U.S. judge blocks Trump's cutoff of family planning subsidies: plaintiffs

[johnnybangkok]

9 minutes ago, Thainesss said:

 

To adjust the law to make it a criminal act punishable by up to 5 years for doctors, and to address 'passive' abortion, allowing the baby to 'eventually pass' as noted from the Gosnell case, to mandate medical care, and require reporting of such actions if known. 

 

Nothing unreasonable at all, just further specifying the details. 

 

And the dems refuse it. Seems to be if they wanted to be seen as not supporting infanticide, they could easily pass it. And don't forget this all came about because of Kathy Tran and Ralph Northam comments. Both Democrats. 

Geezus, what part of all this don't you get?

There are already laws in place to cover any and all of the situations you seem very invested in (another case of a man dictating a woman's rights) but you are advocating new laws that will make it a criminal offence for doctors to act in the best interest of the mother in the VERY RARE cases where a late term abortion is medically necessary to save the mothers life. 89% of all abortions occur within the first 13 weeks, 8% 14-20 weeks and only 1.3% after 21 weeks (https://abort73.com/abortion_facts/us_abortion_statistics/). In the vast majority of third trimester abortions (unfortunately there are few verifiable stats due to the controversy of it all) there is severe health dangers for the mother or the fetus. Do you honestly think that individuals who have committed their whole lives to the well being of others, are in some way going around killing perfectly healthy and physically viable kids? You are (as usual) falling for anti-abortion propaganda, perpetuated by a President who is willfully ill-informed but who is clever enough to turn a non-issue into a rallying call for his demented evangelical support.  

[Tug]

He likes being the fly in the ointment so to speak 

[Thainesss]

5 minutes ago, johnnybangkok said:

Geezus, what part of all this don't you get?

 

I could say the same to you. Nowhere, in any of my posts, have I even remotely done this:

 

2 minutes ago, johnnybangkok said:

but you are advocating new laws that will make it a criminal offence for doctors to act in the best interest of the mother in the VERY RARE cases where a late term abortion is medically necessary to save the mothers life.

 

In fact my very first post (which if you would have read instead of having a meltdown) you would have seen this, which was my very first sentence:

 

11 hours ago, Thainesss said:

All of this is flat out false. Practically nobody debates weather or not abortion should be an option, at any time during pregnancy, if the mother or child's life is in danger. This is a lie and deflection from the pro-abortion left. 

 

 

My concern is late term and full term abortion, infanticide, and the discussions going on about the same within the left. Have you seen the Kathy Tran bill? Thats quite the opposite of what all of you are telling me. 

 

13 minutes ago, johnnybangkok said:

There are already laws in place to cover any and all of the situations you seem very invested in

 

No, there aren't. 

 

Quote

Current federal policy insufficiently protects babies who are born alive following an attempted abortion. While current law recognizes that all infants born alive are “persons,” babies who survive an abortion attempt are left vulnerable because the law provides for no requirements that health care practitioners treat the infant with the same degree of care afforded to any other newborn. The Born-Alive Abortion Survivors Protection Act would remedy this problem by requiring that proper medical care be given to infants who survive an abortion and establishing criminal consequences for practitioners who fail to do so.

 

https://www.heritage.org/life/report/the-necessity-the-born-alive-abortion-survivors-protection-act

[Scott]

Continuing to present information which is incorrect as fact will earn suspensions.  

You have been warned.  

[manarak]

what is policy, what is socialism?

[Prissana Pescud]

On 4/26/2019 at 9:53 PM, Trouble said:

I have no problem with abortion per the Roe V. Wade ruling. I am starting to question whether the advocacy of "very" late term abortion or after birth infanticide is something that should be taking place. Late term is generally considered about 24 weeks (6 months). I'm not really clear on what people on the left are advocating at this point. Lots of confusion over this. If a women can't make up her mind in 24 weeks they have a serious problem. However, I am not so sure that the taxpayers should be funding anything but birth control. I'm all for government funded birth control but think it is a bit odd to see the taxpayers being forced to fund abortion which may be against their beliefs. Personally I think Planned Parenthood is a racket taking millions from the government and in business basically to make those that run it quite wealthy.  Like so many contracted "social services" that local, state, and federal government fund, little money is spent on the services and lots of money spent on those that run the organizations.  It is like everything else the government involves itself in, it is never well run and never goes as intended. 

I have no problems with you holding "beliefs"

I do have issues when you impose your "beliefs" on others.

And that is mostly what your post is about.

How about ladies/ young girls, with support, nurture, compassion be allowed to make up their own mind.

Without the scorning religious dogma, and your opinions the world would be a better place when we do not victimise at risk young people  

[Prissana Pescud]

I think it comes down to intelligence.

Mr Trump is appealing to his base.

The rest of the world (mostly) finds this religious rant as being totally stupid.

 But the US base is religious looneyism.

And this from the best IT country.

 When China does exceed US, it will not be burdened with crazy religious dogma.

Like virgin births, resurrections, devils placed into some wandering pigs and so on.

It is a crock of poo.

[johnnybangkok]

On 4/27/2019 at 7:21 PM, Thainesss said:

 

I could say the same to you. Nowhere, in any of my posts, have I even remotely done this:

 

 

In fact my very first post (which if you would have read instead of having a meltdown) you would have seen this, which was my very first sentence:

 

 

 

My concern is late term and full term abortion, infanticide, and the discussions going on about the same within the left. Have you seen the Kathy Tran bill? Thats quite the opposite of what all of you are telling me. 

 

 

No, there aren't. 

 

 

https://www.heritage.org/life/report/the-necessity-the-born-alive-abortion-survivors-protection-act

You actually said in your last post before this 'To adjust the law to make it a criminal act punishable by up to 5 years for doctors, and to address 'passive' abortion, allowing the baby to 'eventually pass' .....................................'

 

You are advocating punishing doctors for helping women in a horrendous situation and for forcing mothers to give birth to a child that will soon die out of the womb. This idea that 'after birth, the baby is wrapped in a blanket and mother, doctor 'decide whether to execute the baby' (actually said by Trump at a rally in Wisconsin on Saturday), is a horrific lie and would immediately fall under infanticide laws, which are very much in existence already. As usual, people like yourself and other Trump supporters are trying desperately to 'frame' a situation to fit your narrative when if a situation like this did occur (as in the case with Kermit Goswell who performed late term abortions past the 24 week limit and who was convicted of first degree murder) the current laws allow for prosecution and appropriate sentencing.