Arizona Obliterates Signature Requirements for Abortion Initiative

a reply to: Justoneman

Don't believe everything you hear.

originally posted by: Zanti Misfit
a reply to: Degradation33

Who wants to Live in a State that allows the Murder of the Unborn ?

Who wants to live in a State that dictates what is done to or with my body for health or re-productivity?

originally posted by: Therealbeverage

originally posted by: Zanti Misfit
a reply to: Degradation33

Who wants to Live in a State that allows the Murder of the Unborn ?

Who wants to live in a State that dictates what is done to or with my body for health or re-productivity?

This is about the baby’s body.
You can do anything you like with yours.

a reply to: network dude

Age... child... clump of cells.... murder.

I thought you conservatives loved to talk about muh facts and definitions. Learn what all those words mean before trying to make a proper argument. That's why abortion debate is literally stupid. Because stupid people argue about it the most whether it's the ultra pro life or choice. Both book ends are dumb. I hate to put it that way, but the moderates on the subject are on the right path in this debate.

a reply to: strongfp

My input on the abortion issue is idiotic. I have no determining factors involved. I won't be fathering another kid, nor having one, even if "science" can make it possible. (see my signature) So in reality, this discussion should be with women, doctors, and God. But I have an opinion, and I'll not be silenced. So knowing all that, are you still able to get pregnant? Or is your opinion about the same as mine in it's insignificant aspect?

originally posted by: Sookiechacha
a reply to: Justoneman

Don't believe everything you hear.

I don't and never will. I go with what "I can prove" 1st.

Then, I look for "is that really the way it is?"

But, mostly I keep my mind open to following the truth wherever it is without thinking "hey I can't think that". I believe that because truth is ever tested and never forgetting or it just is a lie.

a reply to: strongfp

That's quite a bold statement to make. The two options for why a person might have an issue with terminating the life of an innocent unborn child for matters of convenience is either because they want to control women, or because of religion. But I suppose it makes it easy to fearmonger when you've painted your opposition as authoritarian in one form or another.

Do you need religion to tell you that killing children for convenience is wrong? Do you need the state to tell you that killing children for convenience is wrong? Are you going to totally ignore these questions and go right for the "a fetus isn't a child" strawman?

Maybe you can explain to me the ethics of terminating an innocent unborn child for convenience. I'd be interested in hearing that.

a reply to: Sookiechacha

Sure there is. It's called murder. And no, this is an example of taking your own argument to it's logical conclusion. Somehow the act of exiting the womb bestows personhood, and at that point it's no longer okay to terminate that human life. No one can logically or consistently explain what it is about leaving the womb that grants personhood and makes taking that life not okay anymore, which is what the argument is highlighting. Birth doesn't terminate a pregnancy. Birth completes a pregnancy. Don't play semantics with me, it won't go well for you.

Has anyone said that pregnancy complications don't happen? What exactly was your point with your comment about water breaking at 17 weeks? Are you trying to use the extreme positions very very few people have to paint all of the people who disagree with you?

It baffles me that you actually made that statement.
Me: "If the AMA, FDA, etc set the limits then why aren't all the limits across the states the same?"
You: "They are. They vary across the states"
So are the limits the same, or not?
I didn't ask about different facilities and their ability to decide what services they perform and you know that. You made the statement that [insert entities here] set the limits, so I asked why the limits are different from state to state, and you responded by both saying that they are and that they aren't. But we're the ones that are all over the place.

And no, I'm extremely specific about the wording that I use in the abortion debate. I don't advocate for a total abortion ban. I advocate for a ban on abortions for convenience. Of course there is a difference between an abortion for convenience and an abortion for medical necessity. I've never claimed that there wasn't. I've never claimed that there aren't situations where an abortion is absolutely necessary. That isn't the issue. The issue is that the percentage of abortions performed for medical necessity is miniscule compared to the whole. Even when you include the instances of pregnancies conceived by way of rape or incest, it is still far below any significant percentage and people who advocate for unlimited abortion access like yourself know this, but you use these extreme cases to justify the whole.

a reply to: MrGashler

Sure there is. It's called murder. And no, this is an example of taking your own argument to it's logical conclusionSure there is. It's called murder. And no, this is an example of taking your own argument to it's logical conclusion

You're being disingenuous. Nobody is advocating to legalize the murder of newborn infants or children, or people of any age.

I advocate for a ban on abortions for convenience.

Of course you do.
NEWS FLASH!!!
[B]Mr Gasher thinks abortion is murder! Conflates the two words, arguing that their meanings are equal. [/B]
Got it!

You made the statement that [insert entities here] set the limits, so I asked why the limits are different from state to state, and you responded by both saying that they are and that they aren't. But we're the ones that are all over the place.

Here's what I said:

Justoneman said:
Well with no defined limit to how late the abortion is allowed there.

I said
The limits are defined by the medical standards and ethics imposed on doctors and medical facilities by the AMA, the FDA, insurance carriers, et al, not politicians.

Laws vary from state to state, and hospitals have discretion as to what services they will provide. A Catholic Hospital, in any state, for example, probably won't assist the woman in my example. A Planned Parenthood or similar clinic could, if she can find one.

Listen, the legal limit, set by Roe, was viability. Roe V Wade set a limit. That limit for abortion on demand was viability. Most state initiatives, where abortion has been on the ballot, or is on the November ballot, are asking voters to restore Roe's limits.

Justoneman was talking about states that currently have no legislated limits. In those states, where the law doesn't try to interfere with the relationship between a patient and their doctor, doctors are bound by ethics and medical standards imposed by those agencies.

The issue is that the percentage of abortions performed for medical necessity is miniscule compared to the whole. Even when you include the instances of pregnancies conceived by way of rape or incest, it is still far below any significant percentage and people who advocate for unlimited abortion access like yourself know this, but you use these extreme cases to justify the whole.

So why are women suffering from miscarriages having to leave thier home state to get the medical care they need? If medical abortions are so "miniscule", why don't states just outlaw abortion on demand and let misscarriaging women get the care they need? (I know why)

In comclusion, yeah, you're being disingenious. Nobody is trying to legalize abortion after birth. NOBODY.

So called pro-lifers in states that impose abortion limits put women's lives at risk.

a reply to: Sookiechacha

The extreme right and Trump still insist that women are even getting an abortion after birth. That is murder. They seem to get very confused with a few state laws that will not force medical care on an infant with a terminal situation that will die in hours or a day, the Doctor and/or parent will not be charged if they determine that palliative care is better than taking the child away from the parent to perform potentially painful treatment that will not resolve the issue. Instead the baby can recieve whatever is necessary to make them comfortable and the parents can spend that time with their baby before it passes.

That certainly seems like the better way to spend the remaining hours. But nope, confused or purposely obtuse people are claiming women abort their babies after birth.

a reply to: MrGashler

Because it IS authoritarian.

In the whole pro life / choice debate the pro life crowed need to spend more energy and jump through more hoops to justify their stance. The pro choice crowed just needs to say one line "mind your own business". That's it. Stop trying to control people.

Now, please go virtue signal to me some more about your learned morals on the subject. It won't change my mind on the subject.

As a young woman with Schizohrenia who felt the need to terminate two unintended pregancies out of conern and well being of the new life growing within me (and as a VERY devout Catholic who has been through more grief and suffering from my well intended decisions based on my bloodtype and genetic history and everything happening that caused me to take the path I did, I I confess and atone and grieve to THIS VERY day and these events happened DECADES ago) I cannot understand the wave of young women so causally filming themselves having abortions like it's "no big deal" and there is a recent trend of young women and young men indulging in unprotected sex called "breeding fetishes" where no attempts of preventing conception is attempted in any way shape of form because it's "more exciting that way and we can just have an abortion or take Plan B if we concieve) and I find it ABSOLUTELY HORRIFYING.

Now dont' get me wrong, there is a time and place for the termination of a severely malformed fetus with no brain, working organs and so forth, or cases where something goes drastically remiss during the pregancy and the Mother's Life is at stake as well as that of the developing child (most cases are heartbreaking, as there is no way to save the poor child even with the best efforts and modern technology available in some regions) and every woman alive knows that being able to carry a healthy child to term is a gift, grace and blessing for all to celebrate, but not all women are as blessed as others and bring a new life into this world can be one of the most dangerous things a woman can undertake for various reasons.

Not every young woman can afford prenatal care, not every young woman can afford or has the capacity to have the health nessecary to hold a job to provide for herself during her pregancy (I have a young grilfriend who ended up being abandoned by her boyfriend when he found out and thanks the stars she was strong enough to continue working full time until her due date and it now one of the happiest people I know with her beautiful and amazing daughter).

Even though I cannot have children of my own I love them DEARLY and I pray nightly for the welfare of every woman out there who finds herself pregant without a Fatehr present, or from Rape, or from Incest and all the other horror stories that WOMEN know all too well about but for some reason certain Prolife Groups refuse to acknowledge like we were still inthe goddamn Dark Ages and it absolutely breaks my heart that we are still having this goddamn debate.

In both of my cases, it was not a fetus, but an EMBRYO...barely six to eight weeks of development and even my EXTREMELY Catholic Stepdad with his Masters in Biology was compassionate enough to understand my reasons for termination given my various genetic facotrs, severity of Schizophrenia, blood type and the conditions that brough about my decision to terminate before the poor life developed a brain and the ability to potentially consciously register what was happening, but LORD HAVE MERCY I STILL GRIEVE TO THIS DAY and suffer the Judgement of Others who simply don't (or won't) understand that I KNEW something was very very wrong very very early on. It was NOT normal morning sickness, it was NOT the usual cramping, it was a very clear sign that my body and that of the developing embryos were NOT compatible and being in a subpoverty situation I was NOT eligible for the care I needed in either instance.

I walked into the Medicare waiting room and violently vomited for over an hour from the opressive smell of urine and baby powder that permeated the waiting room, and when my doctor did not show after ANOTHER hour of waiting patiently (and more violent and uncontrollable vomiting) I went home and had a VERY difficult discussion with my Husband, and we had to make a VERY difficult descion.

Still, in light of the waves of women out there continuing to have unprotected sex for whatever psychopathic reasons compell them to continue doing so, as well as the "no big deal it's just a clump of cells" I do what I want bull# sexual liberation nonsense I think we need to continue having this diffcult discussion until we an reach a conscesus abotu Womens Health and the bull# excuses we have for lack of neonatal care, proper training of what to know during one's pregancy and when to see a Doctor, La Mas Classes for childbirth preparation, proper SNAP benefits and care for children in poverty situations and Free Lunches for those who qualify.

For the record, I live in Arkansas, one of the poorest States in the Union, and Child Welfare and care for Single Mothers is through the freakin' roof but we still have a LONG way to go when it comes to dangerous pregancies and the social policies that govern the welfare of those cases where things go wrong without people being absolute MONSTERS about it.

I've said enough. I've spoken my peace. I'll spare you the horror stories I've heard from folks I've met and how horrid it can be when things go wrong with bringing Life into this world and having to endure a System that sometimes doesn't give two wits because of your race, class, creed, socioeconomic staus or what have you because they're Draconian Asshats sometimes.

Everytime I check in for my medications I've been asked if I've been sterlized yet, and I tell them no, we abstain from relations and we move on because there are still complications from having your tubes tied (it's not foolproof) and there are no end to complications with hysterectomies (my Mother had her's at 46 from severe ovarian cysts that were causing her unending pain and were the size of softballs) and she went through diverticulitus and having her vaginal canal FALL OUT because there was no uterus to hold it in place anymore).

If these psychotic young ladies want so much reproductive freedom they're willing to gleefully walk into a clinic to teminate and become freque4nt flyers, relax the restrictions against voluntary tubal litigation and hysterectomies without all the bull# of "oh well, you're young you might change your mind" or "you need your husbands permission" bullcrap. Promote accurate safe sex and biologically sound Sex Education and Contreceptive Educations with parental permissions like they did in the 90's.

For the love of all that is Holy I had to endure one of those "heartstring" moments locally where they take a "ultrasound" and I'm telling ya, unless I really am a freakin mutant there is NO WAY SHAPE OR FORM my six week development was at a three month stage, it was rude and uncalled for and it further complicated my traumas. I'm may be stupid, but Im not a freakin' IDIOT.

Sorry for the Female Fury and Emotional Disconnect, this is a VERY sensitive subject for a lot of us out here who are actual biological Females and I apologise for my outbursts and generalized "hysteria" but I'm at that age where this kind of thing happens to Women and we start losign our goddamn minds and I apologise profusely out of respect for the Men (and Women) here having this discussion for my explosive and passionate outburst.

It's been quite a day and I really need to take my boots off, lol.


I guess I can be just as Draconian as others, but I will gladly fight for RARE, safe and legal abortions within reason.

Sorry, but I'm posting and letting this stand.

May God Have Mercy on My Soul.

a reply to: frogs453

Im not extreme right at all but to you. I am saying there are states implying that in interviews with the Gov of NY for one.


Im moderate and think leave women alone about it, but no late term ones unless for safety of the mom or some established reason other than they don't want a baby. That is they can have one, but be sensible about the time lines.

ETA we cant ignore the baby because you want to after a certain time of gestation is my stance.

As a Christian I am taught to love even the major sinners but to rebuke evil, and God decides their souls fate not me. If you think that is right extremism you are a left wing flamer then. You are one aren't you according to my recollection of frivolous posts that support sickness.

originally posted by: Justoneman
a reply to: frogs453

Im moderate and think leave women alone about it, but no late term ones unless for safety of the mom or some established reason other than they don't want a baby. That is they can have one, but be sensible about the time lines.

ETA we cant ignore the baby because you want to after a certain time of gestation is my stance.

As a Christian I am taught to love even the major sinners but to rebuke evil, and God decides their souls fate not me. If you think that is right extremism you are a left wing flamer then. You are one aren't you according to my recollection of frivolous posts that support sickness.

The only compassionate solution I have been able to come up with in cases where a mother to be becomes hysterial during the last couple months or weeks of the gestation process is to get her informed consent for a cessarian and make sure the infant is sustained until she wakes up from the sedative agent and is healed enough to process wether or not she still wishes to hold her child if the child is developed enough to be able to be held at that stage.

Many women freak out when they get closer to the actual delivery date because labor can take HOURS and it's a very INTENSE EXPERIENCE (preemies nothwithstanding). I know I have a high pain tolerance but the thought of a fully formed birth canal delivery is WAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAY beyond my abilities and I'd probably beg for a cessarian delivery myself if I weren't pushing 50 and found myself suddenly pregnant by some mircale or chance of Fate.

It's also a good time to ask the aforementioned mother to be if she would like to be sterilized while she's under and get informed consent so it doesn't happen again accidentally and so on and so forth.

New Mothers sometimes panic, and One Child is MORE than enough for such Ladies (both myself and my hubs are only chidren), and if the child is rejected still after the offer to hold their infant and experience the joy of new life, the child can be placed for Adoption, and babies go quick with adoptive parents who qualify for such an Honor.

Win Win.

a reply to: strongfp

Wow. I learned something new today. It's authoritarian to.....-checks notes- have an issue with people killing unborn children for convenience?

Are you for or against a person receiving charges of double homicide if they murder a pregnant woman?

Do you maintain that same energy for all kinds of killing? Or just the killing of the ones that don't scream when you rip them apart?
Does "mind your own business" apply when a man beats his wife? That's not your business. You don't know the dynamics or the reason for it.
Does "mind your own business" apply when a woman kills her children after their born?

Where's the line here exactly?

I don't need to virtue signal. All I need to do is let you speak.

a reply to: Sookiechacha

-sigh-
At no point did I state that anyone was actually advocating for post birth abortion. If you took the time to read what I actually said instead of having a long winded REEEEEEEEEEEE over what you think I said, you would understand that. Post birth abortion is simply murder. That was the entire point of my statement. You can grab ahold of your head and stop it from spinning around now. It's okay. The mean scary words aren't actually going to hurt you.

I'm well aware of what you said. I'm well aware of what he said. Your statement was inherently contradictory and still is. [Insert entity here] does not set the limit. The law does. They cannot overrule the law. If the law does not define a limit, then there isn't one, and legally an abortion can be performed at any stage in the pregnancy. There cannot be an argument for ethics in this situation unless one acknowledges that abortion necessarily requires the intentional termination of an innocent human life. Would a doctor likely perform a late stage abortion for convenience? Probably not. Is it legal for a doctor to do that in a state without a defined limit on abortion? Absolutely.

I've been looking for some news stories about your claim of "women having to leave their home state" to receive medical care for a miscarriage. Haven't found anything beyond some opinion pieces on NPR and CNN about how "some states abortion restrictions could criminalize miscarriages" but never actually explain how that's the case. Can you provide some evidence that women in some states are being forced to leave their home state to receive medical care for a miscarriage?
Some states are trying to do exactly what you described. But people like you are shrieking at the top of your lungs about "womens rights" and "bodily autonomy" at the idea of not being able to have abortions on demand.

Can you point out where I actually said that anyone is actually trying to legalize abortion after birth? Can you do that? Or did you just invent a huge strawman because you've been backed into a corner?

Gov of Virginia discusses 3rd Term Abortions

This is horrific.

Dem Gov. Ralph Northam, a pediatrician himself, is defending born-alive abortions:

“The infant would be delivered. The infant would be kept comfortable. The infant would be resuscitated if that’s what the mother and the family desired.”

a reply to: MrGashler

More hyperbole. For starters, no one is killing children or new borns, that's literal murder.

The more you keep bringing up nonsense on the subject the more it just makes women want to not change their stance and keep unhinged people like you away from their personal lives.

Again, the two extreme ends of the spectrum make stupid assumptions and arguments. Moderate people like myself don't want women having late term abortions, and don't want to outright ban them or shove our noses into their lives to control how they feel or act.
When I see the typical argument about women having abortions to "convenience" it tells me you haven't even thought about or even bothered to look into the subject, we don't know why most women seek abortions, the reasons given aren't published, and again, it's none of your business because each case is specific to a specific couple, or doctor and patient, or individual female.
So when I say it is authoritarian I'm pointing out the obvious, that the pro life crowed want to ultimately control women's reproductive rights, and if you come back and say you want to "protect" the unborn, then we enter the debate of the ethics of it all, why should YOU force a person who you don't know to carry a fetus full term and why should YOU decide who should be born.

If the pro life crowed gets its way, they need to maintain their stance which will ultimately end up in an authoritarian situation, because once all these women are forced to carry to term you will then need to propogandize to those future generations to maintain the pro life stance.
We know what happens when one group of people want to assert their moral standards of living on other people. It doesn't work, and if it is working, then you need to see the bigger picture on how its maintained. Let women have access to safe abortions, access to support groups, access to information and knowledge on alternatives.

a reply to: MrGashler

Your statement was inherently contradictory and still is

Nope. But yours are disingenuous. Nobody is advocating for post birth abortion, OR the murder of any infant, or anybody else, here.

Can you point out where I actually said that anyone is actually trying to legalize abortion after birth?

You interjected yourself in a conversation where I was refuting a poster who claimed that Virginia Governor Northam, and Democrats were advocating for "abortions after birth". You can't even see the lines you've blurred trying to defend that poster's assertions.

Lots of hot air, you're blowing there, just to restate your point that YOU BELIEVE that all abortion is murder....period. It doesn't matter whether it's in the womb or a newborn or a 89-year-old. It's all the same to you.

Geeezus, talk about REEEEEEEEE. You've got it going in spades, there brother.

originally posted by: Justoneman
Gov of Virginia discusses 3rd Term Abortions

This is horrific.

Dem Gov. Ralph Northam, a pediatrician himself, is defending born-alive abortions:

“The infant would be delivered. The infant would be kept comfortable. The infant would be resuscitated if that’s what the mother and the family desired.”

If you actually read the whole quote, or watched the whole video, you would know that Gov Northam was talking about what happens NOW whenever a infant is born with a disease or deformities that are inconsistent with life.

“The infant would be delivered. The infant would be kept comfortable. The infant would be resuscitated if that’s what the mother and the family desired.”

This is what happens every day, in every state, whenever a newborn infant is born with a dire prognosis. Northam was not asking voters to vote to allow doctors to murder newborns. He was advocating for the rights of the mother/parents to abort the deformed and diseased fetus BEFORE it's born, only to languish and die, not out of convenience, but out of compassion for everyone involved, including the fetus.