Conversation about the Texas Abortion Ban

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus

originally posted by: rounda
Oh I see. So you have a problem with me not being the first to advocate for exemptions in certain cases, which weren't part of the original response.

Who said you needed to be first? Just that you haven't done it. Still.

That's nice. And I won't. Because I've already made it clear I am not arguing against exceptions.

It is possible to be against abortion and understand the need for exceptions, you know. But since that wasn't what was being discussed....

2000 out of 1.2 million.

a reply to: rounda

That is six weeks after the first day of the women's last period. So, in reality, about two weeks from the time she might notice her period is late give or take. Most adults don't know they are pregnant that early.
And, I was sexually abused as a child. I was too dumb to realize it. And. Texas isn't that great when it comes to sex education... I imagine there are other kids that may be that dumb also?

And, I have been telling women that if they wanted to end the legislative attack on their reproductive rights they should just start refusing to have sex. So, when the op asked the question, I felt obligated to answer it. So, yes, I saw your post as calling me a hypocrite.
But it is quite evident that you didn't read much past the op and have no idea what the texas law is that set the women off this time.

a reply to: rounda

But it is the child that ends up having the child... the child usually can't help it if their parents are idiots, can they?

originally posted by: rounda
Because I've already made it clear I am not arguing against exceptions.

Not arguing about something does not equal supporting something. It's just a lazy way of providing a non-answer.

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus

originally posted by: rounda
Because I've already made it clear I am not arguing against exceptions.

Not arguing about something does not equal supporting something. It's just a lazy way of providing a non-answer.

I didn't say I supported it, either. I said I am not arguing against exceptions. I'm not arguing for them either.

Like I said, you can disagree with abortions and understand the need for exceptions.

2000 out of 1.2 million.

originally posted by: dawnstar
a reply to: rounda

That is six weeks after the first day of the women's last period. So, in reality, about two weeks from the time she might notice her period is late give or take. Most adults don't know they are pregnant that early.
And, I was sexually abused as a child. I was too dumb to realize it. And. Texas isn't that great when it comes to sex education... I imagine there are other kids that may be that dumb also?

And, I have been telling women that if they wanted to end the legislative attack on their reproductive rights they should just start refusing to have sex. So, when the op asked the question, I felt obligated to answer it. So, yes, I saw your post as calling me a hypocrite.
But it is quite evident that you didn't read much past the op and have no idea what the texas law is that set the women off this time.

I fully understand the law that was passed, and it's kind of a joke you sitting there telling me I have no idea what it is that set you off.

Sorry you were abused, but again, you responded to me, I didn't respond to you. I responded to the op. I don't give a # what you were talking about with anyone else in the thread.

And you telling women to abstain is the whole point. If you're not ready to have a child, you shouldn't be having sex... Pretty simple concept. If you choose to have sex, you should be willing to live with the consequences, not kill 1.2 million babies.

It's ridiculous that it has to go any further than that.

A child of reproductive age knows about good touch and bad touch. And if you push for educating children to speak to a teacher if they are abused, you solve a whole lot more problems than pushing for more access to abortions.

For one thing, children under reproductive age aren't "dumb" about it if you teach them what's wrong with it.

For another, the kid won't reach the point where they have to wait for a period to be missed if they report the abuse right away.... Which means they can get tested for pregnancy before the 6 week mark.

For another, the person who abused them will be punished and the kid won't have to endure further abuse....

Or we can just continue to used half assed solutions that don't actually address the underlying issues causing the problem, and allow people to live their lives free of any consequences for their actions.

originally posted by: rounda
I didn't say I supported it, either.

I know that, which is why I pointed it out.

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus

originally posted by: rounda
I didn't say I supported it, either.

I know that, which is why I pointed it out.

For what reason? We weren't talking about exceptions until after you started in.

And it doesn't matter if I support them or not. I understand the need for them... Which is why I'm not arguing against them.....

originally posted by: rounda
For what reason? We weren't talking about exceptions until after you started in.

Because the Texas law being discussed doesn't make exceptions for incest or rape. This thread is about the entire law, not just a limited portion.

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus

originally posted by: rounda
For what reason? We weren't talking about exceptions until after you started in.

Because the Texas law being discussed doesn't make exceptions for incest or rape. This thread is about the entire law, not just a limited portion.

And?

If I'm not for or against something, why would I be required to advocate one way or the other?

originally posted by: rounda
If I'm not for or against something, why would I be required to advocate one way or the other?

Weak non-answer and rather oxymoronic in this context, either the child is getting an abortion or not.

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus

originally posted by: rounda
If I'm not for or against something, why would I be required to advocate one way or the other?

Weak non-answer and rather oxymoronic in this context, either the child is getting an abortion or not.

I've answered you multiple times, and you're just being obtuse at this point.

Exceptions are just that; exceptions. I understand the need for them. If there are exceptions made, I'm not going to fight them.

But I'm not going to justify abortion over a miniscule amount of exceptions.

Just like I'm not going to justify murder over the small amount of self defense cases that result in death.

a reply to: rounda

Obviously you don't understand the law since you keep saying there is still an exception for rape or incest.
And for the record..
I didn't call people idiots for trying to prevent abortions. I called them idiots for comparing the inconvenience and discomfort of wearing a mask or getting a shot to the inconvenience and discomfort of any pregnancy, let alone one involving a young victim of rape or incest. And, while you claim to be supporting an exception for it in abortion laws, the fact that you keep trying to pin the blame on the parents and coming up with alternative solutions that you feel would somehow eliminate a problem that is as old as history betrays that assurance.

originally posted by: dawnstar
a reply to: rounda

Obviously you don't understand the law since you keep saying there is still an exception for rape or incest.
And for the record..
I didn't call people idiots for trying to prevent abortions. I called them idiots for comparing the inconvenience and discomfort of wearing a mask or getting a shot to the inconvenience and discomfort of any pregnancy, let alone one involving a young victim of rape or incest. And, while you claim to be supporting an exception for it in abortion laws, the fact that you keep trying to pin the blame on the parents and coming up with alternative solutions that you feel would somehow eliminate a problem that is as old as history betrays that assurance.

I didn't say there was an exception for rape and incest. And I didn't claim to support an exception, either. I just won't argue against one.

It sounds like you don't understand what we've discussed.

I said that if we taught children to report abuse, 6 weeks would be plenty of time to abort a pregnancy... You know, because a pregnancy test can detect a pregnancy 10 days after conception, not after a missed period.

I'm so sorry that pregnancy is an "inconvenience" for you. I'm sorry it brings you "discomfort."

I'm also sorry those aren't valid justifications for abortion.

Kind of like the "fetus is a parasite" nonsense.

I'm also sorry that the majority of problems in this world reflect directly on poor parenting.

I guess raising a child and teaching them about good and bad touch is not part of your definition of being a good parent. Or being able to judge the character of the people parents allow to be around their children. Or the parents not being incestuous rapists, either.

But justifying 1.2 million abortions on 2000 exceptions is bull#.

a reply to: rounda
Yes, you did say there was an exception, go back a page and read your posts.

I prefer to consider the amount of inconvenienience and discomfort a pregnancy causes.
And, not being able to roll off your side while laying in bed or having to call for help to get out of bed to go to the bathroom is a heck of alot of discomfort and inconvenience for a child!
But, oh, the mask, it's gonna kill me to wear it the ten minutes it takes me to run into the convenience store to grab my beer!

originally posted by: dawnstar
a reply to: rounda
Yes, you did say there was an exception, go back a page and read your posts.

I prefer to consider the amount of inconvenienience and discomfort a pregnancy causes.
And, not being able to roll off your side while laying in bed or having to call for help to get out of bed to go to the bathroom is a heck of alot of discomfort and inconvenience for a child!
But, oh, the mask, it's gonna kill me to wear it the ten minutes it takes me to run into the convenience store to grab my beer!

No, I said there was an exception for pregnancies where the mother's life or health is is danger... Go back and read it...

But oh the "inconvenience" of not being able to roll over justifies killing a baby. A baby that had no choice in its conception, and no choice in whether it gets to live or die. Because of your "discomfort."

Whereas if you are afraid of covid, you can choose to wear a mask, and me choosing to not wear a mask won't affect you in the slightest....

Unless masks don't work, in which case, all those "idiots" aren't "idiots" at all...

originally posted by: rounda
Exceptions are just that; exceptions. I understand the need for them. If there are exceptions made, I'm not going to fight them.

But I'm not going to justify abortion over a miniscule amount of exceptions.

If you support the exceptions then by default you support certain types of abortions. It's not grey, this is very black and white.

a reply to: rounda

Well, we have a different standard of what justifies an abortion. But gee, the lawmakers who wrote this law used the logic that the fetal heartbeats shows that the baby is viable... capable if living outside the womb. I fail to see what the problem is. If the fetus is viable as an embryo, there shouldn't be any problem with the doctors inducing labor and delivering the little tyke and alleviating the girl of any pain and discomfort, regardless of how early or late the pregnancy if discovered. The doctors can provide the care it needs to live, right?

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus

originally posted by: rounda
Exceptions are just that; exceptions. I understand the need for them. If there are exceptions made, I'm not going to fight them.

But I'm not going to justify abortion over a miniscule amount of exceptions.

If you support the exceptions then by default you support certain types of abortions. It's not grey, this is very black and white.

I didn't say I supported exceptions. I said I understand the need for them......

I don't drink alcohol, but have no problem if you do. Does that mean I support drinking?

No, it means I understand you like to drink, and have no issue with you drinking.

I don't support methodone clinics, but understand people need methadone to get off heroin. Does that mean I support methodone?

No, it means I understand some people need methadone, and am not going to fight to close down the methadone clinic down the street.

Kind of like a person .might not support abortions but understand the need for them?