Can Anyone Defend This? (Page 2): Apparently the Supreme Court does not agree with you. The Partial-Birth Abortion Ban Act of 2003 (Pub.L. 108–105, 117 Stat. 1201, enacted November 5...

American Vet

Kevyn wrote:

Partial birth abortion doesn’t exist, it is a made up term used by religious zealots who are bent on taking woman’s right to self determination from them and forcing them to become mothers against their will.

Apparently the Supreme Court does not agree with you.

The Partial-Birth Abortion Ban Act of 2003 (Pub.L. 108–105, 117 Stat. 1201, enacted November 5, 2003, 18 U.S.C. § 1531,[1] PBA Ban) is a United States law prohibiting a form of late termination of pregnancy called "partial-birth abortion", referred to in medical literature as intact dilation and extraction.[2] Under this law, any physician "who, in or affecting interstate or foreign commerce, knowingly performs a partial-birth abortion and thereby kills a human fetus shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than 2 years, or both". The law was enacted in 2003, and in 2007 its constitutionality was upheld by the U.S. Supreme Court in the case of Gonzales v. Carhart.

American Vet

Kevyn wrote:

No in some cases other unsurvivable defects are present viable full term pregnancies are not terminated this law would force physicians to needlessly prolong suffering in horrific situations, nothing more.

Incorrect: the law specifies "routine measures" be used. What you describe in your 'red herring' adventure are not 'routine' measures.

Tug484

Kevyn wrote:

Partial birth abortion doesn’t exist, it is a made up term used by religious zealots who are bent on taking woman’s right to self determination from them and forcing them to become mothers against their will.

Wrong!!!

billman6 Loc: Top of Texas

Kevyn wrote:

Partial birth abortion doesn’t exist, it is a made up term used by religious zealots who are bent on taking woman’s right to self determination from them and forcing them to become mothers against their will.

So in your retort here you are agreeing that it is a baby (human being) in the womb and not just a clump of cells. This baby has a right to life. The woman made a choice and got pregnant. She doesn't have to be a mother if she chooses not to. She can give the baby up for adoption.

DASHY

billman6 wrote:

So in your retort here you are agreeing that it is a baby (human being) in the womb and not just a clump of cells. This baby has a right to life. The woman made a choice and got pregnant. She doesn't have to be a mother if she chooses not to. She can give the baby up for adoption.

Women who seek abortions probably did not make the choice to get pregnant. The decision to terminate pregnancy should always be left to the woman who is pregnant. The cause of the pregnancy should not have to meet any arbitrary criterion. Putting conditions in front of a woman's decision is where the debate begins. There should be no conditions and no debate. Women should have full control over their own bodies just as men have. If men could get pregnant this discussion would end.

American Vet

DASHY wrote:

Women who seek abortions probably did not make the choice to get pregnant. The decision to terminate pregnancy should always be left to the woman who is pregnant. The cause of the pregnancy should not have to meet any arbitrary criterion. Putting conditions in front of a woman's decision is where the debate begins. There should be no conditions and no debate. Women should have full control over their own bodies just as men have. If men could get pregnant this discussion would end.

"Women who seek abortions probably did not make the choice to get pregnant."
Yet they engaged in an activity that could cause pregnancy (except rape). The only 100% effective birth control is abstinence. When one engages in sex, there is a possibility a pregnancy could be the result. It's called personal responsibility.

"Women should have full control over their own bodies just as men have."
The unborn child is not a part of the woman' body.

DASHY

American Vet wrote:

"Women who seek abortions probably did not make the choice to get pregnant."
Yet they engaged in an activity that could cause pregnancy (except rape). The only 100% effective birth control is abstinence. When one engages in sex, there is a possibility a pregnancy could be the result. It's called personal responsibility.

"Women should have full control over their own bodies just as men have."
The unborn child is not a part of the woman' body.

When you say (except rape) you start the debate. What if every woman seeking an abortion asserts rape? Would that be OK with you? What about the male's responsibility? The father is like "Hey, I helped too. For like five seconds. Doing the one thing I think about twenty-four hours a day. Have fun with your morning sickness."

bggamers Loc: georgia

Kevyn wrote:

You are, to put it bluntly, chalk full of sh!t, infanticide is completely illegal in all of the free world including the United States. There is not a single progressive who promotes infanticide or in any way shape or form wants it legalized.

But what they voted for is infanticide Kev some of these babies are born alive and what do u want done what many hospitals are doing because the woman doesn't want this child and went and had a late-term abortion these babies are BORN alive they put them in a room and shut the door and leave them to die

billman6 Loc: Top of Texas

DASHY wrote:

Women who seek abortions probably did not make the choice to get pregnant. The decision to terminate pregnancy should always be left to the woman who is pregnant. The cause of the pregnancy should not have to meet any arbitrary criterion. Putting conditions in front of a woman's decision is where the debate begins. There should be no conditions and no debate. Women should have full control over their own bodies just as men have. If men could get pregnant this discussion would end.

How stupid are you? They are two human beings involved here. That was the point of what I said. And any women who spreads her legs and doesn't use some form of contraceptive is making a choice. You people are lunatic murderers.

Tug484

billman6 wrote:

How stupid are you? They are two human beings involved here. That was the point of what I said. And any women who spreads her legs and doesn't use some form of contraceptive is making a choice. You people are lunatic murderers.

DASHY

bggamers wrote:

But what they voted for is infanticide Kev some of these babies are born alive and what do u want done what many hospitals are doing because the woman doesn't want this child and went and had a late-term abortion these babies are BORN alive they put them in a room and shut the door and leave them to die

All babies and all mothers should be medically protected. All babies born alive should be treated the same by hospital medical personnel. Late term abortions cause moral not medical hand ringing. Early counselling for pregnant women should be encouraged. Planned Parenthood offers this service

DASHY

billman6 wrote:

How stupid are you? They are two human beings involved here. That was the point of what I said. And any women who spreads her legs and doesn't use some form of contraceptive is making a choice. You people are lunatic murderers.

There are actually three parts to this story. Woman, man and baby. When the 200 pound man who is not using a form of contraception forces the little woman to spread her legs against her will, that act was not her choice. She should certainly have free choice about how to deal with it. It is really stupid to think a fourth party (government mandate) is better suited to make that decision.

American Vet

DASHY wrote:

There are actually three parts to this story. Woman, man and baby. When the 200 pound man who is not using a form of contraception forces the little woman to spread her legs against her will, that act was not her choice. She should certainly have free choice about how to deal with it. It is really stupid to think a fourth party (government mandate) is better suited to make that decision.

You left out the third "part".

Lt. Rob Polans ret.

American Vet wrote:

Forty-one Democratic senators voted this afternoon to block the Born-Alive Abortion Survivors Protection Act, successfully filibustering the legislation and preventing it from receiving a final vote. The bill would have required doctors to provide standard medical care to newborn infants who survive abortion procedures.

https://www.nationalreview.com/corner/born-alive-abortion-survivors-protection-act-fails-in-the-senate/

Defend murder? I don't know enough BS.

Lt. Rob Polans ret.

Kevyn wrote:

You are, to put it bluntly, chalk full of sh!t, infanticide is completely illegal in all of the free world including the United States. There is not a single progressive who promotes infanticide or in any way shape or form wants it legalized.

It sure seems like Northam wants it legalized.