This SCOTUS leak has changed my mind.

RQA wrote:

Trapper Gus wrote:

Gaslighting again RQA, and doing a piss poor job at it.

Viability is the current law, which was decided by a Conservative Court. Most people agree with this.

There were arguments that "quickening" was a person by the church, but the church said that a person is not a person until it is breathing.

Heartbeat laws are pure stupidity, as there is no heart when "heart activity" is seen.

blah....blah....blah....

Trapper chooses not to answer my question. Did you apply for Jenn's job? You have the skill set for it.

He said viability rqa. I mean, you can disagree if you want but he answered your question. You even quoted the post.

I have a close friend that had an incomplete miscarriage that required a procedure known as an abortion to prevent her from dying. Technically she could be charged with murder in the near future. I wonder if NumbersDude would recommend her having an abortion or not since he is so intimately interested in her uterus even though he doesn't know her.

Motown Spartan wrote:I have a close friend that had an incomplete miscarriage that required a procedure known as an abortion to prevent her from dying. Technically she could be charged with murder in the near future. I wonder if NumbersDude would recommend her having an abortion or not since he is so intimately interested in her uterus even though he doesn't know her.

Its up to her. You stay triggered though.

RQA is here to troll and repeat the GOP party line. Nothing more.

DWags wrote:This is a New York City fire fighter. “You have no choice, YOUR BODY IS MINE”

You Guys that are for Roe being overturned, you really don’t think there are a ton of police and firefighters with this attitude? These are paramilitary people saying this, we have Supreme Court justices asking for a domestic supply of babies and we have people turning their backs on this. Either because they agree, because they are white males because they are naïve or because they are stupid. Wake up.

[tw]1523317509994156035?s=21&t=UWfutqMtZWnBy-wq_VMM_A[/tw]

At least he is being honest and admitting that this is not about being "pro-life" and all about controlling women like the sexist and misogynistic pigs that they are.

Travis of the Cosmos wrote:

He said viability rqa. I mean, you can disagree if you want but he answered your question. You even quoted the post.

He said that viability is the current law (can debate that later) and that
"most people agree".     As we know Trapper is not "most people" and did not opine that he agreed abortions should not be performed once the baby is "viable".

Trapper, care to clarify?

100 years after the source, that the leaked Rape Republican court decision on abortion cited, railed against abortion and for rape, a "Founding Father" Ben Franklin wrote and printed a household guide which covered many useful topics, including what drugs to mix in what proportions to induce an abortion.

The Rape Republicans on the court are so stupid.

https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2022/5/9/2096935/-BENJAMIN-FRANKLIN-DETHRONED-AS-A-FOUNDING-FATHER

GRR Spartan wrote:RQA is here to troll and repeat the GOP party line. Nothing more.

Gee, in another thread I voiced my support for getting rid of the 2nd amendment. I don't think that is GOP party line, but maybe I missed something.

Trapper Gus wrote:

RQA wrote:

Of course the question leftists never answer is when that "little bag of cells" becomes a person such that it is deserving of being protected.  

Gaslighting again RQA, and doing a piss poor job at it.

Viability is the current law, which was decided by a Conservative Court.  Most people agree with this.

There were arguments that "quickening" was a person by the church, but the church said that a person is not a person until it is breathing.

Heartbeat laws are pure stupidity, as there is no heart when "heart activity" is seen.

RQA wrote:He said that viability is the current law (can debate that later) and that
"most people agree".     As we know Trapper is not "most people" and did not opine that he agreed abortions should not be performed once the baby is "viable".

Trapper, care to clarify?

Sure

You didn't ask for my personal opinion in your gaslighting, dude, so why you are gaslighting yourself I haven't got a clue, except that gaslighting is all that you seem to do.    

I agree with viability.  

If the fetus can be removed from the womb and live, (as a breathing person, not in a hospital critical care unit - I have nothing against trying to keep a near viable fetus alive in a hospital critical care unit, however the fetus at that point is not viable and only the use of extraordinary measures keeps it alive) then it is viable and that should be the preferred medical procedure.  If that procedure will kill the mother, then an abortion should be performed, assuming the abortion will not kill the mother.  If any medical procedure available will kill the mother but allow the birth then that should be the option.

All boys should be given vasectomies until they reach an age where they demonstrate the responsibility and resources required to parent a child. At that point, they may have the vasectomy reversed.

Trapper Gus wrote:

Trapper Gus wrote:

Gaslighting again RQA, and doing a piss poor job at it.

Viability is the current law, which was decided by a Conservative Court.  Most people agree with this.

There were arguments that "quickening" was a person by the church, but the church said that a person is not a person until it is breathing.

Heartbeat laws are pure stupidity, as there is no heart when "heart activity" is seen.

RQA wrote:He said that viability is the current law (can debate that later) and that
"most people agree".     As we know Trapper is not "most people" and did not opine that he agreed abortions should not be performed once the baby is "viable".

Trapper, care to clarify?

Sure

You didn't ask for my personal opinion in your gaslighting, dude, so why you are gaslighting yourself I haven't got a clue, except that gaslighting is all that you seem to do.    

I agree with viability.  

If the fetus can be removed from the womb and live, (as a breathing person, not in a hospital critical care unit) then it is viable and that should be the preferred medical procedure.  If that procedure will kill the mother, then an abortion should be performed, assuming the abortion will not kill the mother.  If any medical procedure available will kill the mother but allow the birth then that should be the option.

“ how dare you have an opinion on abortion and not have a uterus!”
Signed Motownkaren.

I saw an article where an Idaho lawmaker is looking to ban IUDs and contraception.

(but no word on bonar pills)

NumbersDude wrote:

Trapper Gus wrote:



Sure

You didn't ask for my personal opinion in your gaslighting, dude, so why you are gaslighting yourself I haven't got a clue, except that gaslighting is all that you seem to do.    

I agree with viability.  

If the fetus can be removed from the womb and live,  (as a breathing person, not in a hospital critical care unit) then it is viable and that should be the preferred medical procedure.  If that procedure will kill the mother, then an abortion should be performed, assuming the abortion will not kill the mother.  If any medical procedure available will kill the mother but allow the birth then that should be the option.

“ how dare you have an opinion on abortion and not have a uterus!”
   Signed Motownkaren.

Distorting people names like that is soooo Wells.

What do you think about the Rape Republicans (note there are thus far none of these on the board, I'm speaking of the 5 Justices of the Court who are using an argument from a thesis from the 1630's which the author says husbands can rape their wives at will) using this 1630's English thesis but ignoring Ben Franklin's book of home remedies which incudes how to cause an abortion in great detail?

Trapper Gus wrote:

NumbersDude wrote:

“ how dare you have an opinion on abortion and not have a uterus!”
   Signed Motownkaren.

Distorting people names like that is soooo Wells.

What do you think about the Rape Republicans (note there are thus far none of these on the board, I'm speaking of the 5 Justices of the Court who are using an argument from a thesis from the 1630's which the author says husbands can rape their wives at will) using this 1630's English thesis but ignoring Ben Franklin's book of home remedies which incudes how to cause an abortion in great detail?

You don’t think he is distorting my views on being pro choice by posting that? Why? I am pro choice and he is still calling me a sexist. Oh well. Perhaps I am a counter puncher? Nah. I am a foodie not a fighter. Think what you want.
A lot of emotionally charged post though.

Rocinante wrote:All boys should be given vasectomies until they reach an age where they demonstrate the responsibility and resources required to parent a child. At that point, they may have the vasectomy reversed.

Really, they should be castrated. If you're going to commit, you better commit.

Trapper Gus wrote:

NumbersDude wrote:

“ how dare you have an opinion on abortion and not have a uterus!”
   Signed Motownkaren.

Distorting people names like that is soooo Wells.

What do you think about the Rape Republicans (note there are thus far none of these on the board, I'm speaking of the 5 Justices of the Court who are using an argument from a thesis from the 1630's which the author says husbands can rape their wives at will) using this 1630's English thesis but ignoring Ben Franklin's book of home remedies which incudes how to cause an abortion in great detail?

If I'm going to risk going to jail for raping someone, why would I pick my wife?!?

Bredo Morstoel wrote:

Trapper Gus wrote:

Distorting people names like that is soooo Wells.

What do you think about the Rape Republicans (note there are thus far none of these on the board, I'm speaking of the 5 Justices of the Court who are using an argument from a thesis from the 1630's which the author says husbands can rape their wives at will) using this 1630's English thesis but ignoring Ben Franklin's book of home remedies which incudes how to cause an abortion in great detail?

If I'm going to risk going to jail for raping someone, why would I pick my wife?!?

Because adultery is a crime too and you don't want to commit two crimes.

Bredo Morstoel wrote:

Trapper Gus wrote:

Distorting people names like that is soooo Wells.

What do you think about the Rape Republicans (note there are thus far none of these on the board, I'm speaking of the 5 Justices of the Court who are using an argument from a thesis from the 1630's which the author says husbands can rape their wives at will) using this 1630's English thesis but ignoring Ben Franklin's book of home remedies which incudes how to cause an abortion in great detail?

If I'm going to risk going to jail for raping someone, why would I pick my wife?!?

The thesis being used by the Rape Republicans to justify overturning 50 years of settled law states that raping your wife is not a crime.

Reminder that religious people are the most dangerous people on the planet and have no regard for the value of human life.

Robert J Sakimano wrote:Reminder that religious people are the most dangerous people on the planet and have no regard for the value of human life.

The leading cause of unnatural death in the history of the world.

Motown Spartan wrote:

Robert J Sakimano wrote:Reminder that religious people are the most dangerous people on the planet and have no regard for the value of human life.

The leading cause of unnatural death in the history of the world.

yep.

But don't say anything about them.. it makes them sad.

I'm never quite sure if it is Religion or opportunists using Religion to gin up support among ignorant people.  I suppose it really doesn't matter which one it is, but still ...

In the US this has been the plan of the wealthy, aka using religion, since before Reagan.

RQA wrote:

Trapper Gus wrote: If it is legal the laws are protecting the freedom of persons, if it is not, it is protecting the freedom of little bags of cells.  

Of course the question leftists never answer is when that "little bag of cells" becomes a person such that it is deserving of being protected.  

What the hell are you talking about?  Is the law unclear to you?

You act like leftists are aborting 39 week babies on the reg. Another extremist lie you are believing there.

Trapper Gus wrote:I'm never quite sure if it is Religion or opportunists using Religion to gin up support among ignorant people.  I suppose it really doesn't matter which one it is, but still ...

In the US this has been the plan of the wealthy, aka using religion, since before Reagan.

True, it doesn't really matter. Either way, at a minimum religion enables the gift. And Many would argue that religion is the grift.

if the knuckle-scrapin', jesus freak republicans were really 'pro-life', they'd do something about healthcare, public education, the death penalty, gun control, etc.

otherwise they're just bigoted misogynists who want to control women. Not that that is shocking to those of us who have been paying attention the last 30-40 years.

Robert J Sakimano wrote:if the knuckle-scrapin', jesus freak republicans were really 'pro-life', they'd do something about healthcare, public education, the death penalty, gun control, etc.

otherwise they're just bigoted misogynists who want to control women. Not that that is shocking to those of us who have been paying attention the last 30-40 years.

That is exactly who they are at the grass roots, though that the poor minorities are more restricted than the better off White People is part of it. At the higher levels they don't care about this as their personal behavior shows, they are just using it to gain more power.

Trapper Gus wrote:

Robert J Sakimano wrote:if the knuckle-scrapin', jesus freak republicans were really 'pro-life', they'd do something about healthcare, public education, the death penalty, gun control, etc.

otherwise they're just bigoted misogynists who want to control women. Not that that is shocking to those of us who have been paying attention the last 30-40 years.

That is exactly who they are at the grass roots, though that the poor minorities are more restricted than the better off White People is part of it. At the higher levels they don't care about this as their personal behavior shows, they are just using it to gain more power.

At the core it is a vehicle for influence. Which enables wealth building/power accumulation.