Lindsey Graham to introduce federal abortion ban

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:so...not states rights....

And Graham was one of the biggest critics of Trump...until he wasn't.

This is an actual photo of Lindsay Graham when the US Senate is in session:

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Maybe this has been explained upthread, but isn't he lying about Europe? Don't many EU countries allow numerous exceptions beyond 15 weeks? And he claims his bill has exceptions but that's bull?

Actually he's 100% right about Europe. Very few exceptions beyond 15 weeks. He's exposing Democrats as fraudsters, to say the least.

Very few except the reasons that most women get abortions after 15 weeks: fetal abnormality, the health of the mother (health, not life), underage pregnancy, etc. Now the most common reason— lack of access— is addressed by easy access to publicly funded abortion before 15 weeks. Where is the Republican proposal to model Europe in that respect?

Obamacare would have been a great opportunity to model things after Europe (15 weeks, easy access). Too bad.

Are you advocating a full-scale adoption of European model or not? You can’t pick and choose. You want 15 weeks, it’s 15-16 weeks with public funding and guaranteed access. After that it’s available to protect the health of the mother, in cases of fetal abnormality, for any underage pregnancy. If you’re not advocating for all of that, you’re just as much a hypocrite as Graham and the Europe point is irrelevant.

You should check your head and see if there's a brain inside.

Yes, I'd be happy with the "European model", and indicated that it was a missed opportunity to not try that when Obamacare was introduced. I quess activists wouldn't have liked the 15-weeks, but Obama could/ should have sold that as part of the deal.

Then why aren’t all you “moderate” republicans out there advocating for public funding and a legal end to restrictions before 15 weeks, with broad exemptions in all of the categories for which women actually seek abortion after 15 weeks? What a mystery that is.

I have been advocating for this all along. It is the moderate Dems who are blocking this!!! Essentially the Dems are responsible for the current abortion bans in some states. Congress could have acted and still could act but the Dems are playing politics.

It's called the filibuster. Nothing is getting passed until that hurdle is removed or are you that dense?

The so called ban that Lindsey is proposing is very close to the compromise that the previous posters were advocating. Admittedly it will be harder to get Rs to sign on to the 15 week compromise nationwide now that some states have successfully enacted even stricter bans. I have no doubt that they would have almost all agreed to this proposal if it was brought up for consideration when it was leaked that the court was going to overturn Roe.

How is it close to any sort of compromise? It allows bans at any time, and requires a ban at 15 weeks where there’s currently no ban in some places. It’s taking away choice from more people, and not giving anything to anyone else. Do you know what compromise means?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Maybe this has been explained upthread, but isn't he lying about Europe? Don't many EU countries allow numerous exceptions beyond 15 weeks? And he claims his bill has exceptions but that's bull?

Actually he's 100% right about Europe. Very few exceptions beyond 15 weeks. He's exposing Democrats as fraudsters, to say the least.

Very few except the reasons that most women get abortions after 15 weeks: fetal abnormality, the health of the mother (health, not life), underage pregnancy, etc. Now the most common reason— lack of access— is addressed by easy access to publicly funded abortion before 15 weeks. Where is the Republican proposal to model Europe in that respect?

Obamacare would have been a great opportunity to model things after Europe (15 weeks, easy access). Too bad.

Are you advocating a full-scale adoption of European model or not? You can’t pick and choose. You want 15 weeks, it’s 15-16 weeks with public funding and guaranteed access. After that it’s available to protect the health of the mother, in cases of fetal abnormality, for any underage pregnancy. If you’re not advocating for all of that, you’re just as much a hypocrite as Graham and the Europe point is irrelevant.

It's Republican "compromise"! Agree with me or never get anything passed! It's the same "compromise" as my 6-year old uses on his siblings.


You should check your head and see if there's a brain inside.

Yes, I'd be happy with the "European model", and indicated that it was a missed opportunity to not try that when Obamacare was introduced. I quess activists wouldn't have liked the 15-weeks, but Obama could/ should have sold that as part of the deal.

Then why aren’t all you “moderate” republicans out there advocating for public funding and a legal end to restrictions before 15 weeks, with broad exemptions in all of the categories for which women actually seek abortion after 15 weeks? What a mystery that is.

I have been advocating for this all along. It is the moderate Dems who are blocking this!!! Essentially the Dems are responsible for the current abortion bans in some states. Congress could have acted and still could act but the Dems are playing politics.

It's called the filibuster. Nothing is getting passed until that hurdle is removed or are you that dense?

The so called ban that Lindsey is proposing is very close to the compromise that the previous posters were advocating. Admittedly it will be harder to get Rs to sign on to the 15 week compromise nationwide now that some states have successfully enacted even stricter bans. I have no doubt that they would have almost all agreed to this proposal if it was brought up for consideration when it was leaked that the court was going to overturn Roe.

How is it close to any sort of compromise? It allows bans at any time, and requires a ban at 15 weeks where there’s currently no ban in some places. It’s taking away choice from more people, and not giving anything to anyone else. Do you know what compromise means?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Maybe this has been explained upthread, but isn't he lying about Europe? Don't many EU countries allow numerous exceptions beyond 15 weeks? And he claims his bill has exceptions but that's bull?

Actually he's 100% right about Europe. Very few exceptions beyond 15 weeks. He's exposing Democrats as fraudsters, to say the least.

Very few except the reasons that most women get abortions after 15 weeks: fetal abnormality, the health of the mother (health, not life), underage pregnancy, etc. Now the most common reason— lack of access— is addressed by easy access to publicly funded abortion before 15 weeks. Where is the Republican proposal to model Europe in that respect?

Obamacare would have been a great opportunity to model things after Europe (15 weeks, easy access). Too bad.

Are you advocating a full-scale adoption of European model or not? You can’t pick and choose. You want 15 weeks, it’s 15-16 weeks with public funding and guaranteed access. After that it’s available to protect the health of the mother, in cases of fetal abnormality, for any underage pregnancy. If you’re not advocating for all of that, you’re just as much a hypocrite as Graham and the Europe point is irrelevant.

You should check your head and see if there's a brain inside.

Yes, I'd be happy with the "European model", and indicated that it was a missed opportunity to not try that when Obamacare was introduced. I quess activists wouldn't have liked the 15-weeks, but Obama could/ should have sold that as part of the deal.

Then why aren’t all you “moderate” republicans out there advocating for public funding and a legal end to restrictions before 15 weeks, with broad exemptions in all of the categories for which women actually seek abortion after 15 weeks? What a mystery that is.

I have been advocating for this all along. It is the moderate Dems who are blocking this!!! Essentially the Dems are responsible for the current abortion bans in some states. Congress could have acted and still could act but the Dems are playing politics.

It's called the filibuster. Nothing is getting passed until that hurdle is removed or are you that dense?

The so called ban that Lindsey is proposing is very close to the compromise that the previous posters were advocating. Admittedly it will be harder to get Rs to sign on to the 15 week compromise nationwide now that some states have successfully enacted even stricter bans. I have no doubt that they would have almost all agreed to this proposal if it was brought up for consideration when it was leaked that the court was going to overturn Roe.

It’s not “so called”. It’s IS A BAN.
And most of the states that have harsh restrictions had trigger laws ( bans) on the books.
Are you a liar or an idiot?
Nevermind, you are clearly both.
Have the day you deserve.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Maybe this has been explained upthread, but isn't he lying about Europe? Don't many EU countries allow numerous exceptions beyond 15 weeks? And he claims his bill has exceptions but that's bull?

Actually he's 100% right about Europe. Very few exceptions beyond 15 weeks. He's exposing Democrats as fraudsters, to say the least.

Very few except the reasons that most women get abortions after 15 weeks: fetal abnormality, the health of the mother (health, not life), underage pregnancy, etc. Now the most common reason— lack of access— is addressed by easy access to publicly funded abortion before 15 weeks. Where is the Republican proposal to model Europe in that respect?

Obamacare would have been a great opportunity to model things after Europe (15 weeks, easy access). Too bad.

Are you advocating a full-scale adoption of European model or not? You can’t pick and choose. You want 15 weeks, it’s 15-16 weeks with public funding and guaranteed access. After that it’s available to protect the health of the mother, in cases of fetal abnormality, for any underage pregnancy. If you’re not advocating for all of that, you’re just as much a hypocrite as Graham and the Europe point is irrelevant.

You should check your head and see if there's a brain inside.

Yes, I'd be happy with the "European model", and indicated that it was a missed opportunity to not try that when Obamacare was introduced. I quess activists wouldn't have liked the 15-weeks, but Obama could/ should have sold that as part of the deal.

Then why aren’t all you “moderate” republicans out there advocating for public funding and a legal end to restrictions before 15 weeks, with broad exemptions in all of the categories for which women actually seek abortion after 15 weeks? What a mystery that is.

I have been advocating for this all along. It is the moderate Dems who are blocking this!!! Essentially the Dems are responsible for the current abortion bans in some states. Congress could have acted and still could act but the Dems are playing politics.

No you haven’t. You’re a forced birther with a mouth full of car. You all want women in the home, powerless, voteless. You want birth control gone and men in charge. A 15 week ban is moronic.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Maybe this has been explained upthread, but isn't he lying about Europe? Don't many EU countries allow numerous exceptions beyond 15 weeks? And he claims his bill has exceptions but that's bull?

Actually he's 100% right about Europe. Very few exceptions beyond 15 weeks. He's exposing Democrats as fraudsters, to say the least.

Very few except the reasons that most women get abortions after 15 weeks: fetal abnormality, the health of the mother (health, not life), underage pregnancy, etc. Now the most common reason— lack of access— is addressed by easy access to publicly funded abortion before 15 weeks. Where is the Republican proposal to model Europe in that respect?

Obamacare would have been a great opportunity to model things after Europe (15 weeks, easy access). Too bad.

Are you advocating a full-scale adoption of European model or not? You can’t pick and choose. You want 15 weeks, it’s 15-16 weeks with public funding and guaranteed access. After that it’s available to protect the health of the mother, in cases of fetal abnormality, for any underage pregnancy. If you’re not advocating for all of that, you’re just as much a hypocrite as Graham and the Europe point is irrelevant.

You should check your head and see if there's a brain inside.

Yes, I'd be happy with the "European model", and indicated that it was a missed opportunity to not try that when Obamacare was introduced. I quess activists wouldn't have liked the 15-weeks, but Obama could/ should have sold that as part of the deal.

Then why aren’t all you “moderate” republicans out there advocating for public funding and a legal end to restrictions before 15 weeks, with broad exemptions in all of the categories for which women actually seek abortion after 15 weeks? What a mystery that is.

I have been advocating for this all along. It is the moderate Dems who are blocking this!!! Essentially the Dems are responsible for the current abortion bans in some states. Congress could have acted and still could act but the Dems are playing politics.

Show me a single Republican proposal for public funding of abortion. A single one. I’ll wait.

[Anonymous]

I live in Ohio, and I can assure everyone that democrats are NOT responsible for our heartbeat ban that forces children to give birth.

[Anonymous]

Please just report the troll who keeps posting the same unresponsive posts.
They aren’t here to discuss anything.

[Anonymous]

Lindsey is safe from a campaign for a few years. I think he was nominated to introduce this draconian bill in a last-ditch effort to win the mid-terms. Dr. Oz is polling as losing and he's walking back Lindsey Graham's bill as an effort to seem moderate. I expect many more GOP House candidates will do the same. It's a massive, cynical fraud. I'm not saying we shouldn't vote like our freedom depends on it, because it does.

https://www.cnbc.com/2022/09/16/lindsey-graham-abortion-ban-bill-splits-gop-on-midterm-message.html

[Anonymous]

It is a ban.

Full stop. Full Ban.

They are not stopping at banning abortions if you believe that you are an idoit.

They are coming for you jobs, ladies. You see "family men need them more" Gov Kemp.

Yeah they hate women and they are coming for all of our rights every single one.

You want to own property, have credit cards in your name. HAHAHAHAHA Republicans win bye.....

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I live in Ohio, and I can assure everyone that democrats are NOT responsible for our heartbeat ban that forces children to give birth.

I’m assuming this is in response to a forced birther troll, but if not: no one blames the Democrats for any of the forced birther crap. The Democrats have been the ones trying to hold the world together as the GOP tries to rip it apart.

[Anonymous]

According to the CDC, 92.7% of abortions in 2019 occurred prior to 13 weeks. (https://www.cdc.gov/reproductivehealth/data_stats/abortion.htm)

What percentage of those abortions do you think were "because I don't want to have a baby"? Probably the vast majority, right?

So a 15-week ban will not significantly reduce abortions of convenience (which is what Lindsey and his ilk are supposedly trying to do). Instead, it will:

(1) force women to carry unviable pregnancies to term -- increasing dramatically the number of children who are born dead, die soon after birth, or live with disabilities that require expensive care.

(2) force young girls to carry pregnancies to term because they did not know they were pregnant (too young to understand their own bodies or haven't even started a predictable menstrual cycle) or were too afraid to tell anyone they had stopped menstrating and/or had been sexually abused/raped.

(3) encourage more states to pass even more stringent restrictions.

This isn't about "life." It's about punishing women.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:According to the CDC, 92.7% of abortions in 2019 occurred prior to 13 weeks. (https://www.cdc.gov/reproductivehealth/data_stats/abortion.htm)

What percentage of those abortions do you think were "because I don't want to have a baby"? Probably the vast majority, right?

So a 15-week ban will not significantly reduce abortions of convenience (which is what Lindsey and his ilk are supposedly trying to do). Instead, it will:

(1) force women to carry unviable pregnancies to term -- increasing dramatically the number of children who are born dead, die soon after birth, or live with disabilities that require expensive care.

(2) force young girls to carry pregnancies to term because they did not know they were pregnant (too young to understand their own bodies or haven't even started a predictable menstrual cycle) or were too afraid to tell anyone they had stopped menstrating and/or had been sexually abused/raped.

(3) encourage more states to pass even more stringent restrictions.

This isn't about "life." It's about punishing women.

Pete Buttigieg had an excellent observation in a Fox News interview. Chris Wallace was asking him about the approximately 6,000 third trimester abortions performed in the U.S. annually:

Wallace wanted to clarify that Buttigieg would be okay with late-term abortion and pointed out that there are more than 6000 women who get third trimester abortions each year.

"That's right," responded Buttiegieg, "representing one percent of cases. So let's put ourselves in the shoes of a woman in that situation. If it's that late in your pregnancy, then almost by definition, you've been expecting to carry it to term. We're talking about women who have perhaps chosen a name. Women who have purchased a crib, families that then get the most devastating medical news of their lifetime, something about the health or the life of the mother or viability of the pregnancy that forces them to make an impossible, unthinkable choice. And the bottom line is as horrible as that choice is, that woman, that family may seek spiritual guidance, they may seek medical guidance, but that decision is not going to be made any better, medically or morally, because the government is dictating how that decision should be made."

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It is a ban.

Full stop. Full Ban.

They are not stopping at banning abortions if you believe that you are an idoit.

They are coming for you jobs, ladies. You see "family men need them more" Gov Kemp.

Yeah they hate women and they are coming for all of our rights every single one.

You want to own property, have credit cards in your name. HAHAHAHAHA Republicans win bye.....

Roll your eyes at this PP if you must, but this Republican running for the House of Representatives “once railed against giving women the right to vote, arguing that America has "suffered" since women's suffrage.”

“John Gibbs, who defeated in the primary an incumbent Republican who had voted to impeach Trump, also made comments in the early 2000s praising an organization trying to repeal the 19th Amendment which also argued that women's suffrage had made the United States into a "totalitarian state."
As a student at Stanford University in the early 2000s, Gibbs founded a self-described "think tank" called the Society for the Critique of Feminism that argued women did not "posess (sic) the characteristics necessary to govern," and said men were smarter than women because they are more likely to "think logically about broad and abstract ideas in order to deduce a suitable conclusion, without relying upon emotional reasoning."
https://www.cnn.com/2022/09/21/politics/john-gibbs-womens-suffrage-19th-amendment-kfile/index.html

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:According to the CDC, 92.7% of abortions in 2019 occurred prior to 13 weeks. (https://www.cdc.gov/reproductivehealth/data_stats/abortion.htm)

What percentage of those abortions do you think were "because I don't want to have a baby"? Probably the vast majority, right?

So a 15-week ban will not significantly reduce abortions of convenience (which is what Lindsey and his ilk are supposedly trying to do). Instead, it will:

(1) force women to carry unviable pregnancies to term -- increasing dramatically the number of children who are born dead, die soon after birth, or live with disabilities that require expensive care.

(2) force young girls to carry pregnancies to term because they did not know they were pregnant (too young to understand their own bodies or haven't even started a predictable menstrual cycle) or were too afraid to tell anyone they had stopped menstrating and/or had been sexually abused/raped.

(3) encourage more states to pass even more stringent restrictions.

This isn't about "life." It's about punishing women.

+1

It’s cruelty beyond belief.