It's now easier to perform an abortion in the state of New York than to legally apply a tattoo.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It’s still a second degree felony to destroy a turtle egg.

Priorities are clear.

It’s a felony in NY to possess a firearm magazine that can hold 11 bullets.

But killing a unborn baby, nearly full term, that could live if it were delivered, simply “because I don’t wanna have this baby”, is perfectly legal.


It’s absolutely mind bending.

Name a single instance of a nearly full-term viable, healthy baby in the womb of a healthy woman with no medical emergency was aborted.

+1

I’d like to hear an example of this too. Otherwise it’s just fear-mongering. SOP for the GOP.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yes.

Because beyond being a mom, I am a person, and my own health and life has innate value.

This is part of why NY is a maker state, not a failed red state, by the by: equality for adults leads to better outcomes for all families and children over longer terms.

I'm 52.

no longer a practicing Catholic - but Italian . . . So there's a close tie btw the two worlds.

married late, had two kids in my late 30s, early 40s - healthy, no interventions

pro-choice to a degree, as I've supported many friends who had abortions - no judgment

But I did tell my husband with both deliveries that if he had to choose between me and the baby, that the baby would be saved. I'm no martyr; let's get that straight. But a baby has a lifetime ahead of him/her.

And that's your choice. But it's not the best choice for every family.

I grew up near a family who lost a mother, leaving behind 5 young children, and her death became a snowball effect that led to one tragedy after another. Those kids desperately needed their mother, who had kept the family stable and sound, and losing her forever ruined their lives (2 of which were needlessly cut short due to self-destructive behavior). Not saying every family goes to hell after a parent dies. But a decision to sacrifice a mother shouldn't be up to the state.

I could not agree more. Also, mothers should be able to chose whether to have additional children, based on their ability to care for the kids they already have.

Abortions should not be Birth Control 2.0. THAT'S a slippery slope, folks.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It’s still a second degree felony to destroy a turtle egg.

Priorities are clear.

It’s a felony in NY to possess a firearm magazine that can hold 11 bullets.

But killing a unborn baby, nearly full term, that could live if it were delivered, simply “because I don’t wanna have this baby”, is perfectly legal.


It’s absolutely mind bending.

Truth.

Name an instance.

You know it’s clear you’re male, right?

Liar. I choose not to kill the human life within me, in spite of diar circumstances at the time.

Choose life. More and more people are finding themselves infertile when they finally decide they want a child. My heart goes out to them.

What does infertility have to do with this?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Wild. Let's see what happens when the first pregnant woman is murdered. Democrats rejected the Republicans attempt to strengthen the rights of the unborn in crimes.

It truly is playing God.

The pregnant woman and only the pregnant woman gets to decide whether to have an abortion.

If anyone else decides for her and harms her embryo/fetus, it’s a crime.

I don’t see the problem.

Nope.

Can't eat your cake and have it, too. Sorry.

Actually you can.

Having sex with a woman isn't a crime. Unless of course, she declines your advances and you do it against her will. Then it's rape.

See how that works? The person who has the uterus or vagina or what have you gets to decide what does or does not happen to it (or whatever goes inside or stays inside).

Are there any reason why she cannot decide prior to having sex (other than diminished brain capacity)?

I think we’ve lost the plot here. WTF are you talking about?

I think PP was asking if there are any reason the person who have the uterus or vagina cannot decide what happen to it prior to engage in activity that will likely result in pregnancy.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yes.

Because beyond being a mom, I am a person, and my own health and life has innate value.

This is part of why NY is a maker state, not a failed red state, by the by: equality for adults leads to better outcomes for all families and children over longer terms.

I'm 52.

no longer a practicing Catholic - but Italian . . . So there's a close tie btw the two worlds.

married late, had two kids in my late 30s, early 40s - healthy, no interventions

pro-choice to a degree, as I've supported many friends who had abortions - no judgment

But I did tell my husband with both deliveries that if he had to choose between me and the baby, that the baby would be saved. I'm no martyr; let's get that straight. But a baby has a lifetime ahead of him/her.

And I told my husband and OB to pick me. Because I, too, have a whole life in front of me and for two of three births, kids and home for whom to care for.

again - wonderful for you

I've already shared my view. Adding another line just for the purpose of tit for tat is getting old and boring.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:And yes, these cases aren't common. Neither is very late stage abortion -- but these problems exist, whether or not you have heard of them, unfortunately, ad that means they need to be accounted for in the law.

What exactly are the government stats for late term abortions?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It’s still a second degree felony to destroy a turtle egg.

Priorities are clear.

It’s a felony in NY to possess a firearm magazine that can hold 11 bullets.

But killing a unborn baby, nearly full term, that could live if it were delivered, simply “because I don’t wanna have this baby”, is perfectly legal.


It’s absolutely mind bending.

Truth.

Name an instance.

You know it’s clear you’re male, right?

Liar. I choose not to kill the human life within me, in spite of diar circumstances at the time.

Choose life. More and more people are finding themselves infertile when they finally decide they want a child. My heart goes out to them.

Most of the people who are infertile are infertile for reason.
Most of the people who chose to abort the child made a good choice because they would never be capable to love that child even if she carry it to a full term.

[Anonymous]

CNN article
https://www.cnn.com/2019/01/23/health/new-york-abortion-measures-trnd/index.html

"We need to be honest with the public and say that this bill does not simply codify Roe v. Wade... what this bill does is expand abortion up to birth and the third trimester," State Assembly Rep. Nicole Malliotakis argued before the state legislature. She criticized the part of the law allowing medical professionals other than doctors to perform abortions, saying Roe v. Wade requires a licensed physician perform the procedure. But this law removes that requirement and allows physician assistants, nurse practitioners and midwives to perform abortions.

She also argued that removing abortion from the criminal code would mean that if a fetus died as the result of an assault on a woman there would be no prosecution. "Being assaulted and losing your baby is not a woman's choice," she said.

and if both the baby and mother die b/c the person performing the procedure was done by. . . let's say a nurse practitioner? I'm sure malpractice lawyers are salivating over this change.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It’s still a second degree felony to destroy a turtle egg.

Priorities are clear.

It’s a felony in NY to possess a firearm magazine that can hold 11 bullets.

But killing a unborn baby, nearly full term, that could live if it were delivered, simply “because I don’t wanna have this baby”, is perfectly legal.


It’s absolutely mind bending.

Truth.

Name an instance.

You know it’s clear you’re male, right?

Liar. I choose not to kill the human life within me, in spite of diar circumstances at the time.

Choose life. More and more people are finding themselves infertile when they finally decide they want a child. My heart goes out to them.

Most of the people who are infertile are infertile for reason.
Most of the people who chose to abort the child made a good choice because they would never be capable to love that child even if she carry it to a full term.

So b/c I cannot LOVE my baby, I will abort it - RATHER THAN allowing my baby to be adopted by a person who faces infertility issues.

I see logic isn't a strength of yours . . .

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
I'm still waiting for a pro-life person to explain why NY's law about abortion being ok if the mother's health is at risk or the fetus is not viable is so much worse than WV, AK, MS abortion law that allows for full term abortions even when the mother's life is not at risk. No prolifer has addressed my numerous post about this. Why is that?

Still waiting for prolifers to address this question. If you can't.. then just shut it about it NY. You don't have a leg to stand on here.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It’s still a second degree felony to destroy a turtle egg.

Priorities are clear.

It’s a felony in NY to possess a firearm magazine that can hold 11 bullets.

But killing a unborn baby, nearly full term, that could live if it were delivered, simply “because I don’t wanna have this baby”, is perfectly legal.


It’s absolutely mind bending.

Truth.

Name an instance.

You know it’s clear you’re male, right?

Liar. I choose not to kill the human life within me, in spite of diar circumstances at the time.

Choose life. More and more people are finding themselves infertile when they finally decide they want a child. My heart goes out to them.

Most of the people who are infertile are infertile for reason.
Most of the people who chose to abort the child made a good choice because they would never be capable to love that child even if she carry it to a full term.

It's usually almost impossible to be sure exactly why the fertility rates are skyrocketing, isn't it? For that reason, previous abortion history cannot be excluded. After all, abortions DO mess with your reproductive organs. Perhaps Mother Nature doesn't much like elective interference.

Eco-systems can be highly sensitive.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yes.

Because beyond being a mom, I am a person, and my own health and life has innate value.

This is part of why NY is a maker state, not a failed red state, by the by: equality for adults leads to better outcomes for all families and children over longer terms.

I'm 52.

no longer a practicing Catholic - but Italian . . . So there's a close tie btw the two worlds.

married late, had two kids in my late 30s, early 40s - healthy, no interventions

pro-choice to a degree, as I've supported many friends who had abortions - no judgment

But I did tell my husband with both deliveries that if he had to choose between me and the baby, that the baby would be saved. I'm no martyr; let's get that straight. But a baby has a lifetime ahead of him/her.

And that's your choice. But it's not the best choice for every family.

I grew up near a family who lost a mother, leaving behind 5 young children, and her death became a snowball effect that led to one tragedy after another. Those kids desperately needed their mother, who had kept the family stable and sound, and losing her forever ruined their lives (2 of which were needlessly cut short due to self-destructive behavior). Not saying every family goes to hell after a parent dies. But a decision to sacrifice a mother shouldn't be up to the state.

I could not agree more. Also, mothers should be able to chose whether to have additional children, based on their ability to care for the kids they already have.

Abortions should not be Birth Control 2.0. THAT'S a slippery slope, folks.

um ... abortion is Birth Control 2.0. that was the point of my comment.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:CNN article
https://www.cnn.com/2019/01/23/health/new-york-abortion-measures-trnd/index.html

"We need to be honest with the public and say that this bill does not simply codify Roe v. Wade... what this bill does is expand abortion up to birth and the third trimester," State Assembly Rep. Nicole Malliotakis argued before the state legislature. She criticized the part of the law allowing medical professionals other than doctors to perform abortions, saying Roe v. Wade requires a licensed physician perform the procedure. But this law removes that requirement and allows physician assistants, nurse practitioners and midwives to perform abortions.

She also argued that removing abortion from the criminal code would mean that if a fetus died as the result of an assault on a woman there would be no prosecution. "Being assaulted and losing your baby is not a woman's choice," she said.

and if both the baby and mother die b/c the person performing the procedure was done by. . . let's say a nurse practitioner? I'm sure malpractice lawyers are salivating over this change.

a midwife **delivered my baby.*** they can damn well perform abortions particularly medication abortions.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yes.

Because beyond being a mom, I am a person, and my own health and life has innate value.

This is part of why NY is a maker state, not a failed red state, by the by: equality for adults leads to better outcomes for all families and children over longer terms.

I'm 52.

no longer a practicing Catholic - but Italian . . . So there's a close tie btw the two worlds.

married late, had two kids in my late 30s, early 40s - healthy, no interventions

pro-choice to a degree, as I've supported many friends who had abortions - no judgment

But I did tell my husband with both deliveries that if he had to choose between me and the baby, that the baby would be saved. I'm no martyr; let's get that straight. But a baby has a lifetime ahead of him/her.

And that's your choice. But it's not the best choice for every family.

I grew up near a family who lost a mother, leaving behind 5 young children, and her death became a snowball effect that led to one tragedy after another. Those kids desperately needed their mother, who had kept the family stable and sound, and losing her forever ruined their lives (2 of which were needlessly cut short due to self-destructive behavior). Not saying every family goes to hell after a parent dies. But a decision to sacrifice a mother shouldn't be up to the state.

I could not agree more. Also, mothers should be able to chose whether to have additional children, based on their ability to care for the kids they already have.

Abortions should not be Birth Control 2.0. THAT'S a slippery slope, folks.

um ... abortion is Birth Control 2.0. that was the point of my comment.

clueless wonder - Abortions should NOT BE birth control - period!

2.0 is a better version, yes? Abortions and BC are not in the same category. BC is PROactive; abortions are REactive.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It’s still a second degree felony to destroy a turtle egg.

Priorities are clear.

It’s a felony in NY to possess a firearm magazine that can hold 11 bullets.

But killing a unborn baby, nearly full term, that could live if it were delivered, simply “because I don’t wanna have this baby”, is perfectly legal.


It’s absolutely mind bending.

Truth.

Name an instance.

You know it’s clear you’re male, right?

Liar. I choose not to kill the human life within me, in spite of diar circumstances at the time.

Choose life. More and more people are finding themselves infertile when they finally decide they want a child. My heart goes out to them.

Most of the people who are infertile are infertile for reason.
Most of the people who chose to abort the child made a good choice because they would never be capable to love that child even if she carry it to a full term.

It's usually almost impossible to be sure exactly why the fertility rates are skyrocketing, isn't it? For that reason, previous abortion history cannot be excluded. After all, abortions DO mess with your reproductive organs. Perhaps Mother Nature doesn't much like elective interference.

Eco-systems can be highly sensitive.

Is infertility increasing? Fertility rates are going down because people are chosing to have fewer kids. Plus - your point makes no sense. Women have abortions because they don't want to have the baby. Even if there is some very remote increase in infertility risk, that's not likely to change their decision.