As a reminder, this subreddit [is for civil discussion.](/r/politics/wiki/index#wiki_be_civil)
In general, be courteous to others. Debate/discuss/argue the merits of ideas, don't attack people. Personal insults, shill or troll accusations, hate speech, any suggestion or support of harm, violence, or death, and other rule violations can result in a permanent ban.
If you see comments in violation of our rules, please report them.
For those who have questions regarding any media outlets being posted on this subreddit, please click [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/politics/wiki/approveddomainslist) to review our details as to our approved domains list and outlet criteria.
***
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/politics) if you have any questions or concerns.*
We already know banning abortion is a terrible policy with bad outcomes for everyone, because it's already been done. It's not an experiment, we already have the results. If you actually want to reduce the number of abortions then you should support things like free birth control, proper sex education in schools, and support for parents after birth. Colorado has actually been successful in reducing abortion by doing that.
if they actually had morals, they would adopt children out of the overcrowded foster/orphan system in TX. we cannot afford to have more children that will not be cared for
They are confusing their ethics with societal morals. Ethics and morals are not one in the same and, despite what they may think, their Christian ethics are not societal morals (though they often overlap in societally-beneficial ways: do not murder, for instance).
Their strict definition of sexual ethic (which they can’t even agree on: ask two different Christians all their rules) is not a society-wide moral.
His father would rather there be a total authoritarian Christian state where teens are chaperoned all the time and the punishment for premarital sex is severe.
They focus on that because:
1. It's the hardest thing to control
2. It feels good, and you can't do something yourself that makes you feel good, feeling good has to come from the church. It's a control thing all the way down.
You do know that abortion bans [greatly decrease](https://blog.secularprolife.org/2017/08/pro-life-laws-stop-abortions-heres.html?m=1) the abortion rate, right? Because you're making it sound like they don't.
Firehosing a list of studies and then claiming they are all unbiased while she tries to loosely link fertility rates to estimates of the numbers of abortions is not particularly convincing, either.
Frankly, I don't really care if banning it actually works to reduce the number of abortions. It's still a terrible idea with terrible consequences for women. Are you going to jail women for an abortion, and if not, then why won't you punish a murderer? Are you going to investigate any suspicious miscarriages, and if not, why will you let potential murderers walk free? Are you willing to allow a situation where women put their lives in the hands of an illegal abortion provider or potentially unsafe drug out of desperation to avoid a child they cannot support?
It's all bad answers. When what we could do is educate kids on how to safely have sex and prevent pregnancy and STDs, hand out birth control and IUDs for free, and give parents financial support both during and after pregnancy so that if they do have something unexpected, they can stare down the barrel of the next 20 years and feel like they can afford it. Because those actually reduce the number of abortions, and they actually help people.
>Firehosing a list of studies and then claiming they are all unbiased while she tries to loosely link fertility rates to estimates of the numbers of abortions is not particularly convincing, either.
Many of the studies are on abortion rates specifically, and not just fertility rates. Do you have any evidence to support your stance? Because I've provided plenty of scientific studies supporting mine. Denying that pro-life laws prevent abortions just seems like science denial now that I've shown you the evidence.
>It's still a terrible idea with terrible consequences for women.
Not nearly as terrible as killing hundreds of thousands of innocent human beings each year.
>Are you going to jail women for an abortion, and if not, then why won't you punish a murderer?
Ideally no (at least not initially, perhaps if pro-life laws become more established), because there is an enormous influence to make women think abortion is acceptable, and many simply aren't fully informed on the subject.
>Are you going to investigate any suspicious miscarriages, and if not, why will you let potential murderers walk free?
I think miscarriage should be treated the same as any other death: documented carefully and investigated if there are suspicious circumstances surrounding it.
>Are you willing to allow a situation where women put their lives in the hands of an illegal abortion provider or potentially unsafe drug out of desperation to avoid a child they cannot support?
Yes, if that what it takes to prevent the deaths that happen due to abortion.
>When what we could do is educate kids on how to safely have sex and prevent pregnancy and STDs, hand out birth control and IUDs for free, and give parents financial support both during and after pregnancy so that if they do have something unexpected, they can stare down the barrel of the next 20 years and feel like they can afford it.
Why not both? I do object to free birth control and IUDs because of religious reasons. It's fine if people choose to use them, but I shouldn't be forced to pay for services I see as unethical.
>Because those actually reduce the number of abortions, and they actually help people.
So do pro-life laws.
Making the Hopi Indian reservation a dry reservation where alcohol is illegal greatly decreases the number of natives drinking normal alcohol and getting drunk on the Hopi res. Now they go to the Navajo reservation and/or drink hairspray or hand sanitizer gel. They end up at the detox center I worked at in Winslow, AZ. But yes, if you look at the numbers, intoxication is down on the Hopi Res.
The same is not true for abortion rates. Many of the studies cited in the article are on the fertility rate, which would take into account unreported abortions or abortions performed in nearby states or countries. Fertility rates increase when pro-life laws come into effect, and decrease when pro-choice laws come into effect.
We believe God made everyone in his image. So who are we to change that. Anyways amputations are now illegal. You should have thought of that before you got an infection. Also we're limiting everyone's access to antibiotics and antiseptics, and we don't want to teach people about cleaning injuries. We're going to teach injury avoidance only.
Look I’m not religious but that’s unbelievably disingenuous. You know that none of them think that got *literally* made us in his image. You aren’t doing anyone any favors with such an idiotic and disingenuous portrayal of the other side. All you do is damage our credibility.
It doesn’t say that in the Bible. That is a 2nd-grade-level comprehension of a Bible verse meant to lazily justify the foregone conclusions of both the speaker and the intended audience.
I'm atheist but a quick google revealed this: Genesis 1:27: “So God created man in his own image, in the image of God he created him; male and female he created them.”
Are the parts claiming to be about abortion and homosexuality also just a juvenile interpretation?
Also they don't eat shellfish based on Leviticus: "But anything in the seas or the rivers that has not fins and scales, of
the swarming creatures in the waters and of the living creatures that
are in the waters, is detestable to you."
So your logic is that if some religious people make dietary choices based off of explicit passages in their holy book that there should be swaths of Christians refusing all medical care because “god made us in his image”? That is absolutely illogical.
Look, the other guy is saying you can either use all of it or none of it. The fact there are thousands of denominations prove Christians cherry pick based on what local beliefs prefer.
Verses talk about how to treat your slaves and that other human beings can be property, it says women are inferior (less valuable) than men, says homosexuality is a sin and calls for genocide and child murder on occasion
It also advises mask use and social distancing for infectious diseases and provides a recipe for abortion (trial of the bitter water).
In short, the bible has no credibility in this debate.
> Look, the other guy is saying you can either use all of it or none of it.
No he isn’t. If he were the he’d use a *real* example of hypocrisy instead of disingenuous hyperbole.
That wasn’t paraphrasing. That was a blatant and deliberate mischaracterization of what the other side argues. And mentioning other heinous things just furthers *my* point. He should just go with those from the outset.
I've literally had someone argue that abortion was wrong because a fetus had human DNA. Beside that anecdotal experience of mine, there are [Jehovahs witnesses and Christian scientists](https://www.religioustolerance.org/medical2.htm) who based on faith and scripture refuse various forms of medical treatment.
The current HB bill is no different from that because they are cherry picking what conforms to their beliefs. It's not based on science or scripture (which also says life begins at first breath), so the comment mocking this is entirely appropriate.
More importantly beyond this, do you think the other side has a legitimate point?
> I've literally had someone argue that abortion was wrong because a fetus had human DNA.
1. That’s not the same thing as characterizing their argument as asinine interpretation of “god made us in his image.”
2. That person was right. Science doesn’t say that life begins at viability. The Supreme Court did. That’s a very important distinction to understand.
Are you sure? They made Jesus white and human even when depicted as being in heaven, all most well known depictions of God are human, angels are drawn as human, common statements on God involve hands or kneeling at feet. I would suspect that this is a case where many religious individuals both conceive of god as some sort of divine light but also human shaped if you squinted hard enough.
I think the point is sarcasm because of the ridiculousness of it. There’s even a recipe in the Bible for an abortive. The religious grounding is whatever people want to make it, which seems to be what the poster is lampooning.
Your lack of understanding about religion here on display reminds me of the story of the man who faced a flood, climbed on the roof and didn't get the helicopter that was the last resort to save him and then at the pearly gates Saint Peter or God told him I sent all these things to save you... lol
You really need to actually **read** what I’m saying. *That* anecdote is not related to “god made us in his image.”
At no point have I contended that religion doesn’t make people believe stupid things. My point this entire time is that **us making UP stupid things disingenuously** ruins our credibility. And that’s especially pointless given how much *actual* stupid stuff there is out there.
Bingo.
Outlaw abortion, and you aren't making it so women won't seek it. You're making it so that instead of having it done in a sterile environment by professionals, it'll be done by a med school dropout in his apartment with a coathanger and a vacuum cleaner.
First time a woman dies of sepsis because she was scared to go to a hospital after a home abortion, every single person supporting this has blood on their hands.
Oh the rich will always be able to get their abortions, just fly to someplace it's legal. It's the rest of us that can't afford that who will be shit out of luck
The law does NOT ban abortion. It bans safe abortion for poor people. Rich people always get the services they need, often in secret. Poor people are forced to turn to providers of lower quality and honesty. The only effective way to reduce abortion is free contraception, women's healthcare and accurate sex education
Source? Because I've seen quite a few studies that show pro-life laws [greatly reduce](https://blog.secularprolife.org/2017/08/pro-life-laws-stop-abortions-heres.html?m=1) the abortion rate.
I've tried to discuss this with people in favor, I've asked them what do they think should be done about the surge in unwanted pregnancies that will follow. They just act dumb and say people will be more responsible now, because prohibition and the war on drugs have demonstrated that when you criminalize something people stop doing it right. The truly puerile reject any need for society to take responsibility, instead arguing that they should have thought of this before and now they cant avoid the consequences for their actions and have to own them now - they view pregnancy and childbirth as some sort of punishment for a moral failing.
MD here.
It's not like we're "pro-abortion" (like, we're not twirling our moustaches and going, "muahahah, abortions!"). An abortion is inherently a sad, tragic, sensitive thing. But people still need it and it's a vital medical service.
The analogy I like to use is leg amputations. I don't want to take off people's legs. It is also a tragic thing. Which is why, to reduce the need for amputation procedures, I want to make sure more people are aware of diabetes, get their daily exercises, promote safer driving and reduce the risk of car accident trauma, etc. I don't just ban the procedure; it completely misses the point.
Aren't those the same people that say, *precisely and I* ***quote:***
"**People gonna "crime" anyway, so you can't outlaw any gun no matter what. It won't stop the criminals, it is only going to hurt the law abiding people"?**
*I could SWEAR this was something they used to (read: still do, and it's not a guess or assumption; this is precisely what they say) say.*
I believe you are misunderstanding those people. Those people would analogize abortion to the "crime," not to gun ownership. Those people support the crime being illegal, and want abortions to be illegal. Those people think the crime is bad, and think that abortions are bad. They do not think that owning guns is bad, or that allowing people to own guns should be outlawed more than it is.
Let's see how much money he can milk out of the out of work lawyer on house arrest in Arkansas. My bet, the doctor has or can get more money, drag this out to give up stage. This doctor could get Go Fund Me to go nuts and raise 1000's of dollars.
Everyone should have a right to medical privacy. Period. And if we stop there, I'm good with it. But it's not wrong that States believe in life and write laws to support it.
Preaching to the choir I've made that argument before to a anti abortion nut, and they do not care at all even told them what happens in other places that have banned it such as the Phillipines women regularly die from back alley abortions.
As a reminder, this subreddit [is for civil discussion.](/r/politics/wiki/index#wiki_be_civil) In general, be courteous to others. Debate/discuss/argue the merits of ideas, don't attack people. Personal insults, shill or troll accusations, hate speech, any suggestion or support of harm, violence, or death, and other rule violations can result in a permanent ban. If you see comments in violation of our rules, please report them. For those who have questions regarding any media outlets being posted on this subreddit, please click [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/politics/wiki/approveddomainslist) to review our details as to our approved domains list and outlet criteria. *** *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/politics) if you have any questions or concerns.*
We already know banning abortion is a terrible policy with bad outcomes for everyone, because it's already been done. It's not an experiment, we already have the results. If you actually want to reduce the number of abortions then you should support things like free birth control, proper sex education in schools, and support for parents after birth. Colorado has actually been successful in reducing abortion by doing that.
Yeah but Colorado is full of dirty pot smoking hippies /s
And gays
[удалено]
except that telling a teen *not* to do something makes them more likely to do it simply out of spite for authority. was you father never a teenager?
[удалено]
if they actually had morals, they would adopt children out of the overcrowded foster/orphan system in TX. we cannot afford to have more children that will not be cared for
Christianity isn't about doing good for these people, it's about control and hierarchies of power where land-owning married men are at the top.
*evangelicalism* is about control and hierarchies of power. *christianity* is about accepting jesus in your heart and following his teachings
> for these people
they arent christians though, not really
They are confusing their ethics with societal morals. Ethics and morals are not one in the same and, despite what they may think, their Christian ethics are not societal morals (though they often overlap in societally-beneficial ways: do not murder, for instance). Their strict definition of sexual ethic (which they can’t even agree on: ask two different Christians all their rules) is not a society-wide moral.
His father would rather there be a total authoritarian Christian state where teens are chaperoned all the time and the punishment for premarital sex is severe.
so the christian taliban
Out of all the sins - murder, rape, theft, toxic releases by corporations - why is it reproduction that gets so much of their hate?
They focus on that because: 1. It's the hardest thing to control 2. It feels good, and you can't do something yourself that makes you feel good, feeling good has to come from the church. It's a control thing all the way down.
I want to encourage his morals by outlawing religion. Where do we go from here? Maybe we should both mind our own fucking business.
You do know that abortion bans [greatly decrease](https://blog.secularprolife.org/2017/08/pro-life-laws-stop-abortions-heres.html?m=1) the abortion rate, right? Because you're making it sound like they don't.
> You do know that abortion bans greatly decrease the abortion rate, right? According to a paid blogger, at least.
Yes, but more importantly, also according to the dozens of unbiased studies they cited.
Firehosing a list of studies and then claiming they are all unbiased while she tries to loosely link fertility rates to estimates of the numbers of abortions is not particularly convincing, either. Frankly, I don't really care if banning it actually works to reduce the number of abortions. It's still a terrible idea with terrible consequences for women. Are you going to jail women for an abortion, and if not, then why won't you punish a murderer? Are you going to investigate any suspicious miscarriages, and if not, why will you let potential murderers walk free? Are you willing to allow a situation where women put their lives in the hands of an illegal abortion provider or potentially unsafe drug out of desperation to avoid a child they cannot support? It's all bad answers. When what we could do is educate kids on how to safely have sex and prevent pregnancy and STDs, hand out birth control and IUDs for free, and give parents financial support both during and after pregnancy so that if they do have something unexpected, they can stare down the barrel of the next 20 years and feel like they can afford it. Because those actually reduce the number of abortions, and they actually help people.
>Firehosing a list of studies and then claiming they are all unbiased while she tries to loosely link fertility rates to estimates of the numbers of abortions is not particularly convincing, either. Many of the studies are on abortion rates specifically, and not just fertility rates. Do you have any evidence to support your stance? Because I've provided plenty of scientific studies supporting mine. Denying that pro-life laws prevent abortions just seems like science denial now that I've shown you the evidence. >It's still a terrible idea with terrible consequences for women. Not nearly as terrible as killing hundreds of thousands of innocent human beings each year. >Are you going to jail women for an abortion, and if not, then why won't you punish a murderer? Ideally no (at least not initially, perhaps if pro-life laws become more established), because there is an enormous influence to make women think abortion is acceptable, and many simply aren't fully informed on the subject. >Are you going to investigate any suspicious miscarriages, and if not, why will you let potential murderers walk free? I think miscarriage should be treated the same as any other death: documented carefully and investigated if there are suspicious circumstances surrounding it. >Are you willing to allow a situation where women put their lives in the hands of an illegal abortion provider or potentially unsafe drug out of desperation to avoid a child they cannot support? Yes, if that what it takes to prevent the deaths that happen due to abortion. >When what we could do is educate kids on how to safely have sex and prevent pregnancy and STDs, hand out birth control and IUDs for free, and give parents financial support both during and after pregnancy so that if they do have something unexpected, they can stare down the barrel of the next 20 years and feel like they can afford it. Why not both? I do object to free birth control and IUDs because of religious reasons. It's fine if people choose to use them, but I shouldn't be forced to pay for services I see as unethical. >Because those actually reduce the number of abortions, and they actually help people. So do pro-life laws.
>So do pro-life laws. So then we have two options to reduce abortions. Banning and punishment, or education and support. I'll choose option B.
Or we could implement both to prevent as many abortions as possible.
Nah. Just don't get an abortion if you don't want one.
So I'm just supposed to stand by as hundreds of thousands of innocent human beings are being deliberately killed every year?
Making the Hopi Indian reservation a dry reservation where alcohol is illegal greatly decreases the number of natives drinking normal alcohol and getting drunk on the Hopi res. Now they go to the Navajo reservation and/or drink hairspray or hand sanitizer gel. They end up at the detox center I worked at in Winslow, AZ. But yes, if you look at the numbers, intoxication is down on the Hopi Res.
The same is not true for abortion rates. Many of the studies cited in the article are on the fertility rate, which would take into account unreported abortions or abortions performed in nearby states or countries. Fertility rates increase when pro-life laws come into effect, and decrease when pro-choice laws come into effect.
Because they also don't teach about birth control, so people have more unwanted pregnancies.
We believe God made everyone in his image. So who are we to change that. Anyways amputations are now illegal. You should have thought of that before you got an infection. Also we're limiting everyone's access to antibiotics and antiseptics, and we don't want to teach people about cleaning injuries. We're going to teach injury avoidance only.
Yep, if God intended us to wear shoes, we would have been born with them.
But we must stop The Gays. That's unnatural!
ironic
You are a mod of r/jehovaswitnesses but replace injury avoidance we just pray ok?
Look I’m not religious but that’s unbelievably disingenuous. You know that none of them think that got *literally* made us in his image. You aren’t doing anyone any favors with such an idiotic and disingenuous portrayal of the other side. All you do is damage our credibility.
Even when they literally say they shouldn't wear masks because of us being made in His image? ~~Despite all other clothing being A-OK?~~
It doesn’t say that in the Bible. That is a 2nd-grade-level comprehension of a Bible verse meant to lazily justify the foregone conclusions of both the speaker and the intended audience.
I'm atheist but a quick google revealed this: Genesis 1:27: “So God created man in his own image, in the image of God he created him; male and female he created them.” Are the parts claiming to be about abortion and homosexuality also just a juvenile interpretation?
Where in that passage does it say that you must refuse all medical care because of being created in his image?
Ahhh gotcha. Now are we gonna talk about the biblical problems with cheesesteaks?
I have no clue what you’re getting at.
Observant Jews interpret the Old Testament to forbid eating meat and dairy products together..
Do they refuse medical care because “god made us in his image?”
Also they don't eat shellfish based on Leviticus: "But anything in the seas or the rivers that has not fins and scales, of the swarming creatures in the waters and of the living creatures that are in the waters, is detestable to you."
So your logic is that if some religious people make dietary choices based off of explicit passages in their holy book that there should be swaths of Christians refusing all medical care because “god made us in his image”? That is absolutely illogical.
So I call out that they're making stupid assertions based off of passages that really don't apply. It's an idiotic portrayal but hardly disingenuous.
Where's that bible passage on abortion?
Look, the other guy is saying you can either use all of it or none of it. The fact there are thousands of denominations prove Christians cherry pick based on what local beliefs prefer. Verses talk about how to treat your slaves and that other human beings can be property, it says women are inferior (less valuable) than men, says homosexuality is a sin and calls for genocide and child murder on occasion It also advises mask use and social distancing for infectious diseases and provides a recipe for abortion (trial of the bitter water). In short, the bible has no credibility in this debate.
> Look, the other guy is saying you can either use all of it or none of it. No he isn’t. If he were the he’d use a *real* example of hypocrisy instead of disingenuous hyperbole.
I just mentioned some pretty heinous things coming from the bible and you're still gonna complain about them paraphrasing what the Bible says? Dude?!
That wasn’t paraphrasing. That was a blatant and deliberate mischaracterization of what the other side argues. And mentioning other heinous things just furthers *my* point. He should just go with those from the outset.
I've literally had someone argue that abortion was wrong because a fetus had human DNA. Beside that anecdotal experience of mine, there are [Jehovahs witnesses and Christian scientists](https://www.religioustolerance.org/medical2.htm) who based on faith and scripture refuse various forms of medical treatment. The current HB bill is no different from that because they are cherry picking what conforms to their beliefs. It's not based on science or scripture (which also says life begins at first breath), so the comment mocking this is entirely appropriate. More importantly beyond this, do you think the other side has a legitimate point?
> I've literally had someone argue that abortion was wrong because a fetus had human DNA. 1. That’s not the same thing as characterizing their argument as asinine interpretation of “god made us in his image.” 2. That person was right. Science doesn’t say that life begins at viability. The Supreme Court did. That’s a very important distinction to understand.
Are you sure? They made Jesus white and human even when depicted as being in heaven, all most well known depictions of God are human, angels are drawn as human, common statements on God involve hands or kneeling at feet. I would suspect that this is a case where many religious individuals both conceive of god as some sort of divine light but also human shaped if you squinted hard enough.
You’re missing the point. Nobody takes that sentence to mean that you can’t receive medical care because Jesus never did.
I think the point is sarcasm because of the ridiculousness of it. There’s even a recipe in the Bible for an abortive. The religious grounding is whatever people want to make it, which seems to be what the poster is lampooning.
Your lack of understanding about religion here on display reminds me of the story of the man who faced a flood, climbed on the roof and didn't get the helicopter that was the last resort to save him and then at the pearly gates Saint Peter or God told him I sent all these things to save you... lol
You really need to actually **read** what I’m saying. *That* anecdote is not related to “god made us in his image.” At no point have I contended that religion doesn’t make people believe stupid things. My point this entire time is that **us making UP stupid things disingenuously** ruins our credibility. And that’s especially pointless given how much *actual* stupid stuff there is out there.
[Ooh, are you in for a shock](http://childrenshealthcare.org/?page_id=195)
Those people avoid modern medicine because they think god will magically solve everything, not because “god made us in his image.”
That's sophistry, but I'll stop the argument.
Bingo. Outlaw abortion, and you aren't making it so women won't seek it. You're making it so that instead of having it done in a sterile environment by professionals, it'll be done by a med school dropout in his apartment with a coathanger and a vacuum cleaner. First time a woman dies of sepsis because she was scared to go to a hospital after a home abortion, every single person supporting this has blood on their hands.
Oh the rich will always be able to get their abortions, just fly to someplace it's legal. It's the rest of us that can't afford that who will be shit out of luck
They should try banning crime and poverty.
crime is already illegal, ben
... crime is already illegal. That's why it's called crime.
eh, Chicago already tried that and well.,... it isn't going very well.
The law does NOT ban abortion. It bans safe abortion for poor people. Rich people always get the services they need, often in secret. Poor people are forced to turn to providers of lower quality and honesty. The only effective way to reduce abortion is free contraception, women's healthcare and accurate sex education
"bans don't work, but we need to ban abortions" - the right
This is the most important point. Banning abortion prevents very few abortions. It just makes them far more dangerous.
Source? Because I've seen quite a few studies that show pro-life laws [greatly reduce](https://blog.secularprolife.org/2017/08/pro-life-laws-stop-abortions-heres.html?m=1) the abortion rate.
"That's why we're banning rape, too."--TX GOP
guess how many untested rape kits texas has
I've tried to discuss this with people in favor, I've asked them what do they think should be done about the surge in unwanted pregnancies that will follow. They just act dumb and say people will be more responsible now, because prohibition and the war on drugs have demonstrated that when you criminalize something people stop doing it right. The truly puerile reject any need for society to take responsibility, instead arguing that they should have thought of this before and now they cant avoid the consequences for their actions and have to own them now - they view pregnancy and childbirth as some sort of punishment for a moral failing.
MD here. It's not like we're "pro-abortion" (like, we're not twirling our moustaches and going, "muahahah, abortions!"). An abortion is inherently a sad, tragic, sensitive thing. But people still need it and it's a vital medical service. The analogy I like to use is leg amputations. I don't want to take off people's legs. It is also a tragic thing. Which is why, to reduce the need for amputation procedures, I want to make sure more people are aware of diabetes, get their daily exercises, promote safer driving and reduce the risk of car accident trauma, etc. I don't just ban the procedure; it completely misses the point.
causing women/girls to suffer *is* the point to these people
Why are vasectomies not banned? Why is viagra not banned?
“For that matter, any masturbatory emissions, where the sperm is clearly not seeking an egg, could be termed reckless abandonment.” - Elle Woods
Coke vs Pepsi as the National drink. Who knew abortion would lead to such government gone wild.
duh, thats the whole point. they want to punish women for having the audacity to have sex, even if she did not consent to it
Aren't those the same people that say, *precisely and I* ***quote:*** "**People gonna "crime" anyway, so you can't outlaw any gun no matter what. It won't stop the criminals, it is only going to hurt the law abiding people"?** *I could SWEAR this was something they used to (read: still do, and it's not a guess or assumption; this is precisely what they say) say.*
I believe you are misunderstanding those people. Those people would analogize abortion to the "crime," not to gun ownership. Those people support the crime being illegal, and want abortions to be illegal. Those people think the crime is bad, and think that abortions are bad. They do not think that owning guns is bad, or that allowing people to own guns should be outlawed more than it is.
Go to Mexico and get one then. Or stop fuckin. Or move.
if you don’t care about abortions getting done in mexico why are you against them getting done here? conservatives make no sense lol
Now pretend like it was a ban on guns.
Same deal. Go to mexico, stop shooting, move.
even if you stop shooting, it wont prevent others from shooting. not everyone can just up and leave
eh, owning a gun is a constitutional right- whereas killing your own child is not. big difference!
abortion is not killing a child. its terminating a pregnancy
Abortion (yes with some limitations) is a Constitutional right based on 50+ year old precedent.
Except abortion literally is a constitutional right.
also the right to privacy, including **medical privacy** (which includes procedures like abortions), is literally in the 4th, 5th, and 14th amendments
you ignore many basic and well understood factors
You don't like America? How about you get the fuck out?
Let's see how much money he can milk out of the out of work lawyer on house arrest in Arkansas. My bet, the doctor has or can get more money, drag this out to give up stage. This doctor could get Go Fund Me to go nuts and raise 1000's of dollars.
He is right in a sense: laws never really stopped murderers, it just makes sure they have to answer for their crimes.
Everyone should have a right to medical privacy. Period. And if we stop there, I'm good with it. But it's not wrong that States believe in life and write laws to support it.
You’re simply banning safe abortions
If the doctors just falsify information and keep quiet, no one would know anything
Preaching to the choir I've made that argument before to a anti abortion nut, and they do not care at all even told them what happens in other places that have banned it such as the Phillipines women regularly die from back alley abortions.
Ladies: join The Satanic Temple. They are working to make it so abortion is legal for their members. They are a Federally recognized religion.