Supreme court strikes down strict Texas abortion law aimed at closing clinics

For a great many women, being pregnant causes dread, not joy. Again you prove that you choose only to look at one side of that coin.

That's the thing, being pro-choice doesn't cause me to force my morality on anyone ever. All I care about is that all women have the right to choose, I don't really care if they choose to have a baby or abort a fetus, the fact that they have the choice is enough.

I am, you're just making **** up because otherwise your position makes no sense from a legal standpoint.

Again, stealing is universally seen as inherently wrong. Abortion isn't.

 

Hmmmmm. I wonder what other irrelevant garbage you're going to post in this thread.

 

The people have had the debates and it is absolutely the right thing for judges to protect the rights of women to be secure in their persons.

Perhaps not, but you are trying to force your moral beliefs onto women who don't share them.

Yes, because women's right to be secure in their persons was being denied them.

Yes, and if we were talking about a "body" which could exist outside the uterus, this would be a very different conversation. However, you're talking about forcing a woman to use her uterus to bring a fetus to term when she doesn't want her uterus to be used that way.

Her choice, not yours.

There are a great many restrictions on abortions, so "is not impeded" is hyperbolic, to say nothing of the rest of the bullsh!t in this sentence.

Yes, of course. Until you're willing to help assure that every single child born can be fed, clothed, educated, and raised to be a normal, productive, healthy adult, then you have no place to be advocating for policies that would result in even MORE children being born in environments where they aren't wanted.

I love it when opinion pieces like this speculate at the end like this one did.

If wishes were horses, then dreamers would ride.

 

Could one of the pro-choice folks answer specifically at what point after conception does a "clump of cells" become a human being?

 

For me, the "line" would be viability. Once it can survive outside the woman's uterus, it is deserving of protection. IIRC, the earliest that would generally be would be about 24 weeks (50% of fetuses born at 24 weeks survive).

 

A simple straight-forward point that we cannot always control Nature. My problem is that people want to justify abortion on demand because Natures does it already.

 

So with that definition and some of the limits being 28 weeks or more, are the babies as defined by you as "human being" being murdered by the abortion process?

There have been babies that lived and are healthy that were born closer to 22 weeks and the record is 21 weeks 3 days. Do these little guys deserve a fighting chance at life?

 

Two things: 1) never make a big decision when you are emotional and 2) like it or not you knew this was a possible outcome of sexual activity

Uh, the creation in the womb? Notice I did not use the word baby so you couldn't just knee-jerk over-react? You're welcome! Most abortions are likely females; what about those uteri?

If I can admit that I am infringing on a woman's right to choose, why can you not admit that you are killing a human? HINT: because if you do, your "argument" goes limp.

Mine doesn't because of the greater good clause.

And taking another life? SEE ABOVE.

 

How is that irrelevant? She has a uterus; shouldn't see determine its fate?

 

Ah ok. Yea, I agree that's not a valid reason.

 

I didn't define those fetuses as "human beings," stop trying to put words in my mouth. I merely said that if I were to draw a line as to the point at which a woman should generally choose to keep or abort a fetus, that line would be viability.

If the government or some pro-life agency were willing to take on the fetus' healthcare requirements and all future needs, I would fully support the "abortion" option being changed for viable fetuses. Once it hits a certain gestational age, the choice becomes "bring it to term or sign away your parental rights."

Of course, you'll find some reason to believe that the woman should still be responsible for a fetus she doesn't even want to bring to term, but whatever.

 

Who says they are automatically making the abortion decision when they are emotional? Having a feeling of dread instead of joy regarding a pregnancy doesn't indicate that one is so emotionally consumed that they are incapable of making a decision.

Nice assumption, though.

And like it or not, a woman's choice extends long past the sexual activity.

I'm not forcing my morality on fetuses, even those with uteri. A fetus lacks the capacity to understand morality in the first place, my morality is reserved for the women whose choices you would remove based on your own personal moral beliefs.

No, because I'm not "killing" a thing, I don't even have a uterus. The woman who chooses abortion may not see that procedure as "killing" anything either, but that is up to her, her doctor, and her God. She gets to live based on her moral code and you don't get to force yours onto her.

No, yours doesn't make sense from a legal standpoint because the "greater good" is only in your opinion. It is based on your own personal moral beliefs, which aren't even shared by half of this country.

It is only a "life" in your opinion.

 

The woman in whose uterus the fetus is developing has a choice. Assuming there was a uterus inside that fetus, the fetus would have the "right" to choose what happens inside it.

 

Dread implies fear and that is an emotional response without question.

As does her responsibility to her creation.

There is a whole population of people, children and adults, who lack "the capacity to understand morality." Are you, likewise, going to do with them whatever you please? Of course not!

Gee, I wonder what her God thinks about it...

I love the fact that you keep pointing out that my views are just my "opinion" as if your stance was anything but the same.....

 

Who would ever choose saline solution or cutting tools?

 

I don't know how else to ask this, is cml "challenged"? How can you be an even mildly educated individual and not know Roe vs. Wade or it's implication on the 14th Amendment. This ruling has gone a mile over his head, it's very demoralizing watching what I assume is a grown man who interacts with society daily struggling with such a simple case. I hope his handler takes his computer privileges away.

 

Yes, but you're assuming that this emotion is all encompassing, pervasive, and renders the woman unable to make decisions for herself. One can have a feeling when considering some future event or circumstance, but not have that feeling be so overwhelming that they are unable to make decisions for themselves.

Why does only the woman feeling "dread" need to make her decisions without emotion, why does that not apply similarly to the woman making decisions when she feels joy?

She has no responsibility to "her creation" until and unless she chooses to bring the fetus to term and bear it.

In many ways, we already do. Many with mental disabilities are cared for from birth to death without making their own decisions. Such people don't face the same consequences for crimes as those who are mentally capable of understanding morality.

That's up to her to figure out. Personally, I don't believe God would have given us the ability to figure out how to perform abortions if they weren't part of His plan.

The difference is that my position doesn't require me to force my opinions on others or make people do things that they wouldn't do until I forced my opinion on them. I will never force a woman to have an abortion because that is her choice and nobody else's.

 

That is a general summary rule for everyone under any circumstance-- men or women. That's why we "sleep on it overnight" or legally have 3-days "right of recision"

What decision does the one feeling joy face? Maybe she should deal with her own dread rather than taking it out on an innocent life?

That would be.... your opinion?

That was my point. You don't kill off those who don't understand morality, but that's how you justify ending the child's life.

Really? Same with drugs? and WMD? and sexual predation? There's a lot that can wrong here....

Once again, and perhaps forevermore, you forgot about the baby-- oops I said it!

 

don't ruin it for me by implying that he's mentally handicapped! I read cml posts like I do /r/cringepics when I want to instantly feel better about myself.

 

Did you check out this gem?