Ohio Democrat Drafts Amendment Seeking To Make Black Babies Exempt From Pro-Life Law

In other words, a law which forces women to carry out a pregnancy against their will. I agree 100%. Fact.

And I should point out that the title doesn't say that black WOMEN would be exempt, but black BABIES. Where in the bill does this State Representative give exemptions to babies? Can BABIES have abortions?

See response to "fact" #1.

I have no idea why you are making this point. Nobody was arguing that. I was making the argument that pro-life folks tend to use these articles to promote their black-baby conspiracies. That's all. Get it, now?

Please read what you just said here again. And read it once more after that. Women are not babies, yet you are using the terms interchangeably here. You are incorrect. This THREAD and this STORY are about BLACK BABIES, but the BILL is about BLACK WOMEN.

Please note this important distinction. Babies cannot have abortions. Therefore, babies cannot be "exempt" from this piece of legislation. In fact, babies have nothing to do with any of this. The word "babies" was strategically used to elicit an emotional response.

 

Democrats didn’t take money from abortion provider, Planned Parenthood?
Planned Parenthood doesn’t preform abortions?

Sorry, but your poor attempt at semantics isn’t going to help you out of this. You said I was engaging in conspiracies. That’s obviously not the case. You were wrong, own up to it.

 

OK....finally. We are getting somewhere.

Response to Fact #1 - Yeah, some people see it as "women being force to carry full term".....while others see it as "allowing a innocent a chance for life". I am Pro-Choice for the most part, but I can definitely understand a law that prevents "regular" abortions after a heartbeat is heard and there is some basis for "life".

I agree that there are many people that have differing opinions on abortions...and, yes, there will be some that will use these article for conspiracies. However, demanding that a thread be removed because it does not agree with your own opinions or because you do not feel they should be used to promote any conspiracy is not the right way to go about it. You are basically trying to silence the opinions of other because you do not agree with their opinion.....at least, that is how it comes across.

I agree that the title should have said "women" and not "babies". I did catch that right away, however, it is still correct. If a woman is getting an abortion, there is an assumption that a "baby" or, as a more proper term, a "fetus" is involved. While the "baby" may not be specifically exempt, they are exempt through association. It was a small enough of an oversight that was not worthy of the outrage. While I do agree that it might have been used intentionally to make it more sensationalizing, it is not an uncommon tactic in ALL media.....as I said, certainly not worthy of the outrage you expressed.

 

Thread win.

 

I don't agree that black women should be exempt from heartbeat legislation.

 

Good. Glad that was cleared up.

It was hardly a "demand." Nobody is trying to silence anybody. It was simply a call for objectivity. If you are as intelligent as I think you are, then you should agree that the American political conversation has devolved to such a horrid state that nothing is coherent anymore. How can anybody have a conversation in these alarmist conditions?

As for the topic---I think it is a very strategic move on the State Representative's part. If they can successfully make the argument for black women that their being forced to carry a pregnancy full-term is akin to the conditions of slavery, then the same argument can be extended to all women. So perhaps this is not so "race-based" as people are making it out to be. All women in fact become slaves if they are told that they cannot handle their health and body issues according to their own will.

 

Please look up the definition of "semantics." I think it's highly ironic that I need to ask you to do that.

You are engaging in conspiracies because that is quite a broad stroke on a very narrow point of view. I can make the same argument (though I won't, because I'm more open-minded) that the NRA supports guns which kill people--real people, not fetuses-- and they contribute many more millions of dollars to the Republicans. Therefore, Republicans are making blood money. Right?

 

I don't think any laws should be made or segregated because of race. Period.

As I said, I am pretty much pro-choice, however I think a moratorium on voluntary abortions once a heartbeat is heard is a reasonable compromise between the rights to the body for the mother and the inalienable rights of the unborn.

 

I'm not God, nor have I spoken to God or pretend to know what God wants.

The question of when "life" begins is highly philosophical. There is a slow transition somewhere from non-sentient to sentient. But we try to draw a hard line where it doesn't exist.

The majority of my logic gives the "win" to women. Mother knows best. However, I try to respect the pro-life argument even if I don't agree with it.

As a man, nobody gets to tell me what I can or can't do with my body--no matter how personally affected they may feel about it. I cannot in good conscience ask a woman to live by a different standard.

 

Founder of Planned Parenthood, Margaret Sanger.
“We do not want word to go out that we want to exterminate the Negro population,” Sanger wrote. —Letter to Dr. Clarence Gamble on Dec., 10, 1939

Apply a stern and rigid policy of sterilization and segregation to that grade of population whose progeny is tainted, or whose inheritance is such that objectionable traits may be transmitted to offspring."
-- Sanger, Margaret. “My Way to Peace,” Jan. 17, 1932. Margaret Sanger Papers, Library of Congress 130:198. https://www.nyu.edu/projects/s...

Last time I checked the NRA is a group that protects the 2nd amendment. I don’t think it’s in their mission statement to kill helpless unborn children.
I don’t think you know what a conspiracy is, so I’m going to help you out.

con·spir·a·cy
/kənˈspirəsē/
Learn to pronounce
noun

1. a secret plan by a group to do something unlawful or harmful.

There’s nothing unlawful about Abortion, since Roe v. Wade. Campaign finance laws allow America’s largest provider, to donate millions to Democrat candidates. Everything is pretty transparent for the most part. So, please enlighten me, how am I’m suggesting there’s a conspiracy, when Planned Parenthood profits off aborting almost 400,000 black children every year, and in turn donates millions to Democrats.

 

Since you are unwilling to research the legitimacy OR CONTEXT of this quote, let me do it for you.

https://www.factcheck.org/2011/11/cains-false-attack-on-planned-parenthood/

You're welcome.

This isn't going to work with me. You can't just pick and choose quotes that confirm your biases. This is a wasted effort on your part.

Neither is it Planned Parenthood's. So what's your point?

Do you see where I underlined and bolded there? Once again, you're welcome.

Agreed! So...wait...why are we arguing, then?

Because you are clearly attempting to demonstrate a CONSPIRACY (remember the bolded underlined word I pointed out earlier) by democrats to kill black babies for profit. Otherwise you would not be posting these cherry-picked Margaret Sanger quotes, constantly pointing out that Planned Parenthood donates to Democrats and repeating phrases like "kill helpless unborn black children."

Please answer yes or no: Are you asserting that Democrats are killing black babies for profit?

If yes, good. That's what I thought you were saying. I respectfully disagree, and if you'd care to hear, I'll tell you why.

If no, then you need to work on summarizing your points better, because I have no idea what the hell you are trying to accomplish here.

 

Yawn, I never stated Democrats are killing black babies for profit. You pitifully tried arguing with me this whole time, while misquoting me.

Wow.

 

Please. Summarize what you ARE stating.

 

I’m not in the habit of repeating myself, if you can’t understand simple English, that’s on you.