Texas Abortion Law

Choosing an abortion is taking responsibility for ones actions. Throwing on "parental" demonstrates just how far the sides are from rational conversations.
Parental responsibility would be telling the little darlings what happens when they hop into the sack. Parental responsibility would be telling the little darlings that abortion is NOT birth control.

It would help if the government didn't decide to incentivize people popping out the rug rats...I expect a baby boom in the inner city in the coming months with the monthly check for ikids Biden insisted upon.

It would ALSO help if we didn't have television networks glorifying teen pregnancies.
 
He's obviously referring to fetal viability, not how well anyone can function on his/her own outside the womb.

That's how he define viability as the ability to breathe out of the womb. How do you define it?

But to draw a pattern from n64's post, why is the heartbeat rational and not arbitrary? Why not go all the way to the 1-2 days after conception, when a positive pregnancy test wouldn't even register yet? It's because pro-lifers want that "evidence" of innocence to attach to calling it a summary execution; it makes preserving the womb as a vessel that much more important.

Swing and a miss on understanding what rational vs arbitrary is. You unwittingly give a rational distinction. If we can not verify pregnancy at 1-2 days then that can be considered from a human perspective a lack of a pregnancy, right? Now we know theoretically conception is the start of human life but if we can't identify the existence of conception then we can't legislate action against the conceived person.

However, if a human can identify human life in the womb via a discernible heart beat, that is the very definition of a scientific, observable identification of life. That's very rational. Using a word, "viable", to distinguish between life and nonlife is irrational and arbitrary because the definition can be changed to mean whatever a person wants it to mean. Plus, the very fact that "viable" doesn't equate to human life or baby, etc. It is a qualitative description of a human life not a definition of when life begins.

Deez has obviously laid out the moral framework for why we operate this way, and that's perfectly valid. But I'm struggling to find similar situations in a legal sense where it's defensible to force an extrajudicial sentence upon a person because of a personal choice (which... let's be honest... is also not typically because women demand that men ejaculate inside of them). We can shame all we want, but legislating it this way is an overreach.

What Deez showed is that the law is flawed. It allows for actions that can reasonably be considered unjust in relation people bringing and being liable to lawsuits. Those parts should be modified or eliminated for the reasons Deez mentions.
 
The tax write off is well defined at point of birth not point of becoming a person, which is to say it has nothing to do with my comment.
I wasn't disagreeing with you per se. Just pointing out an inconsistency in our current societal definitions.
 
Parental responsibility would be telling the little darlings what happens when they hop into the sack. Parental responsibility would be telling the little darlings that abortion is NOT birth control.

It would help if the government didn't decide to incentivize people popping out the rug rats...I expect a baby boom in the inner city in the coming months with the monthly check for ikids Biden insisted upon.

It would ALSO help if we didn't have television networks glorifying teen pregnancies.
****. I agree with you a little. I need to log off and go talk to someone.

That said, first paragraph....people under the age of 25 often make REAL stupid decisions "in the heat of the moment".
 
These mandatory vaccines got me a thinking....One way to avoid a lot of abortions is to have a mandatory IQ test. If you fail it then you get sterilized. Harsh but effective. But isn't killing the living unborn worse. Using abortions as birth control is moronic.
 
These mandatory vaccines got me a thinking....One way to avoid a lot of abortions is to have a mandatory IQ test. If you fail it then you get sterilized. Harsh but effective. But isn't killing the living unborn worse. Using abortions as birth control is moronic.
If the only options were those two, then yes forced sterilization is better. I would amend your proposal. If you can’t take care of your child, it goes to adoption and you are sterilized.
 
I developed a super hero a few years ago when my 18 year old was about 8 going to a rural elementary school outside of Tahlequah. I saw a pregnant mom pushing a double stroller with a kid or two following. Heroes was or had been a show that was on at the time. I wanted to get trained to put in the little birth control things under women's arms. Then, I was going to need to learn how to stop time like Hiro did on that show. I might have been dreaming. Too bad there's not a pill we could give to males.
 
I developed a super hero a few years ago when my 18 year old was about 8 going to a rural elementary school outside of Tahlequah. I saw a pregnant mom pushing a double stroller with a kid or two following. Heroes was or had been a show that was on at the time. I wanted to get trained to put in the little birth control things under women's arms. Then, I was going to need to learn how to stop time like Hiro did on that show. I might have been dreaming. Too bad there's not a pill we could give to males.
How do you know those babies were unplanned?
 
An unwanted child should not be the punishment for a night of following biological urges or even worse someone else's inability to fcontrol their urges. That's no benefit to the parent or the child if the unwilling parent is forced to carry them to term.
The liberal way, define irresponsibility as "inability to control urges" and that's a good excuse for murder. Excuses, blame anyone but yourself, no accountability and irresponsibility, definitely the liberal way. After all, you have to have reasons for your selfish behavior so why not redefine anything you don't like?

It's interesting, in the business world, the people most likely to violate company safety or quality policy and cause a major industrial situation, and also blame anyone, everyone but themselves are most likely to be? You guessed it.
 
It's interesting, in the business world, the people most likely to violate company safety or quality policy and cause a major industrial situation, and also blame anyone, everyone but themselves are most likely to be? You guessed it.
In Oklahoma we call them Trump voters.
 
This thread is demonstrative of the absolute worst of West Mall. Throwing epithets like "killer", "murderer" for having a different perspective, one that is very commonly shared by >50% of the country is a bit much. Yes, I'm pointing the finger at you @Monahorns.

Some of y'all need to take a step back and learn how to have a respectful conversation with those you disagree. Yes, I'm guilty of throwing back **** when I receive it but the recent rancor seems to be hitting a fever pitch. A reader can FEEL the hate coming through in your posts.
 
Meaning, if you get pregnant right after your last period then six weeks is two weeks after your next period assuming it's right on time. If not on time, then you have to scramble to get tested and get that abortion.
How many women become fertile immediately after menstruation? NONE.
 
How many women become fertile immediately after menstruation? NONE.

Semantics.

If a woman is tracking her cycle, and it's supposed to be every four weeks, then six weeks is two weeks after she should have menstruated. To say "right after" meant as soon as it could happen. But the count between periods starts regardless.
 
Semantics.

If a woman is tracking her cycle, and it's supposed to be every four weeks, then six weeks is two weeks after she should have menstruated. To say "right after" meant as soon as it could happen. But the count between periods starts regardless.
They count day 1 of pregnancy on day 14 after the last period.
 
Semantics.

If a woman is tracking her cycle, and it's supposed to be every four weeks, then six weeks is two weeks after she should have menstruated. To say "right after" meant as soon as it could happen. But the count between periods starts regardless.
Fair enough. I don't know if AOC was making that point or not. I doubt she was.
 
The liberal way, define irresponsibility as "inability to control urges" and that's a good excuse for murder. Excuses, blame anyone but yourself, no accountability and irresponsibility, definitely the liberal way. After all, you have to have reasons for your selfish behavior so why not redefine anything you don't like?

It's interesting, in the business world, the people most likely to violate company safety or quality policy and cause a major industrial situation, and also blame anyone, everyone but themselves are most likely to be? You guessed it.
There is a post-conviction proceeding related to civil commitment of sexual predators. One of the primary questions posed to the jury is whether the individual is a threat to the community by virtue of the inability to control sexual urges.

Seems to me that some of the libtiles support sexually predatory behaviors. Humans are SUPPOSED to have an ability to curb the urge and not act upon it...
 
There is a post-conviction proceeding related to civil commitment of sexual predators. One of the primary questions posed to the jury is whether the individual is a threat to the community by virtue of the inability to control sexual urges.

Seems to me that some of the libtiles support sexually predatory behaviors. Humans are SUPPOSED to have an ability to curb the urge and not act upon it...

I guess it's nice to see that you define "ejaculating inside of a woman" as predatory. I think a lot of women agree.
 
I'm not sure where they were intended to be inserted...or at least not for the purpose of preventing pregnancy.

I friggin hate them. And they're a mood killer. "Hey Baby, give me a minute while I roll this slimy, nasty-*** balloon thing on my junk." Yeah, that's a big turn-on for the ladies.

It's just another big advantage you lesbians have over us. You don't have to mess with that crap.
 
I guess it's nice to see that you define "ejaculating inside of a woman" as predatory. I think a lot of women agree.
When people trot out the 'heat of the moment' crap, it moves into the 'inability to control sexual urges' category.
 
When people trot out the 'heat of the moment' crap, it moves into the 'inability to control sexual urges' category.
Guilty. I have an 18 year old that I take the blame for the procrastination of scheduling said procedure. She gets the blame for the heat of the moment. I called it in the heat of the moment. So yeah, we’re human.
 
But I do see some significant problems with the law that give me pause. First, the right to bring the civil action is almost completely unlimited. Only public officials and employees are excluded. Anybody else can bring suit - even if from out of state and even if thatperson has no interest in the abortion at all. Asstraight-up busybody can sue. Second, the classofpotential defendants is very large, though itinterestingly excludes the woman getting the abortion.It's not just the doctor. It's anyone who assists in theprocess - someone who gives a ride, reimburses cost

I agree with Deez. This is problematic, in that as stated, the busybody appears allowed to bring a case in which they not only have no standing, but also no liability if they lose.
 
You make part of my point for me here. While i agree that the GOP has given too little consideration of the 10% that are possibly "good reasons" to allow abortion, the left gives way to little consideration of the other 85-90% that could have and should have known and done better. the majority of unplanned pregnancies aren't 15-17 yr old girls, they are 18-25 year old Women. For most, this wasn't a failed contraceptive attempt, it was simply bad judgement and rolling the dice. One must end a life to have an abortion, to "roll the dice" on such a huge moral outcome is incredibly selfish. And to simply shrug this off as "my body, my choice" is immoral. And the tired "men don't have a right to weigh in because we don't have vaginas" is really B.S. While the scales certainly lean towards women being pro-choice, there are MILLIONS of females that are pro-life and support this legislation. This is not "men legislating women's bodies". This is a society deciding what is or is not the right moral decision. A difficult choice because substantial harm can be done in both outcomes.

This all day.
 

Recent Threads

Back
Top