Most people in the US agree with limits on abortion after 16-20 weeks or so, but most oppose the extreme position that the Republican party has tried to impose. The problem with the abortion issue is that it is hard for people who believe a fertilized egg is a person to compromise in any way. and if they don't compromise this issue will kill them in elections.
My position is based on law instead of religion. Until an embryo can survive outside of the mother's womb it is not entitled to individual rights superior to the mother. My position is probably considered "liberal" now, but I am guessing that within 10-15 years doctors will be able to grow a fertilized egg completely outside of the mother's womb. At that point I would say that if the father wants the child the mother would have to give it up to him and pay child support. It gets a little more complicated if a grandmother or the state want to take the child, but the biggest issue remains the same. No one can force a woman to carry a child in her body that could not survive without her body.
The problem with the abortion issue is that it is hard for people who believe a fertilized egg is a person to compromise in any way...
There's at least one active member of this forum who believes that line of thought, and if you disagree in any manner, you will be labeled as a "murderer" of "babies". Compromise is not a word in their vocabulary.
There's at least one active member of this forum who believes that line of thought, and if you disagree in any manner, you will be labeled as a "murderer" of "babies". Compromise is not a word in their vocabulary.
If someone honestly believes it is murder then I can understand why he would not compromise. That is what is going to make it so hard for Republicans.
Trump actually drew a larger percentage of the black voters in his second run. Research shows that that gain was almost entirely based on the pro-life platform. Both blacks and Hispanics are more religious than the rest of the DNC.
If someone honestly believes it is murder then I can understand why he would not compromise.
The problem with this member, from my perspective, is that even though I have had nothing to do with any abortion being performed on anyone I know... I have personally been called a "murderer" numerous times in this forum... simply because I'm seen as a "leftist" here.
[This message has been edited by Patrick (edited 08-09-2023).]
It's cute to see a quorum of our PFF Leftoid squad dive in so fast to hold a "seminar" on abortion.
The condescension that's manifest in this remark from forum member randye is enormous, and yet, it's orders of magnitude surpassed by the imponderable mass of evidence that's archived in the annals of this forum: evidence that forum member randye is not living in a higher plane of existence that would realistically position him to look down with condescension upon on any other forum member, regardless of the other forum member's politics or cultural leanings.
Au contraire!
[This message has been edited by rinselberg (edited 08-10-2023).]
It's cute to see a quorum of our PFF Leftoid squad dive in so fast to hold a "seminar" on abortion.
Even cuter to see the right-wing echo chamber members being too afraid to address the subject in any meaningful way. They see what is coming. Republican party taken down by people who call a fertilized egg is a "person" entitled to individual rights.
IMHO, the abortion issue should be left up to the State legislatures.
IMHO this comment does not address the question asked in this thread.
"Leaving it up to the State legislatures" does not explain how the Republicans are going to avoid being severely damaged by their extremist views. National elections will still be shaped by the issue. Presidents will get elected based on which Supreme Court Justices they will appoint. And Federal Law will control the interstate commerce element of abortion like the manufacture and distribution of abortion inducing medication
Originally posted by rinselberg: The condescension that's manifest in this remark from forum member randye is enormous, and yet, it's orders of magnitude surpassed by the imponderable mass of evidence that's archived in the annals of this forum: evidence that forum member randye is not living in a higher plane of existence that would realistically position him to look down with condescension upon on any other forum member, regardless of the other forum member's politics or cultural leanings.
Originally posted by fredtoast: The problem with the abortion issue is that it is hard for people who believe a fertilized egg is a person to compromise in any way. and if they don't compromise this issue will kill them in elections.
Actually, If you opened your eyes you will see this issue has won elections.
quote
Originally posted by fredtoast: Until an embryo can survive outside of the mother's womb it is not entitled to individual rights superior to the mother.
Neither is a teenager.
quote
Originally posted by fredtoast: At that point I would say that if the father wants the child the mother would have to give it up to him and pay child support. No one can force a woman to carry a child in her body that could not survive without her body.
You have the pro life faction and the pro choice faction. A woman does not want to carry, did you say child, she has the choice not to open her legs.
If a father wants a "child", he should have a say if an abortion happens.
Originally posted by fredtoast: IMHO this comment does not address the question asked in this thread.
"Leaving it up to the State legislatures" does not explain how the Republicans are going to avoid being severely damaged by their extremist views. National elections will still be shaped by the issue. Presidents will get elected based on which Supreme Court Justices they will appoint. And Federal Law will control the interstate commerce element of abortion like the manufacture and distribution of abortion inducing medication
"Republicans and their extremist views"?
Killing unborn babies seems to be an extremist view, to my way of thinking.
Killing unborn babies seems to be an extremist view, to my way of thinking.
to your cults beliefs that there is a baby at that stage there is no thinking about cults beliefs or the demands that others inc non cult members comply and they want not voluntary submission to the cults demands but to use the state to enforce the cults rules on everyone
yesterday OHIO vote NO to the cult rules we know the cult seldom respects the will of the people
Most people in the US agree with limits on abortion after 16-20 weeks or so, but most oppose the extreme position that the Republican party has tried to impose. The problem with the abortion issue is that it is hard for people who believe a fertilized egg is a person to compromise in any way. and if they don't compromise this issue will kill them in elections.
My position is based on law instead of religion. Until an embryo can survive outside of the mother's womb it is not entitled to individual rights superior to the mother. My position is probably considered "liberal" now, but I am guessing that within 10-15 years doctors will be able to grow a fertilized egg completely outside of the mother's womb. At that point I would say that if the father wants the child the mother would have to give it up to him and pay child support. It gets a little more complicated if a grandmother or the state want to take the child, but the biggest issue remains the same. No one can force a woman to carry a child in her body that could not survive without her body.
Wrong question. The question is... why didn't DEMOCRATS do anything about the abortion issue?
Since the passage of the Privacy Act of 1974, which was predicated as a result of the Supreme Court Decision, people came to the general consensus that Roe v. Wade was a poor "constitutional" decision (based on the idea of privacy)... but that people still deserved privacy. Why (and here this name comes up again) Archibald Cox, along with other Democrat legal scholars claimed this was a bad decision, and that it was likely to be repealed ... which it was.
So, the Democrats had from 1973 all the way until 2022 ... almost 49 years, to pass a law... ANY laws. Republicans largely do NOT support abortion, and Democrats largely DO support abortion. So it was up to the Democrats to work with Republicans on this to pass laws that affirmed a certain "floor" of rights that would be the law of the land. Everyone knew RvW would eventually be overturned... this was not in question. It was not "law," and you can go back through decades of articles talking about how it would be repealed. This was literally used as a marketing tool by Democrats to encourage Democrats to vote for them. And many times from 1973 to 2022, the Democrats had majorities in both houses... even a Super Majority in both under Obama. Yet... oddly enough, they never attempted to pass any laws on this? ... that is what you should be asking.
As you have a law degree, you obviously understand vertical Federalism, and that there is no Constitutional right affirming abortion. So, with lack of literally ANY Federal legislation at all on this, it goes directly to the states to pass their own laws.
So you ask... what is the Republican Party going to do with the abortion issue. And my answer is... absolutely nothing. Why should they? It's now up to each state. And the vast majority of states allow abortion at least in the case of r@pe / 1ncest / and health concerns. (obfuscating those words so Pennocks doesn't get flagged again by Google as being an inappropriate site).
If Democrats want to allow abortion across the board in ANY capacity, even a limited version where they think they can get Republican support... then it's the Democrats problem to do so... not Republicans. For us... this problem is now solved. The states and local populations now have the authority to pass laws based on their own values, and not those of the larger country.
Originally posted by 82-T/A [At Work]: So you ask... what is the Republican Party going to do with the abortion issue. And my answer is... absolutely nothing. Why should they? It's now up to each state. And the vast majority of states allow abortion at least in the case of r@pe / 1ncest / and health concerns. (obfuscating those words so Pennocks doesn't get flagged again by Google as being an inappropriate site).
If Democrats want to allow abortion across the board in ANY capacity, even a limited version where they think they can get Republican support... then it's the Democrats problem to do so... not Republicans. For us... this problem is now solved. The states and local populations now have the authority to pass laws based on their own values, and not those of the larger country.
Todd, NOTHING happens in a vacuum with the Leftoids.
Fredtroll didn't just suddenly and sua sponte decide to post his loaded abortion "question".
You only have to look to the latest Leftist "news" to see what just stirred up their lunatic hooting.
Right now the Leftoids are strutting around and honking over what happened in Ohio yesterday.
In other words, the issue is working exactly as SCOTUS, and the Constitution, intended via the states individually legislating.
Leftists, with their seriously myopic worldview, immediately believe the propaganda fed to them that THIS is now the wedge issue that going to win 2024 for them.
...
It's also extraordinarily creepy how Leftists, even since the days of their "3/5 of a person", continue to desperately cling to their sick ideology of the value of one human life over another, whether by race, class or even birth status.
quote
Originally posted by fredtoast:
....it is hard for people who believe a fertilized egg is a person to compromise in any way.
My position is based on law instead of religion. Until an embryo can survive outside of the mother's womb it is not entitled to individual rights superior to the mother.
Fortunately, Tennessee law doesn't consistently agree with "lawyer" fredtroll's extremist views:
Tennessee: Effective July 1, 2012 (HB 3517, enacted as Pub. Ch. 1006), Tennessee law includes “a human embryo or fetus at any stage of gestation in utero” as a victim of such offenses as murder, voluntary manslaughter, vehicular homicide, and reckless homicide. See Tennessee Code Annotated, Sections 39-13-107 and 39-13-214. This law replaces a law that took effect in 2011, which had applied the same principle to “a fetus of a human being.” The new language is intended to ensure that the protection extends throughout the period of pre-natal development, along with other technical changes.
Prior to 2011, Tennessee law recognized an unborn child as a crime victim only after “viability.”
Their slaves were only "3/5 of a person", subhuman.
Their holocaust victims were just "Jew vermin"
Their political adversaries are just a "basket of deplorables" or "extremists".
An unborn human life is just "a clump of cells" or just "a fertilized egg".
Throughout history, the Leftist / National Socialists / Marxists dehumanize their victims to help perpetrate, and try to justify, their atrocities.
[This message has been edited by randye (edited 08-10-2023).]
Killing unborn babies seems to be an extremist view, to my way of thinking.
Thanks for proving my point. You are the perfect example of people who refuse to compromise.
A majority of the country has my "way of thinking" instead of yours. They want strict regulations of abortions once the fetus is viable (after 16-20 weeks), but they also want women to have the right to make decisions about her own body until the fetus is viable outside her body.
They don't consider a fertilized egg to be a "baby". It is your choice to define it that way, and your position is more extreme than mine.
Leftists, with their seriously myopic worldview, immediately believe the propaganda fed to them that THIS is now the wedge issue that going to win 2024 for them.
Abortion rights advocates won high-profile votes last year in Michigan and Kansas, and the GOP's stance on abortion was blamed by plenty of political pundits for turning an expected red wave in last November's midterm elections into a red trickle.
Tuesday's vote in Ohio may be another warning sign for Republicans that the issue of abortion may hinder their chances of victory in the 2024 elections.
"The vast majority of Republican candidates are pro-life, but I think there's a recognition that there are political complications with the issue. It's been put on the ballot in several right-leaning states and the voters have rejected efforts to further curb abortion rights," veteran Republican strategist Ryan Williams told Fox News.
Keep your head buried deep in the sand Randye. Just keep telling yourself it won't hurt Republicans to start losing state legislatures and governors.
I have always found it amusing that you Leftoids have such a slavish devotion to CNN and/or "MSLSD" which then causes you to assume that everyone shares your mindless, lemming-like, following of a media outlet as emblematic of their ideology.
In looking up your internet link it turns out to be exactly what I thought it was from reading the text you quoted.
It seems that a guy named Paul Steinhauser (whoever he is), wrote an OPINION including the OPINIONS of a Tina Ramirez and someone named Ryan Williams, and in usual LEFTIST fashion you are unable to discern opinions from objective fact.
I'm also amused how you Lefties have such a propensity to conflate a plurality of votes on a ballot referendum as a majority of total population, in the instant case as though every eligible Ohioan had miraculously voted on the issue in question. What a childlike view of politics.
[This message has been edited by randye (edited 08-10-2023).]
Originally posted by randye: I have always found it amusing that you Leftoids have such a slavish devotion to CNN and/or "MSLSD" which then causes you to assume that everyone shares your mindless, lemming-like, following of a media outlet as emblematic of their ideology.
In looking up your internet link it turns out to be exactly what I thought it was from reading the text you quoted.
It seems that a guy named Paul Steinhauser (whoever he is), wrote an OPINION including the OPINIONS of a Tina Ramirez and someone named Ryan Williams, and in usual LEFTIST fashion you are unable to discern opinions from objective fact.
I'm also amused how you Lefties have such a propensity to conflate a plurality of votes on a ballot referendum as a majority of total population, in the instant case as though every eligible Ohioan had miraculously voted on the issue in question. What a childlike view of politics.
the child's view is yours most of the godbothered voted as did the people who cared about their rights
many of the people who care the least did not vote
there are no miraculous votes sky pilots do not decide elections if they did we would not have been trumped
you should know only the center matters as far as swing voting
It seems that a guy named Paul Steinhauser (whoever he is), wrote an OPINION including the OPINIONS of a Tina Ramirez and someone named Ryan Williams, and in usual LEFTIST fashion you are unable to discern opinions from objective fact.
I never claimed it was anything other than opinion. The reason I posted it was that it was from the Right-wing propaganda machine Foxnews instead of a "leftist" source
quote
Originally posted by randye: I'm also amused how you Lefties have such a propensity to conflate a plurality of votes on a ballot referendum as a majority of total population, in the instant case as though every eligible Ohioan had miraculously voted on the issue in question. What a childlike view of politics.
The fact that I am talking about the republicans having problems in ELECTIONS, makes the voters more important than the entire population. But thesde voting patterns also match polls from around the country of all citizens, not just voters.
The fact that I am talking about the republicans having problems in ELECTIONS, makes the voters more important than the entire population. But these voting patterns also match polls from around the country of all citizens, not just voters.
I guess I don't really care? I'm happy that Democrats are no longer allowed to kill black babies in the name of healthcare, and that's kind of what I'm focusing on. Democrats had 50 years to pass literally anything at the Federal level, and they didn't. So really... who should you really be frustrated with?
I guess I don't really care? I'm happy that Democrats are no longer allowed to kill black babies in the name of healthcare, and that's kind of what I'm focusing on.
I find it a little strange that you don't care about white babies.
quote
Originally posted by 82-T/A [At Work]:
So really... who should you really be frustrated with?
Why would I be "frustrated" by democrats winning all these elections?
Originally posted by fredtoast: I find it a little strange that you don't care about white babies.
Fantastic... you finally now understand what a "strawman" argument is.
If you could only learn the proper use of punctuation and quotes in American English, you'd be all set!
quote
Originally posted by fredtoast: Why would I be "frustrated" by democrats winning all these elections?
This joke is funny. Biden barely won the election through manipulation of state voting laws in all the swing states, which was later proven when the Supreme Court of each of these states ruled that Democrats had violated election laws in each of these states...
But the mid-term election? It was heavily favored for Democrats, the vast majority of the seats that were up, were Republican seats (in the senate). Yet... at the state level, there was an overwhelming number of pickups for Republicans. In the last election (2022) Republicans had the majority in the House and Senate for 30 states, with 27 of them being being Super Majorities (meaning the Republican legislature and senate has a veto-proof majority).
Interestingly enough, in just the past 3 months, two Democrats in separate states have actually switched parties, bringing that super majority up to 29. That wasn't even an election, and Republicans gained two more super majorities. https://news.ballotpedia.or...cent-party-switches/
In the next election, the senate bias flips... meaning that the overwhelming majority of the senate seats that are up for reelection are all Democrat seats. This is completely opposite of what it was in 2022. Matter of fact, CNN believes that of the top 10 Senate Seats that are likely to flip, 8 of them are Democrats, and the two they list for Republicans are not very likely. They even state #10 (Rick Scott) is unlikely because there are now 750k more registered Republicans in Florida than Democrats. https://www.cnn.com/2023/07...elections/index.html
Originally posted by randye: Their slaves were only "3/5 of a person", subhuman.
Their holocaust victims were just "Jew vermin"
Their political adversaries are just a "basket of deplorables" or "extremists".
An unborn human life is just "a clump of cells" or just "a fertilized egg".
Throughout history, the Leftist / National Socialists / Marxists dehumanize their victims to help perpetrate, and try to justify, their atrocities.
again you call actions by CONSERVATIVES as LIBERAL DEMO actions dishonestly slavers were not liberal lump the far right nazi's with the left miss the actions of the 1-6 deplorable's living down to their naming fail at biology
like far too many in the godbothered rightwing you demand infliction of godslaws on our nation
good thing for progress as the country has moved on from religious repression just as my ancestors left the nut puritans behind to be free in Rhode island long ago
again you call actions by CONSERVATIVES as LIBERAL DEMO actions dishonestly slavers were not liberal lump the far right nazi's with the left miss the actions of the 1-6 deplorable's living down to their naming fail at biology
like far too many in the godbothered rightwing you demand infliction of godslaws on our nation
good thing for progress as the country has moved on from religious repression just as my ancestors left the nut puritans behind to be free in Rhode island long ago
Nobody said slave owners were liberal. They were Leftist Democrats.
This joke is funny. Biden barely won the election through manipulation of state voting laws in all the swing states, which was later proven when the Supreme Court of each of these states ruled that Democrats had violated election laws in each of these states...
None of those decisions were based on party. Both parties played by the same rules. So there was no effect on the election results.
Biden won easily.
Actually, these rules were changed at the behest of Democrats and allowed things like ballot harvesting, drop boxes in specific areas, and other things, all of which directly favored Democrats. Republicans have never done ballot harvesting before, did not have a defined structure or playbook for it, and were woefully unprepared for it. In effect, the Democrats VIOLATED state laws with a ground game that Republicans were unprepared for. This absolutely had an effect on election results.
EDIT: And also... really, Biden was the best person they could come up with? You may not like Trump, but Trump was a radically aggressive person that really engaged his base. It was not Biden that won that election, but Trump that lost it. It's unbelievable to me that this was the best Democrats could come up with. He was neither liked by his own party, or even particularly engaging. The majority of Democrats literally don't even want him to run again.
[This message has been edited by 82-T/A [At Work] (edited 08-11-2023).]
Interestingly enough, in just the past 3 months, two Democrats in separate states have actually switched parties, bringing that super majority up to 29. That wasn't even an election, and Republicans gained two more super majorities. https://news.ballotpedia.or...cent-party-switches/
In the next election, the senate bias flips... meaning that the overwhelming majority of the senate seats that are up for reelection are all Democrat seats. This is completely opposite of what it was in 2022. Matter of fact, CNN believes that of the top 10 Senate Seats that are likely to flip, 8 of them are Democrats, and the two they list for Republicans are not very likely. They even state #10 (Rick Scott) is unlikely because there are now 750k more registered Republicans in Florida than Democrats. https://www.cnn.com/2023/07...elections/index.html
So... what exactly are you talking about?
USA: The 26 least populated states, which together elect a majority of Senate seats (52), make up only 18 percent of the population. but really only 1/2 vote so 9% split 5% to 4% minus kids rule the nation or 5% rural backward fools stop progress and are far too proud of it here and willing to revolt to keep power
btw fla got 3 as tommy tootubby is here and NOT in Al as he is supposed to be
------------------ Question wonder and be wierd are you kind?
Nobody said slave owners were liberal. They were Leftist Democrats.
how are they leftist before the 60's civil rights laws and nixon the democratic party in the south was racist conservative whites the few brave blacks were in the Gop along with a few white LIBERALS BEFORE THE SWAP
I WAS THERE THEN I QUIT THE GOP IN RESPONSE TO THE SWAP that some lie about I saw happen
I attended segregated southern schools DID YOU ? I also went to totally integrated northern schools in the same year
Their ideology of "States Rights" fits perfectly with the current right-wing conservative Republican platform.
State's Rights is a republican issue. It is essentially the definition of a federal republic and the meaning of the tenth amendment. Preserving the the Constitution and the Union is by definition a conservative issue. The Confederacy were secessionists, leftists by definition and Democrats by party.
State's Rights is a republican issue. It is essentially the definition of a federal republic and the meaning of the tenth amendment. Preserving the the Constitution and the Union is by definition a conservative issue. The Confederacy were secessionists, leftists by definition and Democrats by party.
TOTALLY AND COMPLETELY BACKWARD UPSIDEDOWN AND WRONG ^^^^
NOT EVEN CLOSE TO TRUE
THINK ABOUT WHO IS ON WHAT SIDE AND WHY
stolen from SA steam said ''Last time I checked, businesses were not citizens. This Supreme Court thinking that artificial entities have superior rights over citizens is the clearest proof needed that we should chuck the whole bunch and start over.'' and B replied ''Well, the constitution seems to be subject to interpretation along party lines. The "parties" seem to be either for the people or for the corporations. Unfortunately, thanks to the twice impeached, multiple indicted conman former prez, the corporations currently hold a majority.''
so my question is why line up with the con and the con-man and the corp-RATS
and against the people
clear clean eazy pick one side is dark and gets darker the other is the way forward
why are you on that dark side ?
[This message has been edited by ray b (edited 08-11-2023).]
USA: The 26 least populated states, which together elect a majority of Senate seats (52), make up only 18 percent of the population. but really only 1/2 vote so 9% split 5% to 4% minus kids rule the nation or 5% rural backward fools stop progress and are far too proud of it here and willing to revolt to keep power
btw fla got 3 as tommy tootubby is here and NOT in Al as he is supposed to be
That IS the definition of a Republic. The majority of states, get the majority of Senate seats. We've democratized it a little bit though. It used to be that the states themselves elected the senators (as in, the state legislatures did). If that was still the case today, the US Senate would literally be a Republican super majority. This was changed in 1913 if I'm not mistaken.
This is going to make some heads explode. Y'all have fun.
First... people, of all ages, are going to have sex. They have for countless generations, in spite of their parents' best efforts. Second... I believe abortion is wrong. Period. But it's a reality of our times. I'd much rather it be obsolete, due to responsible education, and common availability of birth control. Third... I also believe that it's not my place to stop anyone from having an abortion. None of my business. (God gave us a choice. If free will is denied, it's not really a choice, is it.) But I also believe that anyone who has an abortion will have to answer for it at some time. That's between them and God. This is not to judge. Not saying anyone's going to hell. Just not my business.
The practical aspect of all this is that if the Republicans keep choosing this hill to die on, they probably will, more often than not. I believe there are much more important issues for society at large to deal with, but the Republicans keep pounding on this, and it's going to cause them to lose elections. There are a few other "vote killers", but this is the big one.
Of course, all the Republicans will likely be pissed at this, just on principle. So be it. I'm beyond caring. Also, I have very little patience for "evangelists". You do you, and leave me the eff alone. I'll believe as I see fit. I'm good with my God.
And, of course, many of the Dems will laugh because I'm espousing a belief in the "invisible man". My question to those individuals would be, why does it matter what I believe, as long as I don't force my beliefs on you? Conversely, why do you feel the need to force your "non-belief" and derision on believers? This does not just include the Dems, here. It's other people I have to deal with on a day-to-day basis.
[This message has been edited by Raydar (edited 08-11-2023).]
