Texas 6-week abortion ban takes effect after Supreme Court inaction

nope very relevant
both are constitutional rights but you want to restrict one to the utmost and no restriction on the other
only difference is the one you want to restrict the crap out of is a stated right the only right that says shall not be infringed
the other a wrongly interpreted implied so called right

 

they believe more so in Human rights then unrestricted liberal abortion states
Texas wants to protect the rights of all Humans including the unborn
its you that want two classes of humans one with rights the other without
just like back in the days or democrat slavery
humans with no rights

 

Ummm. Do you also realise that both of those methods often do NOT prevent conception...?

 

umm no
many of been convicted of murder when the victim hasn't been identified

so what exactly are you implying anyways you aren't human unless you have a name?

 

Isn't Texas very 'pro' death penalty? Because that would seen to contradict your claim above - particularity the 'all' bit. I get the fact anti-abortion proponents would regard the fetus an a 'innocent' party but then your still left arguing that the 'guilty' deserve death while the 'innocent' don't. Which still leaves Texans making objective decisions about terminating human lives and just quibbling over which sub-set of 'lives' its actually OK to terminate

 

Yes which is why people should take responsibility for their behavior.

 

when the unborn commit a horrendous crime then you can make an equivalence
now you are absurdly grasping at straws

anyways the executed had a trail and many appeals
did the unborn have his/her day in court and convicted of anything?

so you two want two classes of humans one with rights one without
just like the democrat good ole days of slavery
humans with no rights and we all know how that ended

 

So women in Congress should be banned from voting about sending people to war because they can't know what it is like for government to force you to do so. President Biden should keep his mouth shut about abortion because he could never give birth.

It tries to remedy traffic accidents with traffic laws does the mean it is responsible for any damage I incur on those streets? It tries to remedy stealing by making it against the law does it mean if someone gets robbed it is responsible for their loses?

 

Define often and what percent of abortions are due to failed birth control?

 

Uhhh?? Let’s think this through...

You’re one of those people who like to use emotive language...”murdering babies”, etc..

When asked what you mean by “baby”, you claim that they come into existence at conception, right?

So, any action taken to destroy that foetus is “murder” according to you, yes?

The ‘morning after’ pill and the IUD can both be used in such a way that the foetus IS destroyed....but you now say you’re fine with that..!

Wha...???

 

They aren’t failures. Depending upon the type and timing of use, both of those methods can destroy the foetus...

 

Sure it is if it is a life. There is single cell life. We humans start as a single cell life, every human being starts as a single cell life, it is merely the first phase of that life a phase every human who has ever existed went through in their life. And it is human life, it is not potentially human meaning it could be some other life too. It is created as human and until it dies will remain a human.

That is basic embryology, the science. I thought we were supposed to base everything on science not strained justifications to kill that life.

 

And I have yet to figure out what I got out of this right to privacy the SCOTUS says exist or is it only women have a right to privacy.

 

you said

as to: IUD birth control pills prophylactics or some of the other various methods.

Which is actual more than four methods. Define often. And there is no timing with an IUD which is practically full proof. Same with birth control pills you don't time them with the sex you take them routinely and even if you miss a day you can take an extra does the next day and prevent a pregnancy and of course is the woman really wants to make sure she can get a widely available morning after pill.

None of those methods destroy the baby. The either prevent the implantation by prevent the uterus from creating the necessary wall for implantation or with a condom a barrier.

The only time the baby is destroyed is when the mother chooses to kill it in an abortion.

 

Given that women will be FORCED to remain pregnant there will be MORE of them DYING as a result of giving BIRTH to UNWANTED children.

And since that is what YOU want your comment about being despicable applies.

 

Bingo!

You just NAILED to crux of the issue!

This NEFARIOUS TX abortion of a law REMOVES the CONSEQUENCES of frivolous lawsuits.

It makes a complete and utter MOCKERY of the legal system and the Roberts SCrOTUS is 100% LIABLE for allowing it to become law.

There is going to be a very steep price to pay for their MALFEASANCE.

 

Well yeah you were and that life is just as viable and valuable as you were at that stage of your life, we keep lots of people alive by artificial means whose lives are not "viable" that is false argument. What is "viable" anyway, the baby from the moment of conception as long as it is receives nourishment will viably continue to grow through the various stages of life we all go through. Nothing else has to be done to create it. A baby just born placed on a table is not very viable. It won't last very long just laying there. It has to have nourishment and that has to be provided for by another human being.

And no I am not an embryologist and never claimed to be one, you don't have to be one to discuss embryology but I did take embryology classes when I was majoring in biology admitting a long time ago but the basics hasn't changed much.

 

There is NOTHING that is more personal than what happens INSIDE the body of another person and yet YOU applaud a law allowing strangers to PRY inside the bodies of women.

 

WRONG!

Your ONEROUS Texas law allows you to file a lawsuit containing false charges WITHOUT being held liable.

 

A FETUS is NOT a "someone else".

Try sticking to the FACTS and the Law of the Land!

 

A) I see no reason why both examples could not, simultaneously, be true.

B) The main point, of course, was that your suggestion that one's being spied on, & reported to authorities (the civil court), fit this idea of reaping what one had sown, was an erroneous one.

Hard to say that this doesn't paint Texas Republicans, as the anti-freedom party; just look where else have existed, & do exist, societies which are encouraged to report on one's neighbors-- not for suspicious, serious criminal activity, like bomb-making, for instance, but-- for being socially incorrect (like speaking ill of the ruling party); and from someone, I'm moderately sure, who has no love for political correctness.

Lastly, I will point out that you cannot claim that the offender is committing the crime of murder-- or any felony, for that matter-- when the case is resolved in civil (not criminal) court, when the maximum penalty to the woman is the suer's legal fees and, for anyone else involved, a fine of $10,000.

 

Having an abortion is the RESPONSIBLE alternative to FORCING a woman to give birth to an UNWANTED child.

 

So you are advocating ABSTINANCE instead?

Why has that FAILED so miserably in all of your RED states?

 

is the unborn human?

 

BWHAHAHAHAHHAAHHA!

There is NO "scientific moment of creation"!

That is THEIST bovine excrement!

But thanks for EXPOSING your dearth of science knowledge on this matter and thereby rending your content irrelevant as far as any meaningful interaction is concerned.



Have a nice day!