Ronna McDaniel / Republicans support restrictions on abortion, 71% of Americans agree!

originally posted by: frogs453
a reply to: yuppa

I hate to tell you, much more of your tax money will be given to families or children in need, or foster care systems when a woman’s right to choose is taken away or severely limited.

I agree about prevention. All males should have a vasectomy at 12 and only reverse it when they are prepared to have a child and can financially afford it.

Not if the republicans get back in control. Parentless kids can be a resource and be taught trades,or become civil servants,that would offset their care.

ALL Males and Females should have those done,that way they cant claim discirimination. Regardless of EThnicity,creed,color,or politics. Give the parents a cash bonus for getting it done. Eliminating the complaints about the procedure.

a reply to: AutomateThis1v2

Who are you again?

Most of the people upset by this decision don't fully understand what it means. If your state makes abortion illegal or sets restrictions, you just have to drive to your nearest liberal cesspool and get it done there. If you really want to kill a baby because you were too ignorant to use contraception than work for it.

a reply to: frogs453

It's close to a 60-40 split, and many of the 60% who want it would prefer limitations. Only about 25% want few or no limitations.

originally posted by: ManBehindTheMask
a reply to: AutomateThis1v2

Who are you again?

Lmao. What's it to you? Out of everyone who's commented so far my comment was the one to get you to join the peanut gallery.

Like, who are you? Why should I answer your question?

a reply to: AutomateThis1v2

And if a woman does feel the need to have an abortion what is it to anyone else but her?

Because it isn't her life she's ending.

Stop being promiscuous and this won't be an issue.

a reply to: Waterglass

It seeks to polarize without providing context. I dont care if the poll is conservative and the source is conservative or christian, it is still an accurate poll.

71% (including myself) say there should be some restriction on abortion. And that applies to everyone that says cut it off at 6 months, 3 months, or 6 weeks. That includes a lot of pro-choice people.

It seeks the present the argument as compatible with "71% of people agree with SCOTUS", make things black and white.


*** thread drift ***


Even I'm in a strange category of agreeing with SCOTUS without it being a hot button moral issue. More a consistency issue regardless of what i consider viable life.

And here's what that is:

Roe v. Wade cited 14th amendment protection. The state actor shall not abridge the persuit of life, and so on.

So what's life? If it can garner a homicide charge is it life? You can't apply it for homicide as life and not apply it in the same trimester for abortion as not life.

You either gotta stop prosecuting prenatal homicide or acknowledge the protections of the 14th amendment apply to the fetus. You cant really dance around that one either. Even with collapse clauses.

And even The Supreme Court of California threw out challenges to the 2004 Unborn Victims of Violence Act. All challenged on the same 14th amendment basis citing Roe v. Wade. They couldn't keep the courts from recognizing in-utero as life. Thrown out everywhere it was challenged. So the precedence wasn't.

Its one of those, "be glad the definition of life has been left to states" things, at least for me. Because I dont think pro-choice would like the answer if SCOTUS actually defined life.

pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov...

Cause my legal reference on 14th Amendment jurisprudence says this:

Science, history and tradition establish that unborn humans are, from the time of conception, both persons and human beings, thus strongly supporting an interpretation that the unborn meet the definition of "person" under the Fourteenth Amendment. The legal test used to extend constitutional personhood to corporations, which are artificial "persons" under the law, is more than met by the unborn, demonstrating that the unborn deserve the status of constitutional personhood. There can be no "rule of law" if the Constitution continues to be interpreted to perpetuate a discriminatory legal system of separate and unequal for unborn human beings. Relying on the reasoning of the Supreme Court in Brown v. Board of Education, the Supreme Court may overrule Roe v. Wade solely on the grounds of equal protection. Such a result would not return the matter of abortion to the states. The Fourteenth Amendment, properly interpreted, would thereafter prohibit abortion in every state.

My feeling is this is more for states that want to ban it outright than to enforce 14th Amendment protections in states that will still allow it.

originally posted by: projectvxn
a reply to: AutomateThis1v2

And if a woman does feel the need to have an abortion what is it to anyone else but her?

Because it isn't her life she's ending.

Stop being promiscuous and this won't be an issue.

Lol, that old BS?

You gonna ask daddy government to track her down and grill her if the pregnancy is the result of being promiscuous, or if she had been raped, or if she would likely die from the pregnancy, or if the baby wasn't going to make it anyways, or if it was just the result of being in that window of a contraceptive not working or a condom breaking?

You'd rather the woman and her partner struggle to take care of a child, maybe mentally challenged, and will be screwed right out of the gate as far as opportunities, support, and such go?

Do you want them growing up on the government tit? To be brainwashed and dependent on the government, and its agencies, and other people's money on how to act and how to vote?

What are they going to adopt the kid out into an adoption system that is trash? Most of those kids end up being abused, neglected and passed around.

It's a good thing you're not in a position of power. I'm sure you'd be just great at mandating how people ought to behave.

And now? Man imagine #ing a person over before they even had a chance. Economic bullcrap, education is trash, who knows what house prices are going to be in the next twenty or thirty years. Imagine paying $20 for a gallon of milk and a loaf of bread. I don't even want to think about gas prices.

Then what? This person born into crap, economically and socially disadvantaged from birth, because people he's never met got all in their feels about his mother wanting to abort something that hadn't even experienced life yet, and then he was forced to go through a trash school system, has no direction in life, and ultimately ends up just being another tax slave angry on social media complaing about money, politics, relationships, and that's it.

Not every person born is going to be a genius, an actor, doctor, or somebody who's going to change the world.

People aren't perfect. Things happen. Let's not use pregnancy as a punishment for someone being promiscuous and potentially give birth to some pissed off kid who ends up doing something terrible.

I'm sure you wouldn't like the thought of some promiscuous hussy raising her children to be like that right?

originally posted by: AutomateThis1v2
maybe mentally challenged

So someone mentally challenged isn't human? Less human?

originally posted by: AutomateThis1v2
Let's not use pregnancy as a punishment for someone being promiscuous and potentially give birth to some pissed off kid who ends up doing something terrible.

I'm sure you wouldn't like the thought of some promiscuous hussy raising her children to be like that right?

So since it is better for the kids like that to be dead, it's fine if I go around looking for kids like that and kill them, right?

a reply to: OccamsRazor04

Lol, seems sarcasm isn't your strong suit.

a reply to: AutomateThis1v2

Can you blame me with what people post for real?

a reply to: AutomateThis1v2

What an asinine response.

No one has a right to kill a baby for convenience. Which is the reason most women abort by far.

a reply to: Waterglass

A new survey shows that 71% of Americans support restrictions on abortion, and that only 17% of Americans think that a woman should be able to have an abortion "any time she wants" during her pregnancy.

No surprise. The Roe V Wade ruling also supports restrictions on abortion, and support the idea that women can't just go get an abortion on demand anytime during her pregnancy.

So, everyone that supports NOT overturning Roe is included in that statistic.

originally posted by: projectvxn
a reply to: AutomateThis1v2

What an asinine response.

No one has a right to kill a baby for convenience. Which is the reason most women abort by far.

Looks who is talking about being asinine.
What are you going to do? What stake do you have in the matter? Are you going to go around and save all the poor kids who didn't ask to be born in #holes to parents who don't care about them? Kids who will turn into angry, bitter adults who don't even know you?

And you say that most abortions are done out of convenience? Is it convenient to bring another person into this world when a parent already has more children than they can afford? What's to be done in that situation? Place the kid in the foster system where they will be most likely abused and neglected? Just do what they can until the kid ends up living in the basement? Or kicked out and surfing couches? Join the military to be used to push political agendas? Maybe, just maybe they're driven enough or lucky enough to have a teacher that cares and they do well in school to get a scholarship or some other form of tuition assistance?

What then? They go into a saturated field? They go into the trades? I know a lot of people like touting the trades as a means to being successful, but that's not a guarantee.

You're down to force a teen to be a #ty mom? You think a teenager knows how to be a mother? You think the kid is going to appreciate the mother being irresponsible and not a beneficial and supportive parent?

You down to force a person who is already living paycheck to paycheck and possibly already has a child or more to have yet another child, and then the other children suffer as well?

Or a mother in an abusive relationship? You down to have a child raised by an abusive father, potentially beaten and traumatized for life only to continue the cycle of violence and trauma?

You literally said a couple comments ago that it was about being promiscuous, but I bet you can't find a stat saying that these pregnancies are aborted due to that.

But then you shift it to convenience. Yeah, I bet it's real convenient to deny a women an abortion, because she must have been promiscuous, when she's already got other mouths to feed who she would have more of a struggle to keep fed and clothed and taken care of. If she's in an abusive relationship why would she want to bring another little person who can't defend themselves into that situation?

Go on. Show me some stats that show that the majority of women who have had abortions or plan to are because they are promiscuous.

And the whole convenience thing is definitely an asinine remark.

And who are you to say that a woman doesn't have a right? Easy for you to say when you don't have to deal with the repercussions. You'd rather a child to grow up through a # life just because you personally don't agree with abortion?

You don't have a right to tell women what they can and can't do as far as pregnancies go or really anything. You also don't have a right to force people to grow up in # conditions.

Go on and continue supporting the state to enforce your desires and beliefs though. It's the only way you'll ever feel like you have a right or any power to dictate another person's life. I'm willing to bet you'd rather all women be forced to raise children in # conditions only to grow up and be tax slaves and consume so that the politicians and corporate fatasses can get wealthy. To grow up and be military pawns to sacrifice themselves for special interests and to kill foriegners to destabilize their nations for our government.

originally posted by: frogs453
a reply to: jjkenobi

Well based on population sure. It's really a woman issue of all parties. And likely a closer number between both parties if you have All women supporting 70% for any access, 80% and 90% percent for rape and health of the mother, who support these rights as is reported.

black women are 13% of the population but 40% of abortions.

hispanics are 56 pro life, 40 pro choice.

NYT article.

who's democrat who is republican?
what did joe say? you know the thing about not being black?

a reply to: Degradation33

So let’s peel the Republican onion. The current National Chair is: Ronna McDaniel That tweet sort of caught my eye so where did the 71% come from? Marist Poll: 71% of Americans Support Legal Restrictions on Abortion So the Knights of Columbus asked for a Marist Poll. I often wonder about polls. I remember Mitt Romney was ahead in all polls back in 2016. Then we have 2020. At this point it appears that both sides "manufacture" numbers along with whomever is pulling their strings. I also came across Shadow gate I, the documentary by Millie Weaver. I believe that its factual beyond anything else we get from our news media. It may also explain the 71%.

See the recent polls now. Seems to have turned around in favor of allowing abortion. I rest my views as a separation of church and state.

a reply to: Waterglass

Can you show me a source with more people in favor of abortions with zero restrictions.

a reply to: Sookiechacha

What restrictions does Roe place on abortion?

a reply to: OccamsRazor04

Not my interest go look yourself