Convicted felon Donald Trump to ban ABORTION, CONTRACEPTION, MIFEPRISTONE and JAIL doctors

[BillStime]

 

[T master]

On 4/16/2023 at 5:35 PM, BillStime said:

 

 

There are hypocrites in all walks of life that will say what they feel is in there own mind right politicians do it every day & we here recognize that every time we read something you post .

 

So i take it your for abortions right ? 

 

The thing that some of us & he forgets is that one day we will all be held responsible for our actions here on earth when we sit in judgement for them . 

 

 

Edited May 9, 2023 by T master

[Pokebball]

On 4/16/2023 at 6:55 PM, SUNY_amherst said:

Without a doubt, trump has paid for abortion(s) in his life. So this is highly hypocritical 

Trump use to be pro choice. Biden use to be pro life.

On 4/16/2023 at 6:58 PM, Andy1 said:

I’m sure some republican legislature is working on that one.

First outlaw all abortions.

Then make the doctors criminals.

Next, put the girls/women in prison.

What's a girl/woman?

[BillStime]

54 minutes ago, T master said:

So i take it your for

 

Women and couples making the best choice for them.

 

F your feelings.

 

 

[T master]

2 minutes ago, BillStime said:

 

Women and couples making the best choice for them.

 

F your feelings.

 

 

 

It has nothing to do with my feelings but like you i have a opinion but mine differs from yours 99.9% of the time . that's just the difference between old people & millennia's .

[Joe Ferguson forever]

On 4/25/2023 at 1:25 AM, ComradeKayAdams said:

 

Yup. The 2024 election became a fait accompli as soon as the Dobbs v. JWHO decision was announced. I don’t see how Trump can avoid the stain of Christian nationalism as he escapes the primaries and enters the generals (same goes for Meatball Ron and any other GOP’er).

 

I’m predicting a 319-219 electoral college blowout. That would be only 24 red states: Alaska, Idaho, Utah, Montana, Wyoming, North Dakota, South Dakota, Nebraska, Kansas, Oklahoma, Texas, Iowa, Missouri, Arkansas, Louisiana, Mississippi, Alabama, Florida, South Carolina, Tennessee, Kentucky, West Virginia, Ohio, and Indiana.

 

My reasoning:

 

1. The 2022 mid-term red wave turned out to be a trickle.

2. National polls show a large majority support for Roe v. Wade, with the support continuing to grow.

3. The Wisconsin Supreme Court election victory for Janet Protasiewicz highlighted the potency of Democratic campaign machine efforts in college towns.

4. Third-party (Greens + DSA) leftist enthusiasm has collapsed since 2020.

 

And regarding policy details, why the GOP is having a hard time persuading independent voters:

 

1. 6-week abortion bans are laughably absurd, especially when its advocates don’t understand the concept of irregular periods or the reality of how women often don’t even know they’re pregnant up to that point.

2. Contraception is now under attack, which violates the implicit constitutional right to (sexual) privacy found within the ninth and fourteenth amendments.

3. Everything about the mifepristone case’s dissenting opinion from Alito (and Thomas) was ridiculous.

4. People are seeing through the blatant lies of “supporting abortion up to the point of birth.” There’s no statistical evidence for sociopathic mothers having abortions right up to (or beyond) the point of birth. Abortions rarely even occur in the third trimester. When they do occur, it is because of fetal abnormalities or for protecting the mother’s life. These types of abortions are also incredibly expensive and difficult to arrange. The intention of late-term abortion allowance clauses is to eliminate the red tape that gets in the way of exemption cases like rape, i n c e s t, health of the mother, or incredibly long abortion waiting lists. This is the same reason why verification guidelines for abortion exemptions are extremely lax in most European countries.

5. Pro-lifers can’t seem to articulate their arguments without invoking superstitious justifications.

6. Women are just plain uncomfortable with government controlling their sexual autonomy and their medical decisions. We be strange like that…

 

 

EDIT: I hate how Two Bills Drive censors the "i n c e s t" word.

I sure hope you are correct.  D's really need to nominate an alternative to Biden to seal the deal.  Otherwise it may be close.

[BillStime]

1 minute ago, SUNY_amherst said:

 

 

It is such an odd stance for trump. It feels forced every time he talks about it. He is not religious. He is a sexual deviant. The majority of the public falls on the other side of the issue. And his worshippers will follow him no matter what his stance on abortion is.

 

so why is he trying to play pastor on this thing?

 

 

 

 

He is desperate.

 

[Pokebball]

46 minutes ago, BillStime said:

 

Women and couples making the best choice for them.

 

F your feelings.

 

 

Unless it infringes on the life of another, of course. Right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. Life was first for a reason.

[Joe Ferguson forever]

1 hour ago, T master said:

 

There are hypocrites in all walks of life that will say what they feel is in there own mind right politicians do it every day & we here recognize that every time we read something you post .

 

So i take it your for abortions right ? 

 

The thing that some of us & he forgets is that one day we will all be held responsible for our actions here on earth when we sit in judgement for them . 

 

 

I am personally against abortion.  But I also don't believe a woman loses the right to decide what she can do with her body because she got pregnant.  It's her decision and the potential consequences are hers as well.  Don't judge lest you be judged.

[Pokebball]

Just now, redtail hawk said:

I am personally against abortion.  But I also don't believe a woman loses the right to decide what she can do with her body because she got pregnant.  It's her decision and the potential consequences are hers as well.  Don't judge lest you be judged.

Why are you personally against abortion?

[BillStime]

56 minutes ago, Pokebball said:

Unless it infringes on the life of another, of course. Right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. Life was first for a reason.

 

HA - same guy worried about infringing on the rights of gun nuts wants to talk about LIFE.

 

 

20 hours ago, Pokebball said:

How would that not be an "infringement"?

 

seriously, gtfoh

 

[Tommy Callahan]

1 hour ago, Pokebball said:

Why are you personally against abortion?

Pretty sure most are personally against it. but understand why it exist.

 

 

 

 

[Joe Ferguson forever]

2 hours ago, Pokebball said:

Why are you personally against abortion?

I'm Catholic and believe life begins at conception.  Others don't and I don't believe I can tell others that they are wrong.  Do you think capital punishment is ok cuz folks put to death are definitely alive?

[Pokebball]

1 hour ago, redtail hawk said:

I'm Catholic and believe life begins at conception.  Others don't and I don't believe I can tell others that they are wrong.  Do you think capital punishment is ok cuz folks put to death are definitely alive?

Human life beginning at conception for you then must be faith based as opposed to science based?

 

Not to be difficult, I'm just trying to understand your position better. When then do you believe life begins scientifically?

[Joe Ferguson forever]

1 hour ago, Pokebball said:

Human life beginning at conception for you then must be faith based as opposed to science based?

 

Not to be difficult, I'm just trying to understand your position better. When then do you believe life begins scientifically?

I can see the scientific argument that a fetus is not independently viable for several months.  Don't agree but I think it's a valid scientific argument.  The slippery slope then goes to sperm and eggs.  Should contraception be banned?  Should we outlaw oophorectomies or vasectomies?  Condoms?

Edited May 9, 2023 by redtail hawk

[Pokebball]

36 minutes ago, redtail hawk said:

I can see the scientific argument that a fetus is not independently viable for several months.  Don't agree but I think it's a valid scientific argument.  The slippery slope then goes to sperm and eggs.  Should contraception be banned?  Should we outlaw oophorectomy's or vasectomies?  Condoms?

The majority of biologists believe human life begins at conception. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7245522/#:~:text=View that human life begins,it must be one already. This is pretty solid scientific support that life begins then. And just for giggles, here's link with many medical studies supporting this position. https://www.princeton.edu/~prolife/articles/embryoquotes2.html

 

So what about viability? Human life isn't independently viable in many stages and in many conditions of health, even after birth. In fact I'd argue mostly after birth (makes sense because we're talking 9mos vs what, 80yrs). We find ourselves in the hospital our entire lives, increasingly as we get older. We wouldn't have life saving procedures without, not being independently viable. An infant, or even a toddler isn't independently viable, are they?  The biological, or scientific, definition of viability is the "ability to survive or live successfully". It doesn't say, "on your own". The independent viability argument, supporting abortion doesn't make sense to me for these reasons.

 

Additionally, I think our scientific advancement since R v W has taken us far beyond religious faith even mattering anymore. Science should be followed here. So while I respect your Catholic Faith, I guess I'd say kudos because the Catholic theologians had it right. 

 

Eliminating any sort of argument regarding oophorectomy's or vasectomies or condoms is simple and honestly scientific, right? Unless I'm not understanding your question, conception isn't occurring right?

 

Regading your questions of me, I guess this leaves contraception options that occur immediately after conception. I guess I'd say, if this is the only controversy left on the table, I trust our great country can find a compromise. God help us if we cant. 

 

What we haven't addressed are the possible needs for an abortion in the first trimester due to rape or *****. Or perhaps a man and a woman have been so completely and totally irresponsible, given the myriad of options that a responsible human being can use for birth control these days, that we're left with an option of wanting to kill a human life because of them being absolute knuckleheads. I'm sympathetic in rape and ***** cases. In fact, I'm fully in support of aborting the perp for such a disgusting act (I'm kinda joking because I'm anti death penalty. Non-jokingly, some on this board have brought up castration. In rape and *****, I'd consider that). Obviously, drugs and medical procedures can end a pregnancy early in cases of rape and *****. Very early. That would of course depend on the victim reporting early. Easier to do with a rape as opposed to *****, I suppose. I think cases of rape and ***** must fall in our exceptions too, right? I do struggle with a woman claiming rape to justify her abortion in the 3rd trimester.

 

 

[Joe Ferguson forever]

10 hours ago, Pokebball said:

The majority of biologists believe human life begins at conception. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7245522/#:~:text=View that human life begins,it must be one already. This is pretty solid scientific support that life begins then. And just for giggles, here's link with many medical studies supporting this position. https://www.princeton.edu/~prolife/articles/embryoquotes2.html

 

So what about viability? Human life isn't independently viable in many stages and in many conditions of health, even after birth. In fact I'd argue mostly after birth (makes sense because we're talking 9mos vs what, 80yrs). We find ourselves in the hospital our entire lives, increasingly as we get older. We wouldn't have life saving procedures without, not being independently viable. An infant, or even a toddler isn't independently viable, are they?  The biological, or scientific, definition of viability is the "ability to survive or live successfully". It doesn't say, "on your own". The independent viability argument, supporting abortion doesn't make sense to me for these reasons.

 

Additionally, I think our scientific advancement since R v W has taken us far beyond religious faith even mattering anymore. Science should be followed here. So while I respect your Catholic Faith, I guess I'd say kudos because the Catholic theologians had it right. 

 

Eliminating any sort of argument regarding oophorectomy's or vasectomies or condoms is simple and honestly scientific, right? Unless I'm not understanding your question, conception isn't occurring right?

 

Regading your questions of me, I guess this leaves contraception options that occur immediately after conception. I guess I'd say, if this is the only controversy left on the table, I trust our great country can find a compromise. God help us if we cant. 

 

What we haven't addressed are the possible needs for an abortion in the first trimester due to rape or *****. Or perhaps a man and a woman have been so completely and totally irresponsible, given the myriad of options that a responsible human being can use for birth control these days, that we're left with an option of wanting to kill a human life because of them being absolute knuckleheads. I'm sympathetic in rape and ***** cases. In fact, I'm fully in support of aborting the perp for such a disgusting act (I'm kinda joking because I'm anti death penalty. Non-jokingly, some on this board have brought up castration. In rape and *****, I'd consider that). Obviously, drugs and medical procedures can end a pregnancy early in cases of rape and *****. Very early. That would of course depend on the victim reporting early. Easier to do with a rape as opposed to *****, I suppose. I think cases of rape and ***** must fall in our exceptions too, right? I do struggle with a woman claiming rape to justify her abortion in the 3rd trimester.

 

 

i looked at the links and stopped reading.  The first is purely opinion, not science.  It doesn't purport that the majority of scientists believe that life begins at conception.  How could it?  It's not a question science can answer but rather a philosophical question.  The second link talks about fetal development but I didn't see anything in a quick read stating ":we scientists believe life begins at conception".  You mischaracterized these "papers".  Finally, i find it ironic and sad that so many ultra righties appropriately rail against muslim theocracies yet want America to become a Christian one....

 

btw, your argument could be used in an intro logic class as an excellent example of Appeal to Authority fallacy.  There is no earthly authority that can define when life begins.  Hell, there are some pretty smart physicists that believe time is a synthetic concept and that time travel is possible https://www.space.com/29859-the-illusion-of-time.html.  Never mind, if u couldn't grasp the slippery slope point, you'll likely not grasp this admittedly obscure reference..  It's also interesting that the vast majority of climate scientists (who are true authorities) believe that climate change is a very real and serious threat to the planet yet many righties remain unconvinced...

 

Think more deeply...alternatively, read the bible literally and believe the world was created in 6 days and is about 10k years old.  No doubt that's simpler.

Edited May 10, 2023 by redtail hawk

[Pokebball]

8 hours ago, redtail hawk said:

i looked at the links and stopped reading.  The first is purely opinion, not science.  It doesn't purport that the majority of scientists believe that life begins at conception.  How could it?  It's not a question science can answer but rather a philosophical question.  The second link talks about fetal development but I didn't see anything in a quick read stating ":we scientists believe life begins at conception".  You mischaracterized these "papers".  Finally, i find it ironic and sad that so many ultra righties appropriately rail against muslim theocracies yet want America to become a Christian one....

 

btw, your argument could be used in an intro logic class as an excellent example of Appeal to Authority fallacy.  There is no earthly authority that can define when life begins.  Hell, there are some pretty smart physicists that believe time is a synthetic concept and that time travel is possible https://www.space.com/29859-the-illusion-of-time.html.  Never mind, if u couldn't grasp the slippery slope point, you'll likely not grasp this admittedly obscure reference..  It's also interesting that the vast majority of climate scientists (who are true authorities) believe that climate change is a very real and serious threat to the planet yet many righties remain unconvinced...

 

Think more deeply...alternatively, read the bible literally and believe the world was created in 6 days and is about 10k years old.  No doubt that's simpler.

Significant pivot here my friend. 

 

You should have kept reading. But I get it, it doesn't fit your agenda.

Edited May 10, 2023 by Pokebball

[ComradeKayAdams]

21 hours ago, redtail hawk said:

I sure hope you are correct.  D's really need to nominate an alternative to Biden to seal the deal.  Otherwise it may be close.

 

Yeah, it will likely be a lot closer than it needs to be. Biden’s approval numbers are historically low: 36%, the lowest for a first-term president in the post-WW2 era who is 18 months away from the next election cycle. But hey, y’all can’t blame me for Zombie Joe and Cackling Kamala! I was a Sandernista in 2020 and am voting for Marianne Williamson* in the upcoming primaries.

 

Nevertheless, Biden and Harris should still trump Trump and DeSantis and any other Christian nationalist. We are WAY past the days of reasonable GOP alternatives a la the great Jack Kemp. All Joe needs to do is harp on about a federal codification of Roe v. Wade (the 24-week limit) or some type of further left/right compromise like a Euro-style 15-week ban (but with clearly delineated exceptions for the usual: rape, i n c e s t, life of the mother/ectopic pregnancies, psychological health of mother/suicide ideations, fetal abnormalities, D&C/D&E miscarriage procedures, cryptic pregnancies/irregular periods/amenorrhea situations, lengthy abortion waiting lists, etc.). Special emphasis should be placed on exceptions like rape to highlight how unreasonable the GOP stance really is on abortion. Example: talking about how rape victims commonly delay abortion procedures or forego criminal prosecution due to emotional traumatization, intimidation from partners, reticence to deal with all the public slut shaming or prosecutorial red tape, etc.

 

I also want to clarify my “319-219 electoral college blowout” remark (a blowout is relative, but a 100-vote electoral college margin does seem sizable in this modern era of highly polarized politics):

 

1. I conceded 24 red states for 219 votes and am comfortable with allotting 17 obvious blue states for 212 votes.

2. I’m giving Team Blue a Midwestern-ish edge in Pennsylvania, Michigan, Wisconsin, and Minnesota because the Dem Party machine is expected to churn out huge pro-choice Zoomer numbers in major college towns outside the Bible Belt. So that’s 4 more states with 54 more electoral college votes…266-219 in favor of Team Blue.

3. That means Team Red must secure New Hampshire AND Arizona AND Nevada AND North Carolina AND Georgia (5 states, 53 votes) in order to get to 270+. It’s a very narrow electoral college path to victory, made even narrower when you factor in the apparent post-Dobbs agglutination of the 2020 Bernie diaspora around the Dem Party.

 

* - Make sure you vote for Marianne, Redtail Hawk! Universal healthcare is her flagship policy for 2024!

[Pokebball]

6 minutes ago, ComradeKayAdams said:

 

Yeah, it will likely be a lot closer than it needs to be. Biden’s approval numbers are historically low: 36%, the lowest for a first-term president in the post-WW2 era who is 18 months away from the next election cycle. But hey, y’all can’t blame me for Zombie Joe and Cackling Kamala! I was a Sandernista in 2020 and am voting for Marianne Williamson* in the upcoming primaries.

 

Nevertheless, Biden and Harris should still trump Trump and DeSantis and any other Christian nationalist. We are WAY past the days of reasonable GOP alternatives a la the great Jack Kemp. All Joe needs to do is harp on about a federal codification of Roe v. Wade (the 24-week limit) or some type of further left/right compromise like a Euro-style 15-week ban (but with clearly delineated exceptions for the usual: rape, i n c e s t, life of the mother/ectopic pregnancies, psychological health of mother/suicide ideations, fetal abnormalities, D&C/D&E miscarriage procedures, cryptic pregnancies/irregular periods/amenorrhea situations, lengthy abortion waiting lists, etc.). Special emphasis should be placed on exceptions like rape to highlight how unreasonable the GOP stance really is on abortion. Example: talking about how rape victims commonly delay abortion procedures or forego criminal prosecution due to emotional traumatization, intimidation from partners, reticence to deal with all the public slut shaming or prosecutorial red tape, etc.

 

I also want to clarify my “319-219 electoral college blowout” remark (a blowout is relative, but a 100-vote electoral college margin does seem sizable in this modern era of highly polarized politics):

 

1. I conceded 24 red states for 219 votes and am comfortable with allotting 17 obvious blue states for 212 votes.

2. I’m giving Team Blue a Midwestern-ish edge in Pennsylvania, Michigan, Wisconsin, and Minnesota because the Dem Party machine is expected to churn out huge pro-choice Zoomer numbers in major college towns outside the Bible Belt. So that’s 4 more states with 54 more electoral college votes…266-219 in favor of Team Blue.

3. That means Team Red must secure New Hampshire AND Arizona AND Nevada AND North Carolina AND Georgia (5 states, 53 votes) in order to get to 270+. It’s a very narrow electoral college path to victory, made even narrower when you factor in the apparent post-Dobbs agglutination of the 2020 Bernie diaspora around the Dem Party.

 

* - Make sure you vote for Marianne, Redtail Hawk! Universal healthcare is her flagship policy for 2024!

It really wasn't a blowout. The smallest number of vote swings that would have changed the results was something like 43,000, flipping the EC in Arizona, Wisconsin and Georgia, I believe. Numerous polls suggest if the laptop story wasn't suppressed by those that suppressed it, Trump would have won. And as context, I didn't vote for Trump.