know it, and they're lying when they start wailing about the unfairness to rape victims. This is about the 95 percent of cases that are elective in nature, and have no relation to the mother's life or mental health, not the .36 percent that come out of rape/incest/life endangerment.

So... in conclusion, assuming that all 3,349 of those abortions took place in that late window of outside 14 weeks, that leaves about 67,000 abortions in 2020 that were not connected with rape, incest, or the mother's life. We had 692 people killed in mass shootings, and the left is telling us that our kids are all taking their lives in their hands to go to school every day. So I feel like 67,000 isn't an insignificant number.

But the thing is, this isn't about the numbers. If it were, then you guys wouldn't be throwing fits about having to give up partial birth abortions and late-term abortions which you claim never really happen and are just made-up boogeymen to scare the moderates. Because most people get that you can't say "well they need to have a good reason after 18 weeks, but before 18 weeks they can do what they want." It's ridiculous and it's disingenuous because it makes it look as if you've taken some sort of principled stand when in fact all you did was draw an arbitrary line so you can mock the people who drew their lines in a different place.

 

[ProdigalHorn]

The Bible would be more than 22 weeks.

And I'm actually genuinely curious where you got this from.

 

[Mr. Deez]

In 2014 that number was estimated at 1.4%. So, that's pretty low

If it's really so low (which is doubtful), then why do you all crap your pants like someone is trying to repeal the 13th Amendment if restrictions in that range are suggested?

Is the common perception in the pro-life community that a proportion higher than 1.4% are after the first term? I sure think so. I think if you polled every mental midget celebrating the ruling on their social media accounts they would put the % at 50% or higher.

I'll bet pro-lifers are closer to the real number than Democratic voters are to the correct number of unarmed black men shot by the police each year.

The Bible would be more than 22 weeks.

Not sure where that's coming from, but my understanding is that we're not supposed to make laws based on religion. Personally, my religion has never had anything to do with my view on abortion. It has always been based on things like DNA, internal organ function, and fetal development. If I was an atheist, I'd view the issue the same way.

 

[theiioftx]

We are very close to agreeance. Much closer than you’d think.

There will be a juvenile raped in the future. She will try to abort her rapists baby. She will be charged for this “crime”. Hell, she might do more time than the rapist. That’s where we are headed.

First, take care of a rape victim. Initiate a rape test immediately. Provide medication to prevent pregnancy and provide mental health care as long as needed. Prosecute the rapist. If proven guilty, I’m fine with the death penalty. I’ve got no sympathy or patience for rapists.

 

[guy4321]

First, take care of a rape victim. Initiate a rape test immediately. Provide medication to prevent pregnancy and provide mental health care as long as needed. Prosecute the rapist. If proven guilty, I’m fine with the death penalty. I’ve got no sympathy or patience for rapists.

If not death, cut off the willy.

 

[guy4321]

Here's how the GOP could screw it up. They gain control of Congress after the midterm elections, so they're no longer on the outside. They get bold and push for a national ban on abortion (which is both fruitless and unconstitutional),

I don't think they'd push for national ban. I think they'd push for a stop after a certain point while allowing states to be more restrictive but not less. Now would it be 6 weeks, 15 weeks, or something else would be the debate.

Is this a pretty well known person ( unlike the Fuentes turdwaffle)

For example, it is harder to get an AR-15 than an abortion in CT considering AR-15 are illegal to purchase there. It's probably not the only one.

Gun laws in Connecticut: What to know about AR-15s, background checks and more following Texas school shooting

 

[Mr. Deez]

I don't think they'd push for national ban. I think they'd push for a stop after a certain point while allowing states to be more restrictive but not less. Now would it be 6 weeks, 15 weeks, or something else would be the debate.

They shouldn't try any sort of broad nationwide restriction. It's either a state issue or it's not.

 

[ProdigalHorn]

They shouldn't try any sort of broad nationwide restriction. It's either a state issue or it's not.

Particularly since we've had so many conservatives tweeting "This has now been sent back to the states where it belongs," and "no one has made abortion illegal - that's not what this ruling does so stop freaking out." Those comments would ring a little disingenuous if you then turned around and said "Let's pass a federal ban."

The federal ban is the Dems' tool - that's the natural answer to the argument that abortion is not a constitutional right. They have to amend the constitution to make it one. That's their one rational track. They will instead pick the crazy path and claim that the court is illegitimate and refuse to honor the law.

 

[guy4321]

Particularly since we've had so many conservatives tweeting "This has now been sent back to the states where it belongs," and "no one has made abortion illegal - that's not what this ruling does so stop freaking out." Those comments would ring a little disingenuous if you then turned around and said "Let's pass a federal ban."

The federal ban is the Dems' tool - that's the natural answer to the argument that abortion is not a constitutional right. They have to amend the constitution to make it one. That's their one rational track. They will instead pick the crazy path and claim that the court is illegitimate and refuse to honor the law.

I thought we were talking about what Republicans will do not what they should do. Also, it'll never make as an amendment so refusing to honor the law is what they have. Well, I think they'll push for federal funds to fly or drive women to places that do offer it also.

 

[OUBubba]

I love how you act like you want to be conciliatory and reasonable but can't help but insult people who disagree with you. I assume that "Tom Herman disciple" is supposed to be a HornFans version of "mental midget?" Classy as always...

Since I know a bunch of those people, I can say that's not the case, but that's irrelevant. But let's look at the numbers: 7.2 percent of abortions occur from 14 weeks and later - only about 2.6 after 18 weeks. (Oooh, wait, that means that you got the number wrong by almost 50 percent. How tall are you on the mental midget scale?) In 2020, that translated to 70,692 and 24,184 abortions respectively.

If you extrapolate Florida's numbers out, rape, incest and life endangerment would have accounted for 3,349 (.01, .15 and .2 percent.) That's 3,349 out of 930,160. But yeah... this is all about making sure a woman who has been raped is being protected. How many "mental midgets" on the left do you think know THAT number? I'm betting a bunch of them know it, and they're lying when they start wailing about the unfairness to rape victims. This is about the 95 percent of cases that are elective in nature, and have no relation to the mother's life or mental health, not the .36 percent that come out of rape/incest/life endangerment.

So... in conclusion, assuming that all 3,349 of those abortions took place in that late window of outside 14 weeks, that leaves about 67,000 abortions in 2020 that were not connected with rape, incest, or the mother's life. We had 692 people killed in mass shootings, and the left is telling us that our kids are all taking their lives in their hands to go to school every day. So I feel like 67,000 isn't an insignificant number.

But the thing is, this isn't about the numbers. If it were, then you guys wouldn't be throwing fits about having to give up partial birth abortions and late-term abortions which you claim never really happen and are just made-up boogeymen to scare the moderates. Because most people get that you can't say "well they need to have a good reason after 18 weeks, but before 18 weeks they can do what they want." It's ridiculous and it's disingenuous because it makes it look as if you've taken some sort of principled stand when in fact all you did was draw an arbitrary line so you can mock the people who drew their lines in a different place.

I quoted a CDC figure that was the first I found. I don't agree with 99.8% of the people here and they treat me like a drunk Sooner on Commerce Street and I'm the ******* for responding in kind, "as usual". So, dunk away.

I was not a fan of abortion as it was practiced in some places. I mean, we were more liberal than Europe in that regard. I am squarely in the middle. No reasonable person wants MORE abortions. I'd like to have less unplanned pregnancies. I'm happy with banning abortions after the first trimester with exceptions like rape, mom's health, etc. But hey, dance away.

 

[guy4321]

I was not a fan of abortion as it was practiced in some places. I mean, we were more liberal than Europe in that regard. I am squarely in the middle. No reasonable person wants MORE abortions. I'd like to have less unplanned pregnancies. I'm happy with banning abortions after the first trimester with exceptions like rape, mom's health, etc. But hey, dance away.

Rape ought to be handleable in the first trimester, no?

 

[OUBubba]

And I'm actually genuinely curious where you got this from.

Per Genesis (and a few other places) life begins at the first breath. I would infer that to mean that life would begin at the stage of a pregnancy where a baby could survive a first breath. I've had a 29 week premie and a 27 week premie. The 29 weeker wouldn't have survived without modern medicine. Maybe horn6 can question my truthfulness here as well.

 

[OUBubba]

Rape ought to be handleable in the first trimester, no?

You'd think. However, there are some minors who are raped who don't report it and it only becomes evident after they start showing. There are men in prison for rape due to the DNA tests.

 

[OUBubba]

I thought we were talking about what Republicans will do not what they should do. Also, it'll never make as an amendment so refusing to honor the law is what they have. Well, I think they'll push for federal funds to fly or drive women to places that do offer it also.

Yes, but even googling it or giving someone gas money to travel to receive an abortion in some states will end up with prosecution.

 

[Chop]

Now here's an effort to thwart the law (or a mere symbolic gesture), from that hotbed of radicalism: Denton County, Texas.

Denton City Council votes to approve resolution protecting women’s reproductive rights

"The Denton City Council voted 4-3 to pass Texas’ first reproductive rights resolution to make investigating abortion a low priority for Denton police..."

 

[mb227]

Per Genesis (and a few other places) life begins at the first breath. I would infer that to mean that life would begin at the stage of a pregnancy where a baby could survive a first breath. I've had a 29 week premie and a 27 week premie. The 29 weeker wouldn't have survived without modern medicine. Maybe horn6 can question my truthfulness here as well.

Setting aside that, as I recall, Genesis is Old Testament, ANY direct application of an apparent cite from the Bible would be a government intrusion into the separations of church and State by effectively codifying one religion at the expense of all others.

Even YOU should see why that is a problem.

 

[OUBubba]

Setting aside that, as I recall, Genesis is Old Testament, ANY direct application of an apparent cite from the Bible would be a government intrusion into the separations of church and State by effectively codifying one religion at the expense of all others.

Even YOU should see why that is a problem.

I only point it out to highlight that I have a lower bar than Genesis in my definitions. I typically respond with "well, I'm not Jewish" when someone responds with OT from the Torah. So, your point is well received.

 

[ProdigalHorn]

Per Genesis (and a few other places) life begins at the first breath. I would infer that to mean that life would begin at the stage of a pregnancy where a baby could survive a first breath. I've had a 29 week premie and a 27 week premie. The 29 weeker wouldn't have survived without modern medicine. Maybe horn6 can question my truthfulness here as well.

I'm not asking for a talking point. I'm asking for the rationale that says "I look at this passage here, I studied it IN CONTEXT, and it teaches me or implies to me that a fetus is not alive." A vague reference to an entire book and "a couple of other verses" sounds like someone who took their talking points from a progressive Christian blog a while back and never actually studied.

You're the one who introduced a Biblical definition, and now I'm calling you on it. If you're going to claim that you have scripture on your side, you need to at least have a scripture-based argument.

 

[Mr. Deez]

And again, I thought it was bad to base your laws on the Bible.

 

[horninchicago]

Christian religions all follow the bible, but they all are against abortion. Yet, now we are being told they are all wrong because they have ignored what the HF religious scholar unearthed, that life begins at first breath.

 

[OUBubba]

I'm not asking for a talking point. I'm asking for the rationale that says "I look at this passage here, I studied it IN CONTEXT, and it teaches me or implies to me that a fetus is not alive." A vague reference to an entire book and "a couple of other verses" sounds like someone who took their talking points from a progressive Christian blog a while back and never actually studied.

You're the one who introduced a Biblical definition, and now I'm calling you on it. If you're going to claim that you have scripture on your side, you need to at least have a scripture-based argument.

Whatever, it probably talks more about when life begins than it does "laying with another man" yet you want texture and context on one of them. Are you on the short list for SCOTUS?

 

[Mr. Deez]

Christian religions all follow the bible, but they all are against abortion. Yet, now we are being told they are all wrong because they have ignored what the HF religious scholar unearthed, that life begins at first breath.

A religious scholar from Oklahoma, no less.

 

[Monahorns]

If we can't base our laws on the Bible we should probably abolish laws regarding murder, theft, drug use, public intoxication, divorce, etc.

 

[Mr. Deez]

Whatever, it probably talks more about when life begins than it does "laying with another man"

 

[nashhorn]

Uhhh, I think “laying with another man” is pretty specific but not going any further on the ‘thin’ ice comment.

 

[horninchicago]

A religious scholar from Oklahoma, no less.

Stealing land and twisting it to a positive celebrating the forward thinking, go-getter criminals is a religion in Oklahoma, too.

 

[ProdigalHorn]

Whatever, it probably talks more about when life begins than it does "laying with another man" yet you want texture and context on one of them. Are you on the short list for SCOTUS?

Wow... every time I think to myself, "maybe I misjudged this guy. Maybe he'll surprise you with a thoughtful response that tells you he's really speaking from conscience here and not just spouting stuff because he likes to stir things up," you say something like this that shows everyone on this board EXACTLY who you are and what you know about things you claim to understand.

I'll take every bit the same amount of context in each example, thank you. And so will you, which is none. You don't care what the Bible says about anything - you just want to find a talking point that you can throw out to the rubes who don't know any better so that it sounds like you're speaking from some sort of understanding, and so that you can justify yourself because "Hey, someone else has as limited an understanding of the Bible as I do, and people in the media listen to HIM - so this MUST be a good argument even if I don't actually understand it myself."

The ironic thing here is that you tried to act like you know something about what the Bible says about abortion, and when called on it, you switch to ANOTHER topic where you ALSO clearly don't know what the Bible teaches, and you somehow think that's a winning argument, and that it made you sound like you just channeled Aristotle. (I'm sorry, I forgot... that's like Will Rogers but less funny and more words.)

It would be much more honest if you would just say "I don't care what the Bible says, I think abortion should be legal." I at least could respect that position, even though I find it heartbreaking.

 

[mchammer]

If it's really so low (which is doubtful), then why do you all crap your pants like someone is trying to repeal the 13th Amendment if restrictions in that range are suggested?



I'll bet pro-lifers are closer to the real number than Democratic voters are to the correct number of unarmed black men shot by the police each year.



Not sure where that's coming from, but my understanding is that we're not supposed to make laws based on religion. Personally, my religion has never had anything to do with my view on abortion. It has always been based on things like DNA, internal organ function, and fetal development. If I was an atheist, I'd view the issue the same way.

I was surprised to learn on Twitter that many atheists support abortion bans.

 

[mchammer]