Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:And here it is. They’re going to lean into the abortion ban ahead of the midterms. The lesson of Trump: always double down.

This is a gimmick. Republicans have realized that the majority of Americans are opposed to total abortion bans and the Republicans want to paint themselves as the rational ones here by banning them after 15 weeks- and they will then make outlandish claims that all democrats want people to get abortions on demand up until the moment of delivery.

Republicans: let's introduce legislation that has broad popular support
Democrats: that's a gimmick!

I am the PP you are responding to and I am not a Democrat. I am a former R but not a Democrat. I would never personally get an elective abortion and am not particularly fond of the idea of people doing so but don't think legislators should be the ones makes these decisions. I don't care how popular the legislation I- not everything should be subject to popularity contests.

Republicans have completely lost me with this nonsense and gaslighting about late term abortions. Anyone who is getting an abortion past 15 weeks is doing so for reasons that are absolutely none of my business and are likely incredibly hard to deal with.

PP here, I've been a Republican since the second half of college. I don't agree with everything the Republican party has done, but it represents my viewpoints the best so I've stuck with the party. There is undeniably a compelling state interest in protecting human life, including those that are unborn. The difficulty has been in establishing the standard for that interest, not that if such an interest exists at all. Whether we like it or not, everything is up for a popularity contest - even the issues where there is no explicit contest, means there is lack of popular desire to change the issue from the current state of lack of regulation.

Regarding late term abortions, this is not gaslighting at all - it's the mainstream position of the Democrats to protect such a right. They even passed it in the House: Women’s Health Protection Act (WHPA). Go read it, as long as the pregnancy is determined as a risk to the mother's health - a standard which is not defined in the act and is therefore wide open - abortion can be performed at any time.

No woman is having a late term abortion because they do not want a child and no doctor would perform an abortion if this were the case. Every woman who has a late term abortion does so for severe and life threatening medical reasons.

You know this but you want to spout your perverse GOP lies. You are a despicable POS. Go back to your dark hole.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If you guys can't see that insisting on a federal, abortion at any stage and for any reason approach is just as extreme, you are part of the problem.

What’s a “federal abortion”? Also how are you so pig ignorant on this subject still?

Hey hey.

Pigs are very intelligent animals.

Please don't make offensive comparisons.

I agree. Stop insulting the Porcine species.

Anonymous wrote:

I guessed this 2 pages ago.

You are a special kind of stupid, no worse, a particular kind of cruel, if you pretend not to understand why a third trimester abortion might be needed. Nobody wakes up one morning in their third trimester and decides to get a convenience abortion. Read a few first hand accounts then get back to us.

I never had an abortion and hope my daughters never do, but yes I will continue to vote for the party that respects that horrible decision is between the woman and her doctor.

Anonymous wrote:Typical GOP hypocrite I wonder how many pregnancies he’s responsible for in South Carolina.

LOL, you are kidding, right?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Regarding late term abortions, this is not gaslighting at all - it's the mainstream position of the Democrats to protect such a right. They even passed it in the House: Women’s Health Protection Act (WHPA). Go read it, as long as the pregnancy is determined as a risk to the mother's health - a standard which is not defined in the act and is therefore wide open - abortion can be performed at any time.

Please cite a single example of a late term (ie third trimester) abortion that was elective with no mitigating circumstances.

Hint, you can't, it is a red herring established by the Evangelicals as a strawman talking point.

The reality is that when a pregnancy gets to a third term, the mother is thinking about names, prepping a nursury etc, No one carries a fetus to 6 months and then decides, eh, screw it, I didn't want the kid.

????


Then why do you fight so hard for third trimester abortion????

No one "fights hard" for third trimester abortion- they think it isn't your business and should be left to the woman and her doctor. But the reason people think they should be allowed is so that women who need abortions because of fetal or maternal health don't have to go through inquests and criminal investigations or delay care in order to prove that they are getting an abortion for those reasons. Some of the stories coming out of red states are abhorrent- women basically having to wait to bleed out before being allowed to have an abortion of a wanted, 8 week old fetus that has a heartbeat but is in the Fallopian tube.

Men don't have to explain to the state why they want vasectomies- doesn't the state have an interest in their sperm?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Regarding late term abortions, this is not gaslighting at all - it's the mainstream position of the Democrats to protect such a right. They even passed it in the House: Women’s Health Protection Act (WHPA). Go read it, as long as the pregnancy is determined as a risk to the mother's health - a standard which is not defined in the act and is therefore wide open - abortion can be performed at any time.

Please cite a single example of a late term (ie third trimester) abortion that was elective with no mitigating circumstances.

Hint, you can't, it is a red herring established by the Evangelicals as a strawman talking point.

The reality is that when a pregnancy gets to a third term, the mother is thinking about names, prepping a nursury etc, No one carries a fetus to 6 months and then decides, eh, screw it, I didn't want the kid.

????


Then why do you fight so hard for third trimester abortion????

Because life happens. Something happens to the fetus, or something happens in the pregnancy that threatens the life of the mother. Why do you want government to prevent medical care from happening? Do you honestly think someone says "I am going to carry a fetus for 6, 7 or 8 months and then decide, eh eff it?"

Come on.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Regarding late term abortions, this is not gaslighting at all - it's the mainstream position of the Democrats to protect such a right. They even passed it in the House: Women’s Health Protection Act (WHPA). Go read it, as long as the pregnancy is determined as a risk to the mother's health - a standard which is not defined in the act and is therefore wide open - abortion can be performed at any time.

Please cite a single example of a late term (ie third trimester) abortion that was elective with no mitigating circumstances.

Hint, you can't, it is a red herring established by the Evangelicals as a strawman talking point.

The reality is that when a pregnancy gets to a third term, the mother is thinking about names, prepping a nursury etc, No one carries a fetus to 6 months and then decides, eh, screw it, I didn't want the kid.

????


Then why do you fight so hard for third trimester abortion????

Because the people who need them, need them urgently, and don't need to run the risk that their doctors will refuse for fear of being prosecuted.

Exactly this. And they shouldn’t have to add the cost and burden of traveling huge distances to access their needed abortion.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Regarding late term abortions, this is not gaslighting at all - it's the mainstream position of the Democrats to protect such a right. They even passed it in the House: Women’s Health Protection Act (WHPA). Go read it, as long as the pregnancy is determined as a risk to the mother's health - a standard which is not defined in the act and is therefore wide open - abortion can be performed at any time.

Please cite a single example of a late term (ie third trimester) abortion that was elective with no mitigating circumstances.

Hint, you can't, it is a red herring established by the Evangelicals as a strawman talking point.

The reality is that when a pregnancy gets to a third term, the mother is thinking about names, prepping a nursury etc, No one carries a fetus to 6 months and then decides, eh, screw it, I didn't want the kid.

????


Then why do you fight so hard for third trimester abortion????

Because the people who need them, need them urgently, and don't need to run the risk that their doctors will refuse for fear of being prosecuted.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Regarding late term abortions, this is not gaslighting at all - it's the mainstream position of the Democrats to protect such a right. They even passed it in the House: Women’s Health Protection Act (WHPA). Go read it, as long as the pregnancy is determined as a risk to the mother's health - a standard which is not defined in the act and is therefore wide open - abortion can be performed at any time.

Please cite a single example of a late term (ie third trimester) abortion that was elective with no mitigating circumstances.

Hint, you can't, it is a red herring established by the Evangelicals as a strawman talking point.

The reality is that when a pregnancy gets to a third term, the mother is thinking about names, prepping a nursury etc, No one carries a fetus to 6 months and then decides, eh, screw it, I didn't want the kid.

????


Then why do you fight so hard for third trimester abortion????

Different poster. Because my best friend's fetus had a life-ending cardiac malformation that was detected late in pregnancy. There was a risk to her life, so doctors advised an abortion. It was incredibly traumatic to lose a desperately wanted baby. She never had another biological child, and adopted her child several years later.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Regarding late term abortions, this is not gaslighting at all - it's the mainstream position of the Democrats to protect such a right. They even passed it in the House: Women’s Health Protection Act (WHPA). Go read it, as long as the pregnancy is determined as a risk to the mother's health - a standard which is not defined in the act and is therefore wide open - abortion can be performed at any time.

Please cite a single example of a late term (ie third trimester) abortion that was elective with no mitigating circumstances.

Hint, you can't, it is a red herring established by the Evangelicals as a strawman talking point.

The reality is that when a pregnancy gets to a third term, the mother is thinking about names, prepping a nursury etc, No one carries a fetus to 6 months and then decides, eh, screw it, I didn't want the kid.

????


Then why do you fight so hard for third trimester abortion????

Can you read? Terrible circumstances that require tough decision making.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Regarding late term abortions, this is not gaslighting at all - it's the mainstream position of the Democrats to protect such a right. They even passed it in the House: Women’s Health Protection Act (WHPA). Go read it, as long as the pregnancy is determined as a risk to the mother's health - a standard which is not defined in the act and is therefore wide open - abortion can be performed at any time.

Please cite a single example of a late term (ie third trimester) abortion that was elective with no mitigating circumstances.

Hint, you can't, it is a red herring established by the Evangelicals as a strawman talking point.

The reality is that when a pregnancy gets to a third term, the mother is thinking about names, prepping a nursury etc, No one carries a fetus to 6 months and then decides, eh, screw it, I didn't want the kid.

????


Then why do you fight so hard for third trimester abortion????

BECAUSE it's health care. I know TWO very wanted pregnancies in the last 4 months that have had to be terminated after 22 weeks because of severe birth defects - they would not have lived. These are friends that WANTED these children. It is traumatic and awful. They should not have to worry about having to carry their dead fetus' around and risk their own lives and fertility.

THAT IS WHY WE CARE

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Regarding late term abortions, this is not gaslighting at all - it's the mainstream position of the Democrats to protect such a right. They even passed it in the House: Women’s Health Protection Act (WHPA). Go read it, as long as the pregnancy is determined as a risk to the mother's health - a standard which is not defined in the act and is therefore wide open - abortion can be performed at any time.

Please cite a single example of a late term (ie third trimester) abortion that was elective with no mitigating circumstances.

Hint, you can't, it is a red herring established by the Evangelicals as a strawman talking point.

The reality is that when a pregnancy gets to a third term, the mother is thinking about names, prepping a nursury etc, No one carries a fetus to 6 months and then decides, eh, screw it, I didn't want the kid.

????


Then why do you fight so hard for third trimester abortion????

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:And here it is. They’re going to lean into the abortion ban ahead of the midterms. The lesson of Trump: always double down.

This is a gimmick. Republicans have realized that the majority of Americans are opposed to total abortion bans and the Republicans want to paint themselves as the rational ones here by banning them after 15 weeks- and they will then make outlandish claims that all democrats want people to get abortions on demand up until the moment of delivery.

Republicans: let's introduce legislation that has broad popular support
Democrats: that's a gimmick!

I am the PP you are responding to and I am not a Democrat. I am a former R but not a Democrat. I would never personally get an elective abortion and am not particularly fond of the idea of people doing so but don't think legislators should be the ones makes these decisions. I don't care how popular the legislation I- not everything should be subject to popularity contests.

Republicans have completely lost me with this nonsense and gaslighting about late term abortions. Anyone who is getting an abortion past 15 weeks is doing so for reasons that are absolutely none of my business and are likely incredibly hard to deal with.

PP here, I've been a Republican since the second half of college. I don't agree with everything the Republican party has done, but it represents my viewpoints the best so I've stuck with the party. There is undeniably a compelling state interest in protecting human life, including those that are unborn. The difficulty has been in establishing the standard for that interest, not that if such an interest exists at all. Whether we like it or not, everything is up for a popularity contest - even the issues where there is no explicit contest, means there is lack of popular desire to change the issue from the current state of lack of regulation.

Regarding late term abortions, this is not gaslighting at all - it's the mainstream position of the Democrats to protect such a right. They even passed it in the House: Women’s Health Protection Act (WHPA). Go read it, as long as the pregnancy is determined as a risk to the mother's health - a standard which is not defined in the act and is therefore wide open - abortion can be performed at any time.

I math PP you are responding to- the way that the Republican Party misrepresent this position is that they say that Democrats want to maintain abortion up until the moment of conception for the convenience of mothers who decide before their due dates that they want to abort. You say right in your post that the position is to protect the health of the mother, not for convenience. What do you mean it is wide open- that the doctor and the woman should be the ones that decide? That is certainly preferable to politicians deciding each case.

On the first paragraph- I disagree that what a woman does with her body should be up to a popularity contest (even though it is in the US). In many countries it is not and is a fundamental right no matter who is in power. As I stated before I am generally against abortion as a concept for elective purposes and I used to think that meant I was pro-life. But it just means that I personally would not decide to have an abortion and, even if I don't like it I don't think the state should be able to prevent women who do want it from doing so.

You can argue all you want that the state has an interest in protecting the life of the unborn. But this is not a foregone conclusion- it certainly isn't in the Constitution. Is it no more a foregone conclusion than saying a state has an "interest" in an embryo or sperm. And in the end you cannot divorce this "interest" from the woman carrying the fetus. So once you start weighing interests of something that is not born and could not be born without being part of the mother then you are saying that a fetus has more rights than a woman.

If you had told me 25 years ago that this would be the issue that made me leave the Republican party I would have laughed at you- but to me individual rights are more important than states rights and Republicans seem hell bent in taking away individuals rights and freedoms. I am so sick of conservatives blathering about gay people and trans people in order to get votes- just the enormous amounts of taxpayer money spent on some of these exclusionary bills is mind boggling. Let people be gay, them them be trans, let them do what they want in the bedroom or with their bodies and focus back on the damn economy.