Roe vs Wade Overturned

OHvol40

Well-Known Member
Joined
Oct 23, 2008
Messages
8,459
Likes
4,189
I've got no hyperbole. I didn't say, or imply, that a woman has unlimited rights to self determination. That was you. If you want to talk sunlight, that's all I am shedding by taking your very own stance to its logical conclusion. The truth is you're either confused or disgusted with yourself, but as always you'll toe the line and pretend everyone else is some nitwit while contradicting yourself in your own posts.

My position is clear. I am fine with contraceptives that prevent fertilization.

At fertilization/conception, I believe human life has started.

I still understand the necessity of abortion in certain instances where there may be medical challenges for the mother, but by the numbers those are very few and very far between, and I have a healthy enough distrust of the medical system (and have seen firsthand multiple missed diagnoses of babies in the womb that turned out perfectly healthy) to doubt the commonality of those situations. Morally, I think a good mother ought to be willing to sacrifice herself for her child, but I'm not standing here advocating forcing that to happen.

Abortion is far and away an elective procedure in this country. It is far and away used as a contraceptive. And by and large the left, if they follow out their own logic, approve of "abortions" up to and beyond birth. This is your own position, you're just too chickensh** to follow it all the way out.
Since the bolded is incorrect, then anything subsequent is irrelevant because your position is based on an unreasonable position that lacks nuance.
 

ButchPlz

We do a little trollin'
Joined
Aug 27, 2014
Messages
14,508
Likes
27,295
It’s actually the end of any rational and logical discussion. And frankly that was pages back. But by all means keep the emotional disinformation going it’s pretty hilarious to watch.
If I was in here screeching about this ruling being an "abortion ban" I guess I wouldn't be an "emotional train wreck".
 

Franklin Pierce

Well-Known Member
Joined
May 4, 2014
Messages
20,027
Likes
24,838
LAPD Charges Man with Attempted Murder During Roe v. Wade Protests

A California man was arrested and charged with attempted murder of Los Angeles police officers Friday as pro-abortion protesters took to the streets in the aftermath of the SCOTUS abortion ruling.

Michael Ortiz, 30, and Juliana Bernado, 23, were among those arrested during a clash with police officers in the downtown Los Angeles, Los Angeles Police Department (LAPD) Chief Michel Moore said.

The protests went long into the night before members of the crowd began “throwing fireworks and other makeshift weapons” at the officers, police alleged.

Such was the press of people the LAPD declared an unlawful assembly late in the night after protesters filled downtown streets and some briefly blocked traffic on two freeways.

Ortiz was allegedly among those members. He is accused of throwing a makeshift flamethrower at an officer, who had to be treated for burns. He was charged with the attempted murder of a police officer, KTLA reported.

At some point in the night, Bernado allegedly attempted to take an officer’s baton and was subsequently taken into custody, the New York Post reported. She faces possible charges for resisting arrest.

LAPD Charges Man with Attempted Murder During Roe v. Wade Protests
 

Jxn Vol

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 28, 2011
Messages
5,077
Likes
8,938
Great question. It’s not just the insurance companies that it’s creating a nightmare for, it’s patients, physicians, healthcare providers, state licensing agencies… it’s just going to create a mess.
No it’s not. Just stop. This is pot stirring BS. Healthcare has always dealt with different states providing different services by different providers. For example nurse midwives can deliver solo in some states. And the insurance companies are able to manage this.
 

ButchPlz

We do a little trollin'
Joined
Aug 27, 2014
Messages
14,508
Likes
27,295
Great question. It’s not just the insurance companies that it’s creating a nightmare for, it’s patients, physicians, healthcare providers, state licensing agencies… it’s just going to create a mess.
Are you a pro-self-determination anarchist or a statist/corporatist shill? We should only make legal rulings based on how easy it is for megacorps to manage?

Lord have mercy this level of density must be tough.
 

Vol Main

Well-Known Member
Joined
Sep 22, 2010
Messages
12,609
Likes
4,329
I'm saying if (in the recent case) said mal-adjusted teenager had not been encouraged in his mental illness and his own failures, it wouldn't have happened. But this has nothing to do with 1) abortion, 2) a militia, and 3) the ****** memes you produce, so what's the point?
If you do not get the point, what I am supposed to do for you?
 

NorthDallas40

Displaced Hillbilly
Joined
Oct 3, 2014
Messages
47,625
Likes
64,800
No it’s not. Just stop. This is pot stirring BS. Healthcare has always dealt with different states providing different services by different providers. For example nurse midwives can deliver solo in some states. And the insurance companies are able to manage this.
We all saw that one a mile off but I chose to leave it teed up for a healthcare professional to jump on which I think you are.
 

Caculator

No sane person wants to live on planet of the apes
Joined
Nov 30, 2013
Messages
2,387
Likes
2,892
Likes: InVOLuntary

ButchPlz

We do a little trollin'
Joined
Aug 27, 2014
Messages
14,508
Likes
27,295
'Congresswoman Marjorie Taylor Greene has authored a bill which would designate radical anti-life, pro-mass abortion groups Jane’s Revenge and Ruth Sent Us as domestic terror factions, following a spate of vicious attacks on pro-life groups as well as the recent attempted murder of Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh. The bill follows a letter obtained by the Daily Wire which revealed growing support for the move amongst Republicans in the United States Congress'.
And as way out there as she can be, she is absolutely correct here. These groups openly and publicly terrorize regular, everyday folks in an attempt to get their way.

I imagine we have more than a few supporters of those groups here, but it's alright if they interfere with the self determination of people they disagree with.
 
Likes: InVOLuntary

ButchPlz

We do a little trollin'
Joined
Aug 27, 2014
Messages
14,508
Likes
27,295
Since the bolded is incorrect, then anything subsequent is irrelevant because your position is based on an unreasonable position that lacks nuance.
Fantastic rebuttal. The detail is exquisite. I'm enriched from this thoughtfully crafted, certainly unemotional response from someone that has lithely proven his impeccable genius to us foolish urchins beneath him.
 

OHvol40

Well-Known Member
Joined
Oct 23, 2008
Messages
8,459
Likes
4,189
No it’s not. Just stop. This is pot stirring BS. Healthcare has always dealt with different states providing different services by different providers. For example nurse midwives can deliver solo in some states. And the insurance companies are able to manage this.
It’s not as simple as X can perform Y in state A but not state B.

Maybe it would help if you put yourself in this position: You’re an OB doctor and practice in the 4 corners region. You’re licensed and practice in all 4 states with a single provider. That provider generally accepts 3 private insurances plus CMS. Now, all 4 states have extremely different laws on abortion rights. One is completely open, two are partially restricted, and the forth is extremely restrictive.

The two that are partially restrictive have poor/no definitions regarding what is allowed stating abortion is allowed “in cases that endanger maternal health.” What does that mean? Does that mean preeclampsia qualifies? How about Hyperemesis gravidarum? Placental abruption? Maternal coagulation disorders? Gestational diabetes? Do you have to justify this to the state in every instance? Can women in the restricted state go to the unrestricted state for an elective abortion?
Now two of the insurance companies pull their coverage from the restrictive state, and they all rewrite their own criteria coverage of maternal coverage, what is covered, when, where, and why.

The HC provider closes their clinics in restrictive state on ethical and financial grounds.

Of course all of the new state laws will restrict a potential patient’s options, so will their shifting insurance requirements.
 

OHvol40

Well-Known Member
Joined
Oct 23, 2008
Messages
8,459
Likes
4,189
Come on @OHvol40, tell us precisely why, at the moment of "viability" (please define), a baby no longer interferes with a woman's "right to self determination" and therefore an abortion is unacceptable.
Because it’s not a person until it can live independently in a human environment. Assuming anything different, as I said, lacks nuance. Also, I believe viability has it’s own definition, but in your context (fetal viability) is the ability to survive outside the uterus.
 

ButchPlz

We do a little trollin'
Joined
Aug 27, 2014
Messages
14,508
Likes
27,295
Because it’s not a person until it can live independently in a human environment. Assuming anything different, as I said, lacks nuance. Also, I believe viability has it’s own definition, but in your context (fetal viability) is the ability to survive outside the uterus.
And now you're abandoning self determination.
 

allvol123

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jun 3, 2006
Messages
48,363
Likes
45,540
This decision by the SC wasn’t a morality decision. It was a law/Constitution decision.

Y’all are feeding into the left’s side by debating the morality of abortion. What is being overlooked is how much of a big deal that the federal government was checked by this decision. It has the potential to snowball.
this times a 100.
 

Orangeburst

Attention all Planets of the Solar Federation
Joined
Jun 19, 2008
Messages
25,719
Likes
47,462

ButchPlz

We do a little trollin'
Joined
Aug 27, 2014
Messages
14,508
Likes
27,295
According to some of the holier-than-thou boneheads here, she is guilty of nine homicides. Were they reckless or negligent homicides or involuntary homicides? Or were they murders? Duh.

Sharon Stone Revealed She's Had Nine Miscarriages In A Powerful Statement About Reproductive Health
I don't think anyone here believes miscarriages are homicides.

The problem is when the left tries to paint a picture of "extremists" on the other side, it is obvious parody that nobody buys. When the right paints "extremists" on the other side, it usually ends up being a little too accurate.
 

VN Store




Top