Ohio heartbeat law

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Just leave it to the states to decide if abortion should be legal.

Yeah, no. That's not what we're going to do.

It may not be what you want to do but after a couple of conservative Supreme Court picks you will likely see things move in that direction.

Remember, as Obama said, elections have consequences.

He was right. He is still right.
But you have to admit, it's a platitude.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If inside my body is less private than inside my house (where government can not search without a warrant), I don't know what is privacy anymore and where government intrusion can stop.

If there's a heart beating within your body, in addition to your own beating heart, it's not just YOUR body.

Yes, it is. Legally, ethically, and morally.

Legally, yes. Ethically and morally would depend on the ethics and morals of the person who is pregnant with the baby and its beating heart.

Like the oxygen masks on airplanes, a pregnant woman's first and greatest responsibility is to herself. After that, it is up to her how much care she wishes to give the other beating heart.

Yes, but I'm sure you've heard the rest of the flight attendant's message...first put mask on your own face so that you can then breathe and help those who are dependent on you. That's where a mother's ethics and morals come into the picture.

And many women weigh the ethics and morals of caring for their already existing children and decide that outweighs growing another child.

And many women weigh the ethics and morals of caring for their already existing children and take steps--as much as is humanly possible--to not get pregnant again.

And yet, being human, pregnancy still happens.

Yes, and I know a wonderful young couple who couldn't have children of their own. They've just adopted the most precious little girl who is now loved and adored, and she gives them such joy! They are only appreciative and supportive of the college girl who decided to not have an abortion.

I know many really wonderful people whose lives have been changed so much for the better by adoption. I do not know a single one of them who believes that it is ethical to force a woman to carry a pregnancy to term so that the baby can be adopted by a family who wants a child but isn't able to conceive one. Every one of my friends who have adopted are grateful that their child's birth mother did not choose abortion, but they would never, ever have forced a pregnancy on someone who was unwilling to be pregnant.

PP here. I agree and never suggested otherwise.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If inside my body is less private than inside my house (where government can not search without a warrant), I don't know what is privacy anymore and where government intrusion can stop.

If there's a heart beating within your body, in addition to your own beating heart, it's not just YOUR body.

Yes, it is. Legally, ethically, and morally.

Legally, yes. Ethically and morally would depend on the ethics and morals of the person who is pregnant with the baby and its beating heart.

Like the oxygen masks on airplanes, a pregnant woman's first and greatest responsibility is to herself. After that, it is up to her how much care she wishes to give the other beating heart.

Yes, but I'm sure you've heard the rest of the flight attendant's message...first put mask on your own face so that you can then breathe and help those who are dependent on you. That's where a mother's ethics and morals come into the picture.

And many women weigh the ethics and morals of caring for their already existing children and decide that outweighs growing another child.

And many women weigh the ethics and morals of caring for their already existing children and take steps--as much as is humanly possible--to not get pregnant again.

And yet, being human, pregnancy still happens.

Yes, and I know a wonderful young couple who couldn't have children of their own. They've just adopted the most precious little girl who is now loved and adored, and she gives them such joy! They are only appreciative and supportive of the college girl who decided to not have an abortion.

I could never give up a baby for adoption. I'd much rather abort a 4 week old embryo than that. Remember that this is a personal choice.

I'm well aware it's a personal choice and would prefer to think that a child I conceived was adopted rather than suctioned out and tossed with the garbage.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If inside my body is less private than inside my house (where government can not search without a warrant), I don't know what is privacy anymore and where government intrusion can stop.

If there's a heart beating within your body, in addition to your own beating heart, it's not just YOUR body.

Yes, it is. Legally, ethically, and morally.

Legally, yes. Ethically and morally would depend on the ethics and morals of the person who is pregnant with the baby and its beating heart.

Like the oxygen masks on airplanes, a pregnant woman's first and greatest responsibility is to herself. After that, it is up to her how much care she wishes to give the other beating heart.

Yes, but I'm sure you've heard the rest of the flight attendant's message...first put mask on your own face so that you can then breathe and help those who are dependent on you. That's where a mother's ethics and morals come into the picture.

And many women weigh the ethics and morals of caring for their already existing children and decide that outweighs growing another child.

And many women weigh the ethics and morals of caring for their already existing children and take steps--as much as is humanly possible--to not get pregnant again.

And what about girls whose puritanical parents teach only about abstinence (and oppose teaching sex Ed in schools) or victims of rape and incest? Too bad for them I guess. God bless the American Taliban.

Perhaps you overlooked the part about "as much as is humanly possible." No Taliban belief system here.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Just leave it to the states to decide if abortion should be legal.

Yeah, no. That's not what we're going to do.

It may not be what you want to do but after a couple of conservative Supreme Court picks you will likely see things move in that direction.

Remember, as Obama said, elections have consequences.

I love that people think that anti-choice and anti-birth control laws, if enacted broadly and draconianly as the goobers want, would be welcomed broadly. It would only take a few middle class women dying of sepsis for the country to throw the bums out. Women are not brood mares. They're not Eve.

I don't have as much faith in the public as you do, unfortunately. Anti-choice people don't care about women's lives and they wouldn't care about a few dead ones - they'd just see that as collateral damage. Too bad, so sad. I know, because I was taught it in religious school, that it was better for women to die than to end a pregnancy. Disgusting people.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Just leave it to the states to decide if abortion should be legal.

Yeah, no. That's not what we're going to do.

It may not be what you want to do but after a couple of conservative Supreme Court picks you will likely see things move in that direction.

Remember, as Obama said, elections have consequences.

I love that people think that anti-choice and anti-birth control laws, if enacted broadly and draconianly as the goobers want, would be welcomed broadly. It would only take a few middle class women dying of sepsis for the country to throw the bums out. Women are not brood mares. They're not Eve.

I don't have as much faith in the public as you do, unfortunately. Anti-choice people don't care about women's lives and they wouldn't care about a few dead ones - they'd just see that as collateral damage. Too bad, so sad. I know, because I was taught it in religious school, that it was better for women to die than to end a pregnancy. Disgusting people.

Anti choice? No. Anti-abortion on demand.

[Anonymous]

Women deserve better.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Just leave it to the states to decide if abortion should be legal.

Yeah, no. That's not what we're going to do.

It may not be what you want to do but after a couple of conservative Supreme Court picks you will likely see things move in that direction.

Remember, as Obama said, elections have consequences.

I love that people think that anti-choice and anti-birth control laws, if enacted broadly and draconianly as the goobers want, would be welcomed broadly. It would only take a few middle class women dying of sepsis for the country to throw the bums out. Women are not brood mares. They're not Eve.

So what did the Democrats do that caused the people to throw them out of the presidency, control of the Senate, control of the House, loss of 18 governorships since 2008, loss of over 900 seats in the state legislatures?

It had to be more than mere sepsis for this magnitude of rejection!

I don't know, maybe what every party does when holding the Presidency for 8 years?
Even in politics, it's good not to confuse weather with climate.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Just leave it to the states to decide if abortion should be legal.

Yeah, no. That's not what we're going to do.

It may not be what you want to do but after a couple of conservative Supreme Court picks you will likely see things move in that direction.

Remember, as Obama said, elections have consequences.

I love that people think that anti-choice and anti-birth control laws, if enacted broadly and draconianly as the goobers want, would be welcomed broadly. It would only take a few middle class women dying of sepsis for the country to throw the bums out. Women are not brood mares. They're not Eve.

I don't have as much faith in the public as you do, unfortunately. Anti-choice people don't care about women's lives and they wouldn't care about a few dead ones - they'd just see that as collateral damage. Too bad, so sad. I know, because I was taught it in religious school, that it was better for women to die than to end a pregnancy. Disgusting people.

Anti choice? No. Anti-abortion on demand.

Well, you can't have women demanding the right to govern their own body, that's for sure. Put them back in their place where they can ask for permission from men to do something with their bodies.

[Anonymous]

The same it's true for all other measures of power, if you want to read, it's here:

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2014/09/18/measuring_the_strength_of_the_two_parties.html

And here:
http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2014/12/presidents-bad-for-their-parties-113241

Both written way before current election, so can't accuse me of sour grapes.

[Anonymous]

How many have been aborted so far?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
Women deserve better.

They deserve to be educated, to have access to effective birth control, and to make good, healthy choices about when to have sex.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Just leave it to the states to decide if abortion should be legal.

Yeah, no. That's not what we're going to do.

It may not be what you want to do but after a couple of conservative Supreme Court picks you will likely see things move in that direction.

Remember, as Obama said, elections have consequences.

I love that people think that anti-choice and anti-birth control laws, if enacted broadly and draconianly as the goobers want, would be welcomed broadly. It would only take a few middle class women dying of sepsis for the country to throw the bums out. Women are not brood mares. They're not Eve.

I don't have as much faith in the public as you do, unfortunately. Anti-choice people don't care about women's lives and they wouldn't care about a few dead ones - they'd just see that as collateral damage. Too bad, so sad. I know, because I was taught it in religious school, that it was better for women to die than to end a pregnancy. Disgusting people.

Anti choice? No. Anti-abortion on demand.

Well, you can't have women demanding the right to govern their own body, that's for sure. Put them back in their place where they can ask for permission from men to do something with their bodies.

In the USA, most women don't have to ask men for permission to have safe sex and effective birth control. Make smart decisions about when to get pregnant.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Just leave it to the states to decide if abortion should be legal.

Yeah, no. That's not what we're going to do.

It may not be what you want to do but after a couple of conservative Supreme Court picks you will likely see things move in that direction.

Remember, as Obama said, elections have consequences.

I love that people think that anti-choice and anti-birth control laws, if enacted broadly and draconianly as the goobers want, would be welcomed broadly. It would only take a few middle class women dying of sepsis for the country to throw the bums out. Women are not brood mares. They're not Eve.

I don't have as much faith in the public as you do, unfortunately. Anti-choice people don't care about women's lives and they wouldn't care about a few dead ones - they'd just see that as collateral damage. Too bad, so sad. I know, because I was taught it in religious school, that it was better for women to die than to end a pregnancy. Disgusting people.

Anti choice? No. Anti-abortion on demand.

Well, you can't have women demanding the right to govern their own body, that's for sure. Put them back in their place where they can ask for permission from men to do something with their bodies.

In the USA, most women don't have to ask men for permission to have safe sex and effective birth control. Make smart decisions about when to get pregnant.

I think Muslim girls still need to ask their fathers.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Just leave it to the states to decide if abortion should be legal.

Yeah, no. That's not what we're going to do.

It may not be what you want to do but after a couple of conservative Supreme Court picks you will likely see things move in that direction.

Remember, as Obama said, elections have consequences.

I love that people think that anti-choice and anti-birth control laws, if enacted broadly and draconianly as the goobers want, would be welcomed broadly. It would only take a few middle class women dying of sepsis for the country to throw the bums out. Women are not brood mares. They're not Eve.

I don't have as much faith in the public as you do, unfortunately. Anti-choice people don't care about women's lives and they wouldn't care about a few dead ones - they'd just see that as collateral damage. Too bad, so sad. I know, because I was taught it in religious school, that it was better for women to die than to end a pregnancy. Disgusting people.

Anti choice? No. Anti-abortion on demand.

Well, you can't have women demanding the right to govern their own body, that's for sure. Put them back in their place where they can ask for permission from men to do something with their bodies.

In the USA, most women don't have to ask men for permission to have safe sex and effective birth control. Make smart decisions about when to get pregnant.

If anti-choice men writing the legislation have their way, many women won't have easy access to birth control (you know, otherwise known as "abortifacients") and they certainly won't have access to safe abortions. Because men know best especially when it comes to keeping women in their place.