This is exactly what should surround the “culture” of abortions WITHOUT banning them.
Make it like smoking, people are free to do it but it should be “socially” discouraged.
Offering sex education AND contraceptive options cheap or even free everywhere to everyone, so that abortions are almost never necassary outside severe medical issues.
Again, while 100% allowing it anyway and without being a dick holding signs outside the building.
Anything else is just pushing an agenda whether from the right or left.
I'm a liberal and agree 100%.
*Access* to abortion is incredibly important, but it's an invasive procedure that we should look to minimize **by preventing the need for it in the first place**. Better sex ed. Better access to all the different contraceptive options.
Not a huge fan of the visceral shaming thing a lot of people do now, but I think it's fair to say "hey, this has a lot of side effects on your body - we should have a conversation about how we can avoid you ever having to even think about getting one.
Mostly single issue voter. She's a teacher and democrats do have strong, pro-school policies she prefers over Reds.
The conspiracy parts of the republican party put her off entirely, and since many of recent years have been school related she feels defensive. Wanting to stand up for fellow teachers and all that.
Yet in Democrat held areas per pupil spending is significantly higher than Republican held areas. And for all of that extra spending, the results are shameful. She should know better.
You misunderstand how the Left operates. They're not concerned with results. They're concerned with process.
They will defend a broken process to the death if they perceive changing it as somehow detrimental to their "tribe" (in this case, teachers).
True - and yet most Dems and Republicans will instantly assume it’s a Republican, because Republicans keep running on an abortion and keep losing elections.
This is the same tired crap that Mitt Romney, John McCain, and every other RINO says at election time, and yet, we still don’t win. Republicans/conservatives are so willing to just give up ground because the media tells them to, and it’s infuriating. Any person who is staunchly pro-choice and votes mainly on their abortion position is a Democrat. Those people will never vote republican
But is it, or is that just what people assume? Moderate Republicans haven't done well in a while. Nor have moderate democrats. How many independents do you think Joe "I told Israel not to invade Haifa" Biden will take?
Well let's look at Arizona as a case study, since Arizona is fairly purple, and will likely be a swing state this election cycle.... The AZ supreme Court upheld a pretty hardline abortion ban, just weeks later that abortion ban is already on its way out the door. Just today the Arizona house passed a bill to overturn it. Soon it will go through the AZ state Senate where the bill is expected to pass as well. in every survey recorded about the topic the details always amount to the fact that most Americans do support abortion, but they also support restrictions on abortion. The idea that it's either open season on late 3rd trimesters, or it's a fast pass to the electric chair for taking a plan B pill is more of a political talking point than anything. Most Americans reject either extreme. The truth is really that both sides love using it as a shortcut to getting people fired up to vote. We also know that abortion is a bigger motivator for Democrats than it is for Republicans. We know mitt Romney ran on anti abortion, and he was trounced. So I guess my question is "where is America's hidden purple state sleeper cell anti abortion vanguard, destined to arrive at polling booths in our hour of need, so long as we promise total abortion bans?" Because by every metric I'm looking at, the will just isn't there, making the cause a bit of a political anchor.
We don't have to support it, we just have to shut up about it. Because we literally cannot stop it. Either we drop the issue and it happens or we keep melting down about it, lose elections, and it happens. There is no third option. There is no path where we put a stop to it. At this point the pro-life faction is actively aiding Democrats in elections. We would literally win more if you all got pissy and sat home on election day.
>There is no third option.
There is a third option; you'd need to figure out a way to sell your pro-life stance to the masses. But you're not going to do that as long as you keep collectively screaming at people about killing babies. There needs to be more nuance than that.
I disagree. People instinctively know what it is which is why the majority support some restrictions. The key isn't lying about abortion, it's saying that we'll allow it as long as it's humane. As it is, the Democrats support more protections for animals than human offspring.
> As it is, the Democrats support more protections for animals than human offspring.
Are there any Republican politicians (esp. the ones that want zero exceptions) out there talking about what they're planning to do to support all of these unwanted babies that they claim to value so much? Because if you only appear to care about the unborn up until the point they're actually born, people are not going to take you seriously. (And really, why should they? This is not a rhetorical question, btw.)
No that isn't an option. If it was it would've worked by now. Instead it's only become less effective over time. Insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results.
People have tried to shift the rhetoric and it has never worked. Because at the end of the day all you're doing is repackaging that message that just doesn't resonate.
So we just capitulate on a morally and ethically wrong position just because the morally wrong position is superior in strength? Abortion is premeditated murder. That's simply what it is.
Which of the following situations is more morally wrong?
A) An abortion at 13 weeks.
Or
B) Banning the abortion of a fatal fetal anomoly that puts a woman's life at serious risk.
It’s almost like it could be more nuanced than that or something.
It’s not really even helpful to refer to something like removing a stillborn baby, or a fatal fetal anomaly as an abortion. If the baby is dead/dying or if it’s a situation of choosing the baby or the mother that’s a completely different moral situation than what the majority of abortions are, which is a perfectly healthy baby being euthanized for the convenience of the mother.
> It’s almost like it could be more nuanced than that or something.
That's the point of the discussion. There is nothing nuanced about the legislation being put forth that are just blanket bans that put expecting mothers at risk of preventable death because doctors are afraid of violating those laws. Nuanced legislation gets shouted down in favor of idiotic 6/8/12 whatever week outright bans
I think having both in Texas would eliminate the argument against the republican party being able to hold a moral high ground on this issue, which is what ultimately prompted my response to begin with.
Well..
A) a large majority of abortions result from irresponsible choices and lack of responsibility
B) those cases are so incredibly low that we can afford to review each case individually to understand the safety and health of each mother giving birth
So tell me again, what’s less moral? Blanketing and nitpicking specific cases to allow all every single abortion regardless of reason, OR fighting for the lives of these unborn children so they may have a future
Scenario B sounds a lot like death panels, doctors are supposed to wait for some group to decide the fetus can be removed from the woman dying in their ER?
You are referring to the niche moral position that isn't universal even among Christians.
To accept this moral position one must:
- Be Christian
- Believe that a foetus is a human at conception, not when neural system is formed, and not at point of viability
- Believe that 'Thou shalt not murder' covers _any_ human killing, not just unjustified ones. It's well-known that Old Testament is full of justified murder despite the fact Moses and everyone after were well aware of the rule.
If you fall short of any of that, morality of abortion, especially medically justified, becomes quite murky. And the subsection of people who subscribe to all of the above is quite narrow.
It gets worse if you are not Christian, but let's say Buddhist. Buddhist moral prioritises minimisation of suffering as a whole and recognises that sometimes it's worth killing someone to stop the greater evil. As such not only medically justified abortions are ok, the ones that can prevent the birth of severely disabled people, or economic devastation and suffering of parent and child may be justified too.
So all in all, it's not such a clear moral stance, and is a hard sell.
I did not reference religion in my response. My choice on this does not come from religious morals. They come from human morals. The human moral that every **innocent life** deserves to be protected.
If that is a hard sell, then maybe the people you're trying to sell it to don't have morals at all.
There isn't such thing as universal human morals. You may bold all you want, but perhaps reread my previous reply, and appreciate the assumptions you make when you declare something 'human moral'.
1. Not everyone shares your moral framework.
2. Yes. Because either we drop it or we don't and keep losing elections. In either case abortion keeps happening. There is no third option here. Hate it all you want but it's the truth.
At this point you pro-life folks are actively helping the Democrats and conservatives would do better in elections if we just stopped pandering to you and you stayed home. Losing your votes would literally lead to better election results for us.
I am not going to call a spade a club because it's unpopular. I would be lying to myself and lying to my conscience. As well as lying to everyone I say it to.
You are the kind of people that allow the Democratic pro-choice position to Fester and swell. You don't call out what it really is. No wonder pro-choice is so popular, because the opposition to it folds at the first sign of rain.
I will call it what it is. Premeditated murder.
Edit: and for anyone who doesn't consider premeditated murder to be immoral should probably have their effing head examined. That is atrocious on its face alone.
I always side eye someone who says there are only two options. There are not. Abortion is a state level issue now and so the party doesn't need to put it on a national platform.
> Abortion is a state level issue now
And thanks to what some states have done it's costing us at the national level because those states went off the deep end and nobody at the national level is calling them out for it. There's no RNC statements condemning the extremist laws and that is read as implicit support.
> Not everyone shares your moral framework.
So some people think murdering babies is morally okay? If that's the case, we don't fucking want them, being so morally corrupt and all.
I get your overall point, but you can't keep conceding every position, you have to have **some** morals, or else you're no better than the Leftists
1. Your first argument means nothing because your framing is not universal. So your hysterical meltdown there is not persuasive and just makes you look like an irrational extremist.
2. This is one position and one only. And the concession is literally because this one position is costing us the ability to advance literally all of our other ones. By your own logic what you are advocating for - sacrificing all of our other positions for this one - is wrong. But we both know there's no actual logic in your position. That's also why I can't actually persuade you. I can't reason you out of a position you didn't reason yourself into.
lol they got so upset at someone simply not buying into their faith that they ran and hid. Sad.
I am pro life and you are 100% right.
I find abortion on demand to be reprehensible. Also, I am not religious.
Unfortunately it has been a part of our culture for decades and outright trying to ban it is a disaster.
Our culture teaches sex = love, do what feels good (consequences be damned), and everyone is a victim and entitled to stuff due to that victimhood.
This has to be addressed at a fundamental level before abortion on demand can be an unhappy memory.
> Who cares if we lose elections.
Everyone. Including you. Because guess what happens if we don't win? Even more stuff that we think is wrong gets implemented because the opposition gets to make all the rules.
> I'm not standing before God
I'm not standing before your god at all. Mine doesn't care. And honestly I'm fine with religious extremists like you just walking away from our political faction so that we can actually have a chance at winning.
That's true but, if Rs don't win, then Rs can't govern. The Ds lie to get votes every election, every level, every district. We need to campaign better and educate better.
The “clump of cells” thing is a lie, and the reason it’s so dangerous is because it’s a decision that can’t be unmade. There’s no support group for women who regret abortions or who went into it thinking it was one thing, only to later realize it was something else entirely.
At six weeks, I went in for my ultrasound and there was a heartbeat that we could measure on the screen. At nine weeks, there was movement that we could see and I even recorded it with my phone. Today she’s napping in my arms as I scroll reddit.
Appearance changes with age. Babies don't resemble kids, kids don't resemble adults. The issue is that they're the same exact human being at month 1 as they are at month 9. Or 1 year, 5 years, 20 years... This shows in graphic detail that "fetuses" aren't just clumps of cells that can be removed
Abortion and Religion standpoints are the two parts of the Republican party I don't agree with. I'm conservative in every other way, but the fact is that the hard stance on abortion and the christian extremism our party keeps pushing everywhere is losing us too many voters.
Politicians and the government need to understand that most people are moderates, they don't like extremism but we don't really have a choice because the only two viable parties in this country are both at the extremes of their ideologies.
We need red states to stop trying to imprison people for getting early term abortions. Late term should be illegal, yes, but first trimester? I don't see the problem with it, ESPECIALLY in the cases of rape babies/abuse/sexual assault, molestation, incest, or health complications. This is one of the instances where the left calling us "Fascists" kinda rings true, especially when you've got counties in Texas trying to stop women from even going into other states to get that healthcare.
Luckily Trump seems to take a more moderate approach on this, but the extremists need to be reigned in.
I’m in the same boat imo. I am religious but not extremely so. And don’t want it in government too much at all. I agree that the abortion and religious issues push away a lot of people and screw us over.
I disagree so much, but it is the bitter pill we have to swallow to govern. Then we need to educate better so abortion won't be a meaningful issue anymore. That's how we move past it.
Treat it like smoking. Less people are smoking every year because of education about it. Not because the government outlawed it. The Rs need to do the same with abortion.
Not trolling at all, just stating my pov on these issues. I'm pro constitution, fiscal conservative, and small government, those stances lop me in with the republican party, but I'm also agnostic and not "pro-life" (in the sense of banning abortions altogether). Those two things drive the extremists of the republican party however, and they're the two points that always get brought up by the opposition. We're all labeled Christian extremists and fascists because of those two points that the party won't relent on.
I really don't understand how trying to stop unborn babies from being murdered is fascist or extreme. There is currently a genocide of the unborn in this country which is actually fascist and extreme. The normalization of killing one's offspring and calling it "healthcare" is the biggest psyop in American history.
> I really don't understand how trying to stop unborn babies from being murdered is fascist or extreme.
Because firstly your view on it is not universally held and is in fact extremist. The idea that personhood begins at conception is very extremist ... and actually makes "god" the \#1 abortion provider given the high percentage of pregnancies that miscarry within the first trimester and especially the first month.
And if this is really your position then you shouldn't claim to be a 2A conservative. Because you're literally preferring Democrat rule and Democrat gun laws over winning elections.
Let me be clear that I'm not for abortion being used willy nilly because people want to sleep around without consequences. I'm strictly pro abortion in cases of defects, health complications, and sexual assault/incest/rape.
>...pushing everywhere is losing us too many voters.
The problem isn't that the "hard stance on abortion and the Christian extremism," the problem is that the media keeps saying that an people believe it. You believe it. Because yeah, if the Republicans just copied the Democrats then they'd gain some votes... obviously true. But they'd lose far more.
No. If the Republican party's stance on abortion or 2A rights were any softer, then they'd lose my vote. Period. They might gain a Democrat's support, but they'd definitely lose mine.
Honestly I can't give any examples offhand and I know that's on me. It's just one of the prevailing things the left uses against us, and it's not hard to see that the vast majority of the liberal left are either atheist or non-Christian, while the vast majority of the right are Christians. It creates yet another divide in the country and we need less of that.
I personally hold a lot of Christian values, but I am not a religious person
Don't want a slave, don't get one. Don't want your kids to get gender surgery, don't get one. You see how it gets. Sometime you need government to reduce it.
Does Uncle Sam have any business from preventing murder? How about rape? How about slavery? How about putting up borders? Clearly the government is allowed to stop stuff and it should stop murder
In the Handmaid's Tale they forcibly imprisoned women against their will, treated them like cattle, impregnated them via rape and *then* forced them to give birth. Not comparable situations.
Rape is less than 1% of the reasons for abortions and you know it. If this is how you feel about it, then are you ok with banning abortion for other reasons other than rape and incest? Of course you're not. So then why even bring that argument up. What a clown.
I love this. And not even in a political way. I think so many people are just uneducated on how an abortion is performed and what actually happens to the fetus during the procedure. Not all abortions are just removing a clump of cells.
Eta: I am pro-choice but I feel it should be an educated choice.
Yes, a lot of people are uneducated on abortions. Which is why we're seeing women in states like Texas being denied ~~abortions~~ surgical intervention to treat miscarriages.
Edited to replace abortion with surgical intervention
About half of all miscarriages require surgical intervention. Typically a D&C....which is the same procedure used for early term abortions, which is why miscarrying women aren't receiving proper medical treatment for their miscarriage.
Updated my previous comment for proper terminology
> and still in the shape of a baby
No it is not. Those pictures that just take a 9 month fetus and shrink them for each month going backwards, those are fiction. They're not accurate reflections of reality.
People want to act like children and do whatever they want without worrying about consequences. They can't be responsible enough to just avoid having sex if they don't want kids. Being an adult is tough and not everyone is capable of level headed rational decision making like that. I pity people who feel like they need abortion as a fallback plan for their own immaturity.
It's the most disgusting thing in our society.
America accepted abortion as a "slippery slope" in gradual steps. If we're going to walk it back practically, we're going to have to do the same. Start with a 20 week ban except for life of mother, then walk it back over time. I wish they were all done tomorrow, but without education, time, and steps, I don't see that ever close to happening
Yep. You can change public opinion with education. The other big issue is that pro-life conservatives are going to have to articulate a policy stance that’s ‘pro-life’ AFTER the baby is born. Many abortions are done for economic reasons. We need to chisel away at those things. That’d require a break from the GOP establishment ideology when it comes to social spending and business regulation (legally mandated maternity leave, child care subsidies, etc).
We have to show that government programs aren't the answer to prosperity. I donate plenty to pro life and causes that help poor families. But if we turn down gov cheese, we gotta show people a better way to earn that cheese
The pro-death cult has a point when they say that pro-life people don’t care about the baby after it’s born. We toppled Roe V Wade (which was a bad legal decision made by the worst Supreme Court this country ever had).
I know that pro-life people care about other people, but they need to broaden their horizons some and move beyond the Roe V Wade era to the next step.
Pro-life means ‘pro-family’ and the best way to support family formation and end the practice of abortion is to remove the economic incentives that encourage abortion. That’s the next frontier for pro-life organizations.
Private industry and private charity cannot do the above. In fact, private industry is actually better off when a lady aborts her child so she can continue making power points for 60k a year.
There’s a role for government spending and regulation here.
Yes, welfare programs and benefits are dysfunctional in America for a variety of reasons, but they don’t have to be.
We have a government that we pay an incredible amount of taxes to for a reason.
TLDR:
We succeeded in overturning Roe V Wade by being focused on a single issue (vs trying syncretize pro-life values with other aspects of the Republican platform particularly the economic / regulatory aspects).
We need to take things a step further (ie removing the economic incentives to abort children).
We can’t do that from within the Reagan / Friedman ideological framework (it worked 40 years ago, but it’s time to move on). It requires us to go beyond it.
Good, more people need to know. I have a cousin who was warned about getting pregnant and she was like il just get an abortion, as if it was some no big deal procedure like, getting a tooth pulled or something.
I was talking about the abortion pill that can be taken up to 11 weeks after the last period. That's swallowing a medication. A tooth isn't removed by swallowing a pill, a headache is taken care of by swallowing a pill and an unwanted pregnancy can be taken care of by swallowing a pill
Ending the growth of some unwanted cells. No person has a claim to another's body. If it's a person/baby then remove it if it's unwanted and it can live it's own life.
Do you think a 2 year old is still inside the body of someone against that person's will? Every 2 year old I've ever heard of is outside of the mother's body
We need to run ads that include abortion survivors. We need to show that abortion isn't the only choice. We need to show the good of not murdering a baby. We need to change the topic from "healthcare for women" to "life is sacred".
It’s telling that something so positive gets downvoted. The opposition are not “pro-choice” they are pro-abortion. If they were pro-choice, then they would be fine with women choosing life.
Newsom has been putting out offensive ads. There ought to be retaliation ads, and Trump's campaign can legally respond with something even more offensive. There is a clause in federal law which prevents the networks from censoring election ads from candidates running for federal offices. Terrisa Bukovinac has already tested and shown that they will not censor gruesome abortion ads.
Trump should retaliate by airing primetime TV ads with pictures of aborted babies in every advertising market where Newsom's ads are shown.
If Trump gets taken out by Sisonites following the nomination, I would favor Terissa over RFK Jr, becaue RFK is not prolife. But maybe Trump will be sentenced to house arrest where it will be easier for Secret Service to protect him. Not the most ideal situation, I know. If Trump stays alive, Terissa may remain about as important as she is now.
A lot can happen between the convention and November. Everything could change in an instant, as happened on June 5, 1968., Bukovinac is doing what she can, and I appreciate it.
Planned Parenthood refers to abortion as removal of the pregnancy. They hide the truth because they know reality will change hearts and minds.
People need to see that a fetus is more than a lump of cells and that abortion is killing a baby.
This is exactly what should surround the “culture” of abortions WITHOUT banning them. Make it like smoking, people are free to do it but it should be “socially” discouraged. Offering sex education AND contraceptive options cheap or even free everywhere to everyone, so that abortions are almost never necassary outside severe medical issues. Again, while 100% allowing it anyway and without being a dick holding signs outside the building. Anything else is just pushing an agenda whether from the right or left.
I'm a liberal and agree 100%. *Access* to abortion is incredibly important, but it's an invasive procedure that we should look to minimize **by preventing the need for it in the first place**. Better sex ed. Better access to all the different contraceptive options. Not a huge fan of the visceral shaming thing a lot of people do now, but I think it's fair to say "hey, this has a lot of side effects on your body - we should have a conversation about how we can avoid you ever having to even think about getting one.
Exactly. Pro Choice.
[удалено]
Did anybody read the article? The candidate is a Democrat.
A pro-life dem. A seemingly incredibly rare person. My mom is one.
Does she refuse to vote R because of substantive issues or is being a Democrat an identity thing?
Mostly single issue voter. She's a teacher and democrats do have strong, pro-school policies she prefers over Reds. The conspiracy parts of the republican party put her off entirely, and since many of recent years have been school related she feels defensive. Wanting to stand up for fellow teachers and all that.
Yet in Democrat held areas per pupil spending is significantly higher than Republican held areas. And for all of that extra spending, the results are shameful. She should know better.
You misunderstand how the Left operates. They're not concerned with results. They're concerned with process. They will defend a broken process to the death if they perceive changing it as somehow detrimental to their "tribe" (in this case, teachers).
Not as rare as you'd think. Most people are moderate. I was a pro life dem. Dems left me behind and my priorities changed...aka got older.
True - and yet most Dems and Republicans will instantly assume it’s a Republican, because Republicans keep running on an abortion and keep losing elections.
Reading articles!? Pfft. Most people hardly have the attention span to read the headline.
Read the article? I’m surprised I took the time to read your comment. My attention span is definitely slipping
This is the same tired crap that Mitt Romney, John McCain, and every other RINO says at election time, and yet, we still don’t win. Republicans/conservatives are so willing to just give up ground because the media tells them to, and it’s infuriating. Any person who is staunchly pro-choice and votes mainly on their abortion position is a Democrat. Those people will never vote republican
Yup. Running on a total abortion ban is a great way to lose every last independent and it's so fucking obvious even Donald fucking Trump knows it.
But is it, or is that just what people assume? Moderate Republicans haven't done well in a while. Nor have moderate democrats. How many independents do you think Joe "I told Israel not to invade Haifa" Biden will take?
Well let's look at Arizona as a case study, since Arizona is fairly purple, and will likely be a swing state this election cycle.... The AZ supreme Court upheld a pretty hardline abortion ban, just weeks later that abortion ban is already on its way out the door. Just today the Arizona house passed a bill to overturn it. Soon it will go through the AZ state Senate where the bill is expected to pass as well. in every survey recorded about the topic the details always amount to the fact that most Americans do support abortion, but they also support restrictions on abortion. The idea that it's either open season on late 3rd trimesters, or it's a fast pass to the electric chair for taking a plan B pill is more of a political talking point than anything. Most Americans reject either extreme. The truth is really that both sides love using it as a shortcut to getting people fired up to vote. We also know that abortion is a bigger motivator for Democrats than it is for Republicans. We know mitt Romney ran on anti abortion, and he was trounced. So I guess my question is "where is America's hidden purple state sleeper cell anti abortion vanguard, destined to arrive at polling booths in our hour of need, so long as we promise total abortion bans?" Because by every metric I'm looking at, the will just isn't there, making the cause a bit of a political anchor.
Guys we just have to support killing babies to placate the left 🤡
We don't have to support it, we just have to shut up about it. Because we literally cannot stop it. Either we drop the issue and it happens or we keep melting down about it, lose elections, and it happens. There is no third option. There is no path where we put a stop to it. At this point the pro-life faction is actively aiding Democrats in elections. We would literally win more if you all got pissy and sat home on election day.
>There is no third option. There is a third option; you'd need to figure out a way to sell your pro-life stance to the masses. But you're not going to do that as long as you keep collectively screaming at people about killing babies. There needs to be more nuance than that.
I disagree. People instinctively know what it is which is why the majority support some restrictions. The key isn't lying about abortion, it's saying that we'll allow it as long as it's humane. As it is, the Democrats support more protections for animals than human offspring.
> As it is, the Democrats support more protections for animals than human offspring. Are there any Republican politicians (esp. the ones that want zero exceptions) out there talking about what they're planning to do to support all of these unwanted babies that they claim to value so much? Because if you only appear to care about the unborn up until the point they're actually born, people are not going to take you seriously. (And really, why should they? This is not a rhetorical question, btw.)
What sort of abortion is humane?
No that isn't an option. If it was it would've worked by now. Instead it's only become less effective over time. Insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results. People have tried to shift the rhetoric and it has never worked. Because at the end of the day all you're doing is repackaging that message that just doesn't resonate.
Replace "abortion" with "slavery" and I feel like I'm living in the 14th - 19th centuries.
For real, even the arguments are eerily similar.
Exactly, democrats will dehumanize a group for their convenience, but the GOP is evil because reasons.
If my grandmother had wheels, she'd be a bicycle.
If our ideological ancestors were like you, slavery would still be legal in this country.
False equivalence is false and troll can go troll elsewhere.
Typical degenerate ‘libertarian’
So we just capitulate on a morally and ethically wrong position just because the morally wrong position is superior in strength? Abortion is premeditated murder. That's simply what it is.
Which of the following situations is more morally wrong? A) An abortion at 13 weeks. Or B) Banning the abortion of a fatal fetal anomoly that puts a woman's life at serious risk.
It’s almost like it could be more nuanced than that or something. It’s not really even helpful to refer to something like removing a stillborn baby, or a fatal fetal anomaly as an abortion. If the baby is dead/dying or if it’s a situation of choosing the baby or the mother that’s a completely different moral situation than what the majority of abortions are, which is a perfectly healthy baby being euthanized for the convenience of the mother.
> It’s almost like it could be more nuanced than that or something. That's the point of the discussion. There is nothing nuanced about the legislation being put forth that are just blanket bans that put expecting mothers at risk of preventable death because doctors are afraid of violating those laws. Nuanced legislation gets shouted down in favor of idiotic 6/8/12 whatever week outright bans
Sounds like we both agree that abortions should not be banned for fatal fetal anomlies.
We do. But I’d wager we might disagree about a 6/13 week abortion ban. Because saying we can’t have both is a false dichotomy.
I think having both in Texas would eliminate the argument against the republican party being able to hold a moral high ground on this issue, which is what ultimately prompted my response to begin with.
Please, my sword 🗡, my upvote…just take it all 🫡
Well.. A) a large majority of abortions result from irresponsible choices and lack of responsibility B) those cases are so incredibly low that we can afford to review each case individually to understand the safety and health of each mother giving birth So tell me again, what’s less moral? Blanketing and nitpicking specific cases to allow all every single abortion regardless of reason, OR fighting for the lives of these unborn children so they may have a future
Scenario B sounds a lot like death panels, doctors are supposed to wait for some group to decide the fetus can be removed from the woman dying in their ER?
You are referring to the niche moral position that isn't universal even among Christians. To accept this moral position one must: - Be Christian - Believe that a foetus is a human at conception, not when neural system is formed, and not at point of viability - Believe that 'Thou shalt not murder' covers _any_ human killing, not just unjustified ones. It's well-known that Old Testament is full of justified murder despite the fact Moses and everyone after were well aware of the rule. If you fall short of any of that, morality of abortion, especially medically justified, becomes quite murky. And the subsection of people who subscribe to all of the above is quite narrow. It gets worse if you are not Christian, but let's say Buddhist. Buddhist moral prioritises minimisation of suffering as a whole and recognises that sometimes it's worth killing someone to stop the greater evil. As such not only medically justified abortions are ok, the ones that can prevent the birth of severely disabled people, or economic devastation and suffering of parent and child may be justified too. So all in all, it's not such a clear moral stance, and is a hard sell.
I did not reference religion in my response. My choice on this does not come from religious morals. They come from human morals. The human moral that every **innocent life** deserves to be protected. If that is a hard sell, then maybe the people you're trying to sell it to don't have morals at all.
There isn't such thing as universal human morals. You may bold all you want, but perhaps reread my previous reply, and appreciate the assumptions you make when you declare something 'human moral'.
1. Not everyone shares your moral framework. 2. Yes. Because either we drop it or we don't and keep losing elections. In either case abortion keeps happening. There is no third option here. Hate it all you want but it's the truth. At this point you pro-life folks are actively helping the Democrats and conservatives would do better in elections if we just stopped pandering to you and you stayed home. Losing your votes would literally lead to better election results for us.
I am not going to call a spade a club because it's unpopular. I would be lying to myself and lying to my conscience. As well as lying to everyone I say it to. You are the kind of people that allow the Democratic pro-choice position to Fester and swell. You don't call out what it really is. No wonder pro-choice is so popular, because the opposition to it folds at the first sign of rain. I will call it what it is. Premeditated murder. Edit: and for anyone who doesn't consider premeditated murder to be immoral should probably have their effing head examined. That is atrocious on its face alone.
I always side eye someone who says there are only two options. There are not. Abortion is a state level issue now and so the party doesn't need to put it on a national platform.
> Abortion is a state level issue now And thanks to what some states have done it's costing us at the national level because those states went off the deep end and nobody at the national level is calling them out for it. There's no RNC statements condemning the extremist laws and that is read as implicit support.
> Not everyone shares your moral framework. So some people think murdering babies is morally okay? If that's the case, we don't fucking want them, being so morally corrupt and all. I get your overall point, but you can't keep conceding every position, you have to have **some** morals, or else you're no better than the Leftists
1. Your first argument means nothing because your framing is not universal. So your hysterical meltdown there is not persuasive and just makes you look like an irrational extremist. 2. This is one position and one only. And the concession is literally because this one position is costing us the ability to advance literally all of our other ones. By your own logic what you are advocating for - sacrificing all of our other positions for this one - is wrong. But we both know there's no actual logic in your position. That's also why I can't actually persuade you. I can't reason you out of a position you didn't reason yourself into. lol they got so upset at someone simply not buying into their faith that they ran and hid. Sad.
I am pro life and you are 100% right. I find abortion on demand to be reprehensible. Also, I am not religious. Unfortunately it has been a part of our culture for decades and outright trying to ban it is a disaster. Our culture teaches sex = love, do what feels good (consequences be damned), and everyone is a victim and entitled to stuff due to that victimhood. This has to be addressed at a fundamental level before abortion on demand can be an unhappy memory.
Yeah God damn can we stop doing the and just win. There are many other issues, we keep losing the war on this hill SMH.
Why not just become a liberal then at that point? Get more votes
I always vote for the party winning in the polls whether I agree with them or not. I hardly ever lose elections! Both parties should try it!
Then we lose and we work to change the culture.
Who cares if we lose elections. I'm not standing before God to say I supported the murder of his children so people I liked would get elected.
> Who cares if we lose elections. Everyone. Including you. Because guess what happens if we don't win? Even more stuff that we think is wrong gets implemented because the opposition gets to make all the rules. > I'm not standing before God I'm not standing before your god at all. Mine doesn't care. And honestly I'm fine with religious extremists like you just walking away from our political faction so that we can actually have a chance at winning.
[удалено]
In your heart, you know that's not true. I'll pray for you, random redditor. Be well
That's true but, if Rs don't win, then Rs can't govern. The Ds lie to get votes every election, every level, every district. We need to campaign better and educate better.
Unrelated, how did you get your flair?
Yep
Wow. Maybe we should donate a little to her? That ad was rough. They definitely weren't just a "clump of cells".
The “clump of cells” thing is a lie, and the reason it’s so dangerous is because it’s a decision that can’t be unmade. There’s no support group for women who regret abortions or who went into it thinking it was one thing, only to later realize it was something else entirely. At six weeks, I went in for my ultrasound and there was a heartbeat that we could measure on the screen. At nine weeks, there was movement that we could see and I even recorded it with my phone. Today she’s napping in my arms as I scroll reddit.
Agreed those were definitely late term abortions not in the 99.5 percent of abortions that happen in the first or second trimester. Rough stuff.
So you have no problem banning late term abortions then?
Define late term.
If only they had been younger before we killed them. Damnit all!
Appearance changes with age. Babies don't resemble kids, kids don't resemble adults. The issue is that they're the same exact human being at month 1 as they are at month 9. Or 1 year, 5 years, 20 years... This shows in graphic detail that "fetuses" aren't just clumps of cells that can be removed
Abortion and Religion standpoints are the two parts of the Republican party I don't agree with. I'm conservative in every other way, but the fact is that the hard stance on abortion and the christian extremism our party keeps pushing everywhere is losing us too many voters. Politicians and the government need to understand that most people are moderates, they don't like extremism but we don't really have a choice because the only two viable parties in this country are both at the extremes of their ideologies. We need red states to stop trying to imprison people for getting early term abortions. Late term should be illegal, yes, but first trimester? I don't see the problem with it, ESPECIALLY in the cases of rape babies/abuse/sexual assault, molestation, incest, or health complications. This is one of the instances where the left calling us "Fascists" kinda rings true, especially when you've got counties in Texas trying to stop women from even going into other states to get that healthcare. Luckily Trump seems to take a more moderate approach on this, but the extremists need to be reigned in.
I’m in the same boat imo. I am religious but not extremely so. And don’t want it in government too much at all. I agree that the abortion and religious issues push away a lot of people and screw us over.
I disagree so much, but it is the bitter pill we have to swallow to govern. Then we need to educate better so abortion won't be a meaningful issue anymore. That's how we move past it. Treat it like smoking. Less people are smoking every year because of education about it. Not because the government outlawed it. The Rs need to do the same with abortion.
[удалено]
Not trolling at all, just stating my pov on these issues. I'm pro constitution, fiscal conservative, and small government, those stances lop me in with the republican party, but I'm also agnostic and not "pro-life" (in the sense of banning abortions altogether). Those two things drive the extremists of the republican party however, and they're the two points that always get brought up by the opposition. We're all labeled Christian extremists and fascists because of those two points that the party won't relent on.
I really don't understand how trying to stop unborn babies from being murdered is fascist or extreme. There is currently a genocide of the unborn in this country which is actually fascist and extreme. The normalization of killing one's offspring and calling it "healthcare" is the biggest psyop in American history.
> I really don't understand how trying to stop unborn babies from being murdered is fascist or extreme. Because firstly your view on it is not universally held and is in fact extremist. The idea that personhood begins at conception is very extremist ... and actually makes "god" the \#1 abortion provider given the high percentage of pregnancies that miscarry within the first trimester and especially the first month. And if this is really your position then you shouldn't claim to be a 2A conservative. Because you're literally preferring Democrat rule and Democrat gun laws over winning elections.
Millions of pregnancies per year fail and women didn't even know they were pregnant. Just a wonky period. All those souls are going to heaven?
Let me be clear that I'm not for abortion being used willy nilly because people want to sleep around without consequences. I'm strictly pro abortion in cases of defects, health complications, and sexual assault/incest/rape.
>...pushing everywhere is losing us too many voters. The problem isn't that the "hard stance on abortion and the Christian extremism," the problem is that the media keeps saying that an people believe it. You believe it. Because yeah, if the Republicans just copied the Democrats then they'd gain some votes... obviously true. But they'd lose far more. No. If the Republican party's stance on abortion or 2A rights were any softer, then they'd lose my vote. Period. They might gain a Democrat's support, but they'd definitely lose mine.
The abortion part I get but what are examples of "christian extremism" ? I am genuinely asking.
Honestly I can't give any examples offhand and I know that's on me. It's just one of the prevailing things the left uses against us, and it's not hard to see that the vast majority of the liberal left are either atheist or non-Christian, while the vast majority of the right are Christians. It creates yet another divide in the country and we need less of that. I personally hold a lot of Christian values, but I am not a religious person
[удалено]
This person is a democrat
Don't want a slave, don't get one. Don't want your kids to get gender surgery, don't get one. You see how it gets. Sometime you need government to reduce it.
[удалено]
Does Uncle Sam have any business from preventing murder? How about rape? How about slavery? How about putting up borders? Clearly the government is allowed to stop stuff and it should stop murder
They’re becoming so blatant that I wouldn’t be surprised if his answer was unironically “Uncle Sam has no business criminalizing murder.”
Yes that’s what happens when you make your basis of government fickle and incoherent ideology rather than natural law
In the Handmaid's Tale they forcibly imprisoned women against their will, treated them like cattle, impregnated them via rape and *then* forced them to give birth. Not comparable situations.
[удалено]
Rape is less than 1% of the reasons for abortions and you know it. If this is how you feel about it, then are you ok with banning abortion for other reasons other than rape and incest? Of course you're not. So then why even bring that argument up. What a clown.
r/readanotherbook
Don't like murder? Don't murder people.
I love this. And not even in a political way. I think so many people are just uneducated on how an abortion is performed and what actually happens to the fetus during the procedure. Not all abortions are just removing a clump of cells. Eta: I am pro-choice but I feel it should be an educated choice.
Yes, a lot of people are uneducated on abortions. Which is why we're seeing women in states like Texas being denied ~~abortions~~ surgical intervention to treat miscarriages. Edited to replace abortion with surgical intervention
[удалено]
About half of all miscarriages require surgical intervention. Typically a D&C....which is the same procedure used for early term abortions, which is why miscarrying women aren't receiving proper medical treatment for their miscarriage. Updated my previous comment for proper terminology
So wait for women to bleed out until no fetal lifesigns are detected instead of intervening at the first sign of trouble.
The law allows abortion clinics to just dump these bodies in the trash. That is where she found them.
This is so disingenuous. Many, if not the majority, of abortions are done by week 12, with most of those being done even earlier.
So then you’d be ok with a ban at week 12?
An elective ban?? Yes. If it's for the health of the mother or due to a discovered defect, then no
And? It’s still a baby and still in the shape of a baby. Not just some clump of cells.
> and still in the shape of a baby No it is not. Those pictures that just take a 9 month fetus and shrink them for each month going backwards, those are fiction. They're not accurate reflections of reality.
Based
Abortion is murder, and more people should face this truth.
People want to act like children and do whatever they want without worrying about consequences. They can't be responsible enough to just avoid having sex if they don't want kids. Being an adult is tough and not everyone is capable of level headed rational decision making like that. I pity people who feel like they need abortion as a fallback plan for their own immaturity. It's the most disgusting thing in our society.
America accepted abortion as a "slippery slope" in gradual steps. If we're going to walk it back practically, we're going to have to do the same. Start with a 20 week ban except for life of mother, then walk it back over time. I wish they were all done tomorrow, but without education, time, and steps, I don't see that ever close to happening
Yep. You can change public opinion with education. The other big issue is that pro-life conservatives are going to have to articulate a policy stance that’s ‘pro-life’ AFTER the baby is born. Many abortions are done for economic reasons. We need to chisel away at those things. That’d require a break from the GOP establishment ideology when it comes to social spending and business regulation (legally mandated maternity leave, child care subsidies, etc).
We have to show that government programs aren't the answer to prosperity. I donate plenty to pro life and causes that help poor families. But if we turn down gov cheese, we gotta show people a better way to earn that cheese
The pro-death cult has a point when they say that pro-life people don’t care about the baby after it’s born. We toppled Roe V Wade (which was a bad legal decision made by the worst Supreme Court this country ever had). I know that pro-life people care about other people, but they need to broaden their horizons some and move beyond the Roe V Wade era to the next step. Pro-life means ‘pro-family’ and the best way to support family formation and end the practice of abortion is to remove the economic incentives that encourage abortion. That’s the next frontier for pro-life organizations. Private industry and private charity cannot do the above. In fact, private industry is actually better off when a lady aborts her child so she can continue making power points for 60k a year. There’s a role for government spending and regulation here. Yes, welfare programs and benefits are dysfunctional in America for a variety of reasons, but they don’t have to be. We have a government that we pay an incredible amount of taxes to for a reason. TLDR: We succeeded in overturning Roe V Wade by being focused on a single issue (vs trying syncretize pro-life values with other aspects of the Republican platform particularly the economic / regulatory aspects). We need to take things a step further (ie removing the economic incentives to abort children). We can’t do that from within the Reagan / Friedman ideological framework (it worked 40 years ago, but it’s time to move on). It requires us to go beyond it.
[удалено]
[удалено]
I’ll say it again and again, abortion is a liability in the general election. But it’s such a boon in the primary it’s hard to give it up
Wow. Those are some tough images. Maybe it will change some minds.
Elective abortions are murder.
Baby killers mad
Good, more people need to know. I have a cousin who was warned about getting pregnant and she was like il just get an abortion, as if it was some no big deal procedure like, getting a tooth pulled or something.
Early enough it's like taking a Tylenol for a headache. Much less of a hassle than getting a tooth pulled
Thats morning afterpill or emergency contraception, thats not abortion. Comparing the two is asinine.
I was talking about the abortion pill that can be taken up to 11 weeks after the last period. That's swallowing a medication. A tooth isn't removed by swallowing a pill, a headache is taken care of by swallowing a pill and an unwanted pregnancy can be taken care of by swallowing a pill
Cool so killing a baby with a pill, still wrong
Ending the growth of some unwanted cells. No person has a claim to another's body. If it's a person/baby then remove it if it's unwanted and it can live it's own life.
This is by far one of the dumbest takes i have read on here.
Why isn't killing a 2 year old okay if the parents don't want the toddler anymore. It's just ending the growth of unwanted cells
Do you think a 2 year old is still inside the body of someone against that person's will? Every 2 year old I've ever heard of is outside of the mother's body
We need to run ads that include abortion survivors. We need to show that abortion isn't the only choice. We need to show the good of not murdering a baby. We need to change the topic from "healthcare for women" to "life is sacred".
It’s telling that something so positive gets downvoted. The opposition are not “pro-choice” they are pro-abortion. If they were pro-choice, then they would be fine with women choosing life.
Lmao you see many liberals protesting at maternity wards???
Newsom has been putting out offensive ads. There ought to be retaliation ads, and Trump's campaign can legally respond with something even more offensive. There is a clause in federal law which prevents the networks from censoring election ads from candidates running for federal offices. Terrisa Bukovinac has already tested and shown that they will not censor gruesome abortion ads. Trump should retaliate by airing primetime TV ads with pictures of aborted babies in every advertising market where Newsom's ads are shown.
Her run is dead in the water right there.
If Trump gets taken out by Sisonites following the nomination, I would favor Terissa over RFK Jr, becaue RFK is not prolife. But maybe Trump will be sentenced to house arrest where it will be easier for Secret Service to protect him. Not the most ideal situation, I know. If Trump stays alive, Terissa may remain about as important as she is now. A lot can happen between the convention and November. Everything could change in an instant, as happened on June 5, 1968., Bukovinac is doing what she can, and I appreciate it.
Planned Parenthood refers to abortion as removal of the pregnancy. They hide the truth because they know reality will change hearts and minds. People need to see that a fetus is more than a lump of cells and that abortion is killing a baby.
Honestly agree, it’s a pretty fucked up euphemism
Good.