I'll ask you again, are you the kind of man who would feel better about putting your little girl through that trauma if she was already a victim of sexual assault? Would you force her to do that knowing she was already traumatized and possibly scarred for life already? Would you want your child to have to carry and deliver a full grown baby, possibly causing her health complications and mental trauma for years, to spare an embryo? Not all parents want to put an already traumatized child through that, and I don't think they should be forced to. I disagree in forcing a child victim to go through that trauma. Children of sexual assault are victims. They are children, and not adults.
I see you still are avoiding my questions. Would you force your little girl to go through the trauma of carrying a baby and delivering it if she was sexually assaulted and 13 years old? Would you do it if she was traumatized, scared, crying, and having nightmares over the assault? Would you force her to go through that physical and mental pain? Would you force her to carry a baby knowing she could have health complications and mental trauma for years? Would you force your child to become a mother, even though she's only a child herself?
And what do the Rs say about abortion? The Rs say that the Ds want to abort/kill babies after they are born. This make up are 0% of abortions. This is such a political loser for the Rs. 70+% of the voters want abortions legal until after viability (24 months), with exceptions for the life of the mother. Ballot initiatives in effing R states agree. The Rs do not care about fatal fetal abnormalities ... or the life of the mother. Do you know what percentage of voters have mothers? Or who have wives, daughters, granddaughters, nieces, etc? Women have a much more nuanced opinion of abortions. I think as men we should listen to their opinions ... and ... let women draft abortion legislation.
The Rs are right. There is run away voter fraud ... by the Rs. By all means, we should let the Rs write more voter fraud laws ... which somehow would let more Rs avoid prosecution and deny more legal D votes. Georgia GOP vice chair booted for illegally voting 9 times as a convicted felon
You posted twice while I was asleep. I wasn't avoiding your question, I just don't generally post between 4 a.m. and 6 a.m. If I had a daughter, and if she were raped, I would take her to get a Plan B immediately so she never got pregnant in the first place. If she was already pregnant, I wouldn't support killing the child, I would take her to counseling and support her through the pregnancy process and steer her toward adoption (unless she wanted to keep the baby, in which case I would support her in that). They are talking about opposition to things like the Born Alive Infants Protection Act. There are a non-zero number of abortions that result in a live baby. Some Democrats (including famously Barak Obama) voted against that legislation that required doctors to try to keep those live babies alive. That is also a very small percentage of cases, so if the entire abortion debate was framed around those cases, it would be equally silly. It generally isn't. Pro-Life politicians (Republican or otherwise) should focus on the far more numerous cases instead of edge cases that don't come up very often. People should not decide moral issues on popularity. I would guess some do and some don't. 100. Probably a lot, but less than 100. I don't think we should limit policy decisions only to those directly impacted. Gun laws should not be limited to gun owners, even though they have a much more nuanced opinion than people who have never fired a gun. Policing laws should not be limited to law enforcement officers, even though they have a much more nuanced opinion of policing than the general public. It is a silly standard to have. Everyone can have an opinion on abortion, and no genital configuration affects the validity of those opinions.
Everyone can have an opinion on abortion but not everyone's opinion should be given the same weight. It is a silly standard to have. How about this? We limit the opinions on abortions to those who can pass a simple biological test on how a woman's body actually works. That would filter out perhaps a majority of men, who's knowledge of woman's body begins and ends with where their **** goes during sex.
Well, if Republicans have their way plan B will be off the table. In fact, if some Republicans get their way it will be legal to have child brides to have sex with, and they can't get charged for rape. That opens the doors wide open for sexual predators to lull young minds with evil intentions, and paves the way for families to sell their child for money into arranged marriages, where the child could be threatened into doing as told. All the counseling in the world won't take away the physical and mental trauma these children can suffer for years to come as long as a majority of men get their way with child brides and children being forced to bear children.
Again we will never come to agreement on abortion as this is where there is diametrically opposed moral and worldviews. This is the reason for a functioning democratic republic to determine where society ultimately stands in such things.
I think there all there to get the daily talking points in person on how they should lie about what's going on at the trial......funny they show up when Cohen takes the stand...............his wife still not there though, interesting. Never loved those "stand by your man" women after the guy does all of this, I mean her hubby is a convicted sex degenerate, has to pay millions to Jean C and now this......but yea, everyone is out to get him
I love Raskin. I'd vote for him in a heartbeat for President. He's so damn intelligent, no nonsense, and not afraid to call out ignorance and BS with cold hard facts.
The maga republican house of representatives lack of integrity is only exceeded by its incompetence... "back the blue" my a...
I suspect these are maga republican witnesses called in to testify in the maga government weaponization hearings?
