Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What about reproductive rights? That is the critical issue of this election. Why is he joining forces with the destructor of Roe?

Maybe because when looking at abortion, there is another human life who also has rights, and who should not be killed. Funny how pro choicers constantly talk about women's rights, but conviently ignore the rights of the human lives inside the women, half of whom are also females.

No one is having their "reproductive rights" taken away. You still have the right to reproduce. But not the right to take away human life.

Ok so rfk is a forced birther. That is a losing, minority view

You can use whatever clever label you want. But in the end, it is about protecting human life. In the balance, I choose not killing a human life over "forcing" a woman to carry and give birth, at which point she has the right to give up the human life for adoption.

Do you think women who have abortions should be arrested and charged with murder?

Of course they do. Incarceration of 20 percent of our female population. It will be the trump Vance RFK biggest growth industry!

Anonymous wrote:This is a huge win for Trump.

Bigly? Or Huuuuge?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What about reproductive rights? That is the critical issue of this election. Why is he joining forces with the destructor of Roe?

Abortion may be your critical issue, as well as the majority of posters here, but last I heard it ranked third nationally.

it has been a dominant issue since roe was overturned.

Did I say otherwise? No. PP said it was THE critical issue of this election and it’s not. The economy and border security have been and remain the majority of Americans most critical issues.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What about reproductive rights? That is the critical issue of this election. Why is he joining forces with the destructor of Roe?

Maybe because when looking at abortion, there is another human life who also has rights, and who should not be killed. Funny how pro choicers constantly talk about women's rights, but conviently ignore the rights of the human lives inside the women, half of whom are also females.

No one is having their "reproductive rights" taken away. You still have the right to reproduce. But not the right to take away human life.

A fetus that cannot live independently of its mother has no legal rights. But for simplistic thinkers like yourselves, who believe women are not fully capable autonomous beings with the right to make decisions about their own body (especially with something as mentally, physically, financially, and professionally consequential as having a child), I can see how this doesn't track.

Hey "simplistic thinker," a newborn cannot live independently without its mother. It would die within days. So why does a newborn have the full right to live, such that a mother killing it would equate to murder?

So under your logic, as science improves, abortions should become less available? So when a fetus is viable at 10, 8, or even 6 weeks with new technology, you are OK with not allowing abortions after those marks?

It's time the Kennedy's address this in-house if you ask me

This is a huge win for Trump.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What about reproductive rights? That is the critical issue of this election. Why is he joining forces with the destructor of Roe?

Maybe because when looking at abortion, there is another human life who also has rights, and who should not be killed. Funny how pro choicers constantly talk about women's rights, but conviently ignore the rights of the human lives inside the women, half of whom are also females.

No one is having their "reproductive rights" taken away. You still have the right to reproduce. But not the right to take away human life.

When it is a clump of cells, it isn't a human. When it isn't viable, even your previous Bible says that it isn't a fully formed human.

Have you ever watched an abortion? Genuinely wondering. Because I was (and still am) torn on the issue and figured I should see the reality of it. But I’m never going to use bolded term again. Especially when it’s the second trimester.

It was disturbing.

And yes, it was an actual educational video for medical students, not some fear mongering fake right-wing propaganda.

Yes, I have. But you know what, until the fetus is viable, the host (mother) has the right to make the best medical decision for themselves. MIND YOUR OWN BUSINESS.

But in 99% of cases, it is not a "medical decision." That is just what you want to conveniently call it so that abortion will be allowed.

No one is forcing you to get an abortion. But you don't have the right to impose anything on to anyone else. Mind your own business.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What about reproductive rights? That is the critical issue of this election. Why is he joining forces with the destructor of Roe?

Maybe because when looking at abortion, there is another human life who also has rights, and who should not be killed. Funny how pro choicers constantly talk about women's rights, but conviently ignore the rights of the human lives inside the women, half of whom are also females.

No one is having their "reproductive rights" taken away. You still have the right to reproduce. But not the right to take away human life.

Ok so rfk is a forced birther. That is a losing, minority view

You can use whatever clever label you want. But in the end, it is about protecting human life. In the balance, I choose not killing a human life over "forcing" a woman to carry and give birth, at which point she has the right to give up the human life for adoption.

Do you think women who have abortions should be arrested and charged with murder?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What about reproductive rights? That is the critical issue of this election. Why is he joining forces with the destructor of Roe?

Maybe because when looking at abortion, there is another human life who also has rights, and who should not be killed. Funny how pro choicers constantly talk about women's rights, but conviently ignore the rights of the human lives inside the women, half of whom are also females.

No one is having their "reproductive rights" taken away. You still have the right to reproduce. But not the right to take away human life.

When it is a clump of cells, it isn't a human. When it isn't viable, even your previous Bible says that it isn't a fully formed human.

Have you ever watched an abortion? Genuinely wondering. Because I was (and still am) torn on the issue and figured I should see the reality of it. But I’m never going to use bolded term again. Especially when it’s the second trimester.

It was disturbing.

And yes, it was an actual educational video for medical students, not some fear mongering fake right-wing propaganda.

Yes, I have. But you know what, until the fetus is viable, the host (mother) has the right to make the best medical decision for themselves. MIND YOUR OWN BUSINESS.

But in 99% of cases, it is not a "medical decision." That is just what you want to conveniently call it so that abortion will be allowed.

Why were you ever supporting RFK?

Anonymous wrote:

Trump tried to throw 80 million votes in the garbage. Anyone that would endorse him is an un American. Autocrat lover

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What about reproductive rights? That is the critical issue of this election. Why is he joining forces with the destructor of Roe?

Maybe because when looking at abortion, there is another human life who also has rights, and who should not be killed. Funny how pro choicers constantly talk about women's rights, but conviently ignore the rights of the human lives inside the women, half of whom are also females.

No one is having their "reproductive rights" taken away. You still have the right to reproduce. But not the right to take away human life.

When it is a clump of cells, it isn't a human. When it isn't viable, even your previous Bible says that it isn't a fully formed human.

Have you ever watched an abortion? Genuinely wondering. Because I was (and still am) torn on the issue and figured I should see the reality of it. But I’m never going to use bolded term again. Especially when it’s the second trimester.

It was disturbing.

And yes, it was an actual educational video for medical students, not some fear mongering fake right-wing propaganda.

Yes, I have. But you know what, until the fetus is viable, the host (mother) has the right to make the best medical decision for themselves. MIND YOUR OWN BUSINESS.

But in 99% of cases, it is not a "medical decision." That is just what you want to conveniently call it so that abortion will be allowed.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What about reproductive rights? That is the critical issue of this election. Why is he joining forces with the destructor of Roe?

Maybe because when looking at abortion, there is another human life who also has rights, and who should not be killed. Funny how pro choicers constantly talk about women's rights, but conviently ignore the rights of the human lives inside the women, half of whom are also females.

No one is having their "reproductive rights" taken away. You still have the right to reproduce. But not the right to take away human life.

Like typical "prolifers", you only care about the life from conception till birth.
After that, f' em, they're on their own.

Great logic: "I care about kids after they are born, so that means I am allowed to support the killing of kids before they are 'born'!"

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What about reproductive rights? That is the critical issue of this election. Why is he joining forces with the destructor of Roe?

Maybe because when looking at abortion, there is another human life who also has rights, and who should not be killed. Funny how pro choicers constantly talk about women's rights, but conviently ignore the rights of the human lives inside the women, half of whom are also females.

No one is having their "reproductive rights" taken away. You still have the right to reproduce. But not the right to take away human life.

When it is a clump of cells, it isn't a human. When it isn't viable, even your previous Bible says that it isn't a fully formed human.

Have you ever watched an abortion? Genuinely wondering. Because I was (and still am) torn on the issue and figured I should see the reality of it. But I’m never going to use bolded term again. Especially when it’s the second trimester.

It was disturbing.

And yes, it was an actual educational video for medical students, not some fear mongering fake right-wing propaganda.

Yes, I have. But you know what, until the fetus is viable, the host (mother) has the right to make the best medical decision for themselves. MIND YOUR OWN BUSINESS.

Anonymous wrote:He's a loon and no way Dems could work with him. Conspiracy cultists naturally gravitate to Trump so it's a good fit, and he has far lower standards. This will give Trump a bump, but I suspect many of his cultists will elect to write him in.

Agree with this.