I'm a progressive I'm also pro life, abortion rights are doomed, give up the fight.

Why would I go threw a whole bill to find the specifics when it's everywhere on every news site

 

FoxHastings said: ↑
Why TF should I look it up?....I didn't make any claim about it...that would be YOU

Because YOU are claiming something from the bill.


Because I did not bring it up....YOU mentioned this law so it's on YOU to show the parts YOU want to discuss.....it's a simple concept...


Gee, gosh, if it's everywhere then YOU should be able to find the part you claim is true and show it to me ….

(and the word is "through" not "threw" )

 

You didn't read the link I showed you. So that's on you.

INB4 I dud not seen no link, warrr dat link.

 

FoxHastings said: ↑
Why TF should I look it up?....I didn't make any claim about it...that would be YOU




Because YOU are claiming something from the bill.


Because I did not bring it up....YOU mentioned this law so it's on YOU to show the parts YOU want to discuss.....it's a simple concept...


Gee, gosh, if it's everywhere then YOU should be able to find the part you claim is true and show it to me ….

(and the word is "through" not "threw" )


DO YOU KNOW WHO "YOU" IS IN THE ABOVE POST ?

AGAIN: why should I read your link?

YOU, uh, that means YOU not me, made a claim about this law....therefore any sane person would see that it is up to you to show me the words in the law that say what YOU , not me, claim they say.


I didn't ask for a link , I asked you to show me the words where the law says what you claim.....and you obviously CAN'T...


Why TF should I sift through YOUR link???


Now if you can't produce what you say is in the bill, and obviously you can't....good bye...there is no point in further discussion....

 

It was in the frocking title!

 

So you DO know what the bill achieved?

 

FoxHastings said: ↑
SEE, NO where did I claim ""NY passed a bill that doesn't actually achieve anything"

You're twisting desperately now...

The statement of mine you quoted above in no way indicates that I ""DO know what the bill achieved""

Now, I have no idea why you want it to appear that way ...that's so weird how you have no point but so desperately want me to say something I never said...

This is what I said:
NO where did I claim ""NY passed a bill that doesn't actually achieve anything"


If you want to twist that to say, ""I vacationed in the Canadian Rockies"...well, I guess you can but that's not what it says.



And, once again, you show that YOU have no idea what the bill achieved...

 

It was a question. Do you know what the bill achieved?

 

Don't you ?

 

I'm asking you. Why are you unable to answer?

 

Why are you unable to state the law you're talking about ?

Why can you only ask questions but never have answers?

 

Reproductive Health Act, what the hell else?

 

What about it?

 

What do you think it achieved?

 

This reminds me of that old nursery rhyme "Ring Around the Rosy"...and around and around and around and STILL YOU have not made a POINT

STILL you have NOT shown any part of this bill that you and that other poster seem to need to talk about so desperately but can't seem to find !!

The bill you're both making claims about but can't seem to show any part of …. even tho YOU and the other poster brought it up....I didn't..


Let's keep going../.it's so much fun going around in circles...What do YOU think it achieved?

 

There's no point in continuing unless you know about the law and what it actually achieved.

 

Correct, there's no point in continuing unless you know about the law and what it actually achieved.

 

Okay, but I asked you first, so why can't you say? Are you really THAT incompetent?

 

See if you really knew that the bill didn't have any of the stuff claimed in it thus making easy to debunk and easy for pro choicers to morally back, then you would just show proof but since you can't you just to delay things by only accepting direct copy paste from the actual bill instead of media exerts.

 

It actually doesn't say that explicitly, but the language and wording of the law seem likely to have that outcome.

The main thing is, an abortion assistant who's not a doctor can decide to give a woman a late-term abortion if she thinks there are "health" reasons, and that could be all sorts of different things, or just about anything.

The law is worded very vaguely and loose, so it seems like it was probably designed to allow late-term abortion without being obviously worded that way.
There's also a statement of intent in that law that a woman has the right to abort her pregnancy, and there are no exceptions written into that statement of intent.

Before this the state's law actually didn't have any specific formal provisions in its law legalizing late-term abortions for exceptional reasons, but it was effectively legal through court precedents (New York has traditionally been the most pro-abortion state, so that was never really in question).
The ostensible reason for this new law was really more a formality.

 

FoxHastings said: ↑
Correct, there's no point in continuing unless you know about the law and what it actually achieved.

Rule No. 1 for Anti-Choicers: " Get frustrated so make an insult""

How childish.

I bet you want posters to forget that you and your friend were the one who brought up this "law"...that put's the onus on you to show the law.

The onus is not on me to show YOU the law YOU brought into the thread.... I didn't bring this "law" into the thread ...

Don't you and your friend know what personal responsibility is?

 

YOU introduced this "bill" or "law" into the thread and still can't show what it says


YOU brought it into the thread, the onus is on YOU to show what it says...

It's called taking personal responsibility and backing up what you claim

 

The law says, "at ANY time." Seems pretty clear to me.

 

The fact that it allows abortion at any time for health reasons.

 

Where does it say that....please backup your contention with the actual words and context from the bill....or you have nothing...