Roe v Wade is on deck

[Jarhyn]

Pro choice outnumber anti-abortion rights by a significant percentage.

If youre talking about the USA, I thought the majority of Americans opposed absolute, unlimited, no-questions-asked, abortion on demand all the way up to 36 weeks.

That is the abortion lobby's position is it not? Elective abortion on demand without any gestational age limit. That's what pro-choice means right?

I think you need to fact check your claim.

No. I also think you need to check your facts.

OK
Is Pew Research May 2022 sufficient for you?

According to them, only 19% say it should be legal on demand irrespective of gestational age.

That means the majority of Americans (surveyed) oppose absolute, unlimited, no-questions-asked, abortion on demand all the way up to 36 weeks.

Wow your framing is dishonest.

Like, "in most cases" is a very strong statement that the chart dishonestly looks away from in the title.

 

[Lion IRC]

You might take a look at the number of babies who die in miscarriages every year.

Are we going to have a look at the scientific evidence for what causes miscarriage?

It's most of them.
Unborn children who die, but not because any human made the choice.

One human or many humans can be the cause of another person's unwanted miscarriage.

If there is a God as you describe, He's the biggest abortionist ever.

I don't accept that God performs abortions.

 

[Lion IRC]

Wow your framing is dishonest.

Like, "in most cases" is a very strong statement that the chart dishonestly looks away from in the title.

What are you talking about?
The title agrees with me.
It says the majority of Americans think abortion should be illegal in some cases - denying women CHOICE.
And it's not a small majority either.

 

[Jarhyn]

Wow your framing is dishonest.

Like, "in most cases" is a very strong statement that the chart dishonestly looks away from in the title.

What are you talking about?
The title agrees with me.
It says the majority of Americans think abortion should be illegal in some cases - denying women CHOICE.
And it's not a small majority either.

Legal in most cases.

You could ask anyone here and they would say "illegal in some cases".

Those cases generally involve the minority of cases where someone has gotten to a point of viability of premature birth, the principal that a potentially independent person can be evicted but ought be evicted to charity if available, and that the squatter has some right as a future person to not having been born premature.

None of that applies to the VAST majority of abortions.

The chart does not support your argument the way you think it does.

 

[Shadowy Man]

If there is a God as you describe, He's the biggest abortionist ever.

I don't accept that God performs abortions.

Why? Do you *know* that he doesn't, or just don't like the idea that he might? How can we ever know if he does or does not perform abortions?

 

[TomC]

Are we going to have a look at the scientific evidence for what causes miscarriage?

Sure.
The problem is that usually nobody knows. What is known is that no human chose it.

One human or many humans can be the cause of another person's unwanted miscarriage.

Could you be more clear? Under what circumstances could one or many humans be the cause of another person's unwanted miscarriage? Of course, toxic waste or something might cause a few of the miscarriages. I oppose that sort of behavior as well, but nobody deliberately caused the miscarriages I'm talking about.

I don't accept that God performs abortions.

I don't accept that God is a word with any important meaning. So, I agree with you in a sense.

But here's a true story from my life.
When I was 20 and my girlfriend was 19, we got pregnant. It was a big crisis for us. We didn't know what to do.

If your God exists, He took care of the problem for us. She miscarried at about a month. We hadn't decided anything.

God aborted our baby.

If anything like the Abrahamic God exists, that is. If not, then it all makes sense.

Ironically, the experience turned me into a hardcore prolifer. I've softened and mellowed since then (it was about 45 years ago).
But 12 years of Christian academy left me a solid pro-choice proponent. A month of being a father flipped me completely. She and I were leaning towards an abortion, before the decision was taken out of our hands. Hard reflection made me realize that what I was inclined towards was offing my own kid.
Tom

 

[ideologyhunter]

The Pro-Lifers want to accomplish a tyranny of the minority. I haven't heard any of them deplore the excesses we've seen in the past two years -- in my state, in Texas, etc. If you don't have autonomy in deciding whether or not to reproduce, you are under the thumb of a theocracy.

 

[Elixir]

Pro choice outnumber anti-abortion rights by a significant percentage.

If youre talking about the USA, I thought the majority of Americans opposed absolute, unlimited, no-questions-asked, abortion on demand all the way up to 36 weeks.

That is the abortion lobby's position is it not? Elective abortion on demand without any gestational age limit. That's what pro-choice means right?

I think you need to fact check your claim.

No. I also think you need to check your facts.

OK
Is Pew Research May 2022 sufficient for you?

According to them, only 19% say it should be legal on demand irrespective of gestational age.

That means the majority of Americans (surveyed) oppose absolute, unlimited, no-questions-asked, abortion on demand all the way up to 36 weeks.

That’s pretty stupid. Count me in as thinking abortion should not always be legal.

Anyone who thinks abortion should be legal past a point of viability, has also gone astray. Not necessarily as wacky as the “no exceptions” loonies, but morally chsllenged nonetheless. The number of viable babies that are legally aborted is minimal if not nonexistent.

 

[Lion IRC]

The chart does not support your argument the way you think it does.

The chart doesn't say what people want it to say. It's just numbers.

19% is a minority. (Should there be restrictions - no)

81% is a majority. (Should there be restrictions - yes.)

I'm part of the 81%

Planned Parenthood's Official policy on abortion access is precisely that of the 19%

 

[Elixir]

My apology: my estimate of god’s carnage was probably a little bit off.
PubMed says:

“With nearly 130 million births per year across the world, a 15% risk of miscarriage proposes nearly 23 million miscarriages per year or 44 per min. given that the miscarriages and preclinical pregnancy losses are usually managed at home, the absolute number of miscarriages is significantly higher than reported (5).”

So Lion, why are you not upset about your god’s ongoing genocide of hundreds tens of Millions of Children every year? But you want to interfere with other people’s reproductive choices. Such hypocrisy.

 

[ideologyhunter]

81% is a majority. (Should there be restrictions - yes.)

I'm part of the 81%

So -- how does the 1864 Arizona law strike you? (Apology if this has already been covered -- this thread is now too long for me to get ahold of.)

 

[Lion IRC]

Never heard of it. Sorry.

 

[Elixir]

19% is a minority. (Should there be restrictions - no)

81% is a majority. (Should there be restrictions)

According to your chart, I am opposed to 58% of people and you are opposed to 71%. Unless you’re a “no exceptions” type, in which case you are opposed 92:8

Figure it out. You can’t claim affiliation with your opponents.

 

[TomC]

Planned Parenthood's Official policy on abortion access is precisely that of the 19%

You don't understand PP very well at all.
They try to prevent abortions and they're very good at it.
What they (and I) oppose is government overreach.
There's no reason for the government to get involved in something like. If the government wants to reduce abortion they could support sex ed in schools and PP, which actually do reduce abortion.
Tom

 

[Lion IRC]

So Lion, why are you not upset about your god’s ongoing genocide of hundreds tens of Millions of children every year?

Because I dont think God causes what you describe.

But you want to interfere with other people’s reproductive choices. Such hypocrisy

I don't want to interfere with their choice. I want to interfere with the choice of people who earn their living killing unborn humans.

 

[TomC]

Never heard of it. Sorry.

Never heard of what?
Tom

 

[TomC]

Because I dont think God causes what you describe.

Why not?
God isn't particularly powerful? What?

God killed my baby, if there is a God like you describe.
Tom

 

[Elixir]

Because I dont think God causes what you describe.

I thought you believed in a tri-Omni god.
One that could refrain from letting all those children die, even if it had not intervened directly to effect the genocide.

Or is it like the OT god punishing those kids and their parents for being wicked? Sadistic wacko.

Perhaps in His Infinite Wisdom and Mercy, He refrained from conferring sentience upon non viable fetuses, that their loss may pain only the parents.

 

[Lion IRC]

Planned Parenthood's Official policy on abortion access is precisely that of the 19%

You don't understand PP very well at all.

Yes I do. They are very vocal in the public square and very clear in their communications.

Do you claim that I'm misrepresenting their clearly stated position on unrestricted access to abortion on demand?

Want me to post it here - with quotation marks and a url?

They try to prevent abortions and they're very good at it.

I don't think they are doing that good a job.

What they (and I) oppose is government overreach.

It seems obvious that YOU dont understand PP very well. They don't just oppose overreach, They dont just oppose some restrictions. They oppose any and all legal restrictions.

"No judge, no politician, no law should ever block....[access to abortion on demand]
Their position is that of the 19% minority.

There's no reason for the government to get involved...

Please learn the difference between saying "there is no reason" and "I disagree with those reasons".

If the government wants to reduce abortion they could support sex ed in schools and PP, which actually do reduce abortion.
Tom

Sure. But these arent mutually exclusive.
Wanting to reduce abortion is not synonymous with restricting access to abortion. PP can have a policy which supports unlimited access to abortion on demand whilst simultaneously doing 'stuff' they claim helps reduce abortion.

 

[Lion IRC]

Because I dont think God causes what you describe.

God killed my baby, if there is a God like you describe.

I just described Him as NOT being that sort of God. That's my description.