posted April 05, 2019 09:23 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Belage:
I honestly thought the US was a secular nation, But I could be wrong, But I do know that we have a separation of church and state written in the constitution.

As for the Christian BIble, it is made of the Tanak (Jewish Bible) and the New Testament. I am not aware of any New Testament verse on abortion.

---

That would depend on what we mean by nation. If we mean goverment structure, laws, policy etc than yes the US is a secular nation. If we mean the people than we have one of the higher percentages of believers in the West. I believe only the eastern euro nations top us.
Israel, though a "Jewish state", has a perhaps surprising 60% rate of non religious citizens.

posted April 05, 2019 09:42 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by shura:
I think it will result in some unplanned babies, yes. Whether unplanned necessarily equals unwanted ... Well we've established that we just cant say how often it does, and what the consequence is when it does. Nevertheless I don't think you will see the massive upswing in unplanned births you're looking for. I think women will 1) plan better 2) utilize morning after pills 3) cross state lines.

---

But, but, but, the pro-lifers are also against the morning after pills and consider it abortion:
https://cogforlife.org/morning-after-pill/

posted April 05, 2019 09:51 PM            

I have NEVER had an abortion.
My reproductive years are over.

posted April 05, 2019 11:19 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Belage:
^^ Yes I know and understand the rethoric. Innocent babies... etc.

My question is: are you prepared and ready to have more of your tax dollars allocated to the social services who are going to have to handle all those unwanted babies? Are you prepared and ready to have more of your tax dollars supporting indigent parents of those unwanted babies?

---

Why are you trying to lay off the responsibility of raising these so called 'unwanted children' on American taxpayers?

They are the responsibility of their parents you know.

posted April 05, 2019 11:27 PM            

Consequences!

posted April 06, 2019 12:04 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Belage:
But, but, but, the pro-lifers are also against the morning after pills and consider it abortion:
https://cogforlife.org/morning-after-pill/

So basically, the only choice left to women are 1) and 3)

---

posted April 06, 2019 12:17 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Belage:
By the way, I have no personal dog in this fight.

I have NEVER had an abortion.
My reproductive years are over.

I have come to embrace many of the current republican ideals and positions, however, something about the way this issue is being handled keeps me from saying that I am a republican.

---

Understood. I couldn't call myself a Repub for multiple reasons.

I think it's worthwhile to differentiate between the position of the Party, and the position of the people.

posted April 06, 2019 03:11 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by jwhop:
Why are you trying to lay off the responsibility of raising these so called 'unwanted children' on American taxpayers?

They are the responsibility of their parents you know.

It's not as though there aren't various types of birth control available for those who don't want to be parents.

---

I think it is fair to say that if the American people are forcing someone to carry an unwanted child to term, then the American people should be ready to take SOME responsability for that child's life. Do the American people not care at all what is going to happen to that unwanted child they were so eager to "save"?

That is what I don't understand.

posted April 06, 2019 03:19 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by shura:
Some are. Some are even against birth control, but these options are not currently on the legal chopping block. So ….

---

Correct.

But the same forces that pushed through the HeartBeat Bill have every intention of moving in that direction. It is their long term plan.

posted April 06, 2019 03:21 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by ballerina:
Life is a Gift
a Miracle from God. ...

Consequences!

---

posted April 06, 2019 09:07 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by ballerina:
What is happening in my
personal life, does not
need to be shared..I am
paying the price for my
actions..there is no
escape from anything we
do..it is all accounted
for...we are all connected!
There is right
and there is wrong
it is a11 very simple!

---

posted April 06, 2019 09:12 PM            

Learning and Growing...

...with Love and Understanding!

posted April 06, 2019 09:48 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Belage:
I am not sure the silent majority is with the heartbeat Bill.

According to many different polls most Americans are not in favor of overturning Roe VS Wade.
Most American want limits on abortion - restricted to the first 3 months of pregnancy- and this nuanced position is found across all political persuasions, democrats, independents, and Republicans.

---

Yep. I don't believe they are with the Heartbeat Bill either. Third term and post birth abortion are equally too extreme for the middle. It's those extremes, yes? Both parties are gunning for their respective extremes. Why?

posted April 06, 2019 09:57 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Belage:
Correct.

But the same forces that pushed through the HeartBeat Bill have every intention of moving in that direction. It is their long term plan.

---

Yep again. Extremists within both camps are maneuvering for dominance, and theyve both got some genuinely noxious long-term plans. The Left's extremists have greatly outmaneuvered their counterparts on the Right, but I suppose that's another post. Meantime, where does the extremism leave us? The vast middle isn't so vast anymore. So do we kill all the babies or none of the babies? Chose.

posted April 28, 2019 03:46 AM            

NOT A SIN.

Maximum Theologians agree that the Soul enters the Foetus between 5th to 7th month.

Such rules are just to oppress women, and take away their productive lives for the mistakes of men who refuse protection.

posted April 28, 2019 04:03 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Belage:
My question is: are you prepared and ready to have more of your tax dollars allocated to the social services who are going to have to handle all those unwanted babies? Are you prepared and ready to have more of your tax dollars supporting indigent parents of those unwanted babies?

---

I get what you're saying. It seems wholly unhelpful to me that certain leaders of the Republican party would like to cut funding for social services and also ban abortion...like, okay, every life is precious, but how are you going to feed that precious life when it's born? Are we going to let he/she starve once they're here? Are we going to allow he/she to be homeless? Are we going to deny he/she adequate healthcare?

The American taxpayers are not responsible for an unwanted baby, but they're going to be faced with the bills associated with one, like it or not. Where do we think these unwanted babies will end up? Likely not with their parents. More likely, in an orphanage. Maybe they'll be adopted, and maybe they'll bounce from group home to group home on the taxpayer dollar until they turn 18.

posted April 28, 2019 03:17 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Randall:
Roe v. Wade was based on the viability of the fetus, i.e., when a fetus can live outside of the womb. That will never be reversed. But technology has improved so much that it should be revisited.

---

You mean, keep a woman hooked up to something, or have a procedure that might allow it to live outside "the host body" sooner, and have even more control over a woman?

posted April 29, 2019 09:28 PM            

quote:

---

The American taxpayers are not responsible for an unwanted baby, but they're going to be faced with the bills associated with one, like it or not. Where do we think these unwanted babies will end up? Likely not with their parents. More likely, in an orphanage. Maybe they'll be adopted, and maybe they'll bounce from group home to group home on the taxpayer dollar until they turn 18.

---

Do you honestly suppose we will see a rash of "unwanted babies" left on street corners by their upwardly mobile moms who were just too darn invested in their careers to commit to parenthood? Maybe all the Kashmir trekking Instagram models will drop off their inconvenient spawn at the nearest ashram? Are you envisioning Oliver Twist style orphanages? Is it so impossible to imagine women might, you know, take responsibility? Crazy talk! And look, American taxpayers are already financially supporting supposedly "wanted" babies by the millions - poor American children, foreign children here in the US, and children in other nations.

posted April 30, 2019 06:18 PM            

quote:

---

But I'm not so eager to ban a reproductive right for all women, just because I've never been in a situation in which I would ever need to consider having one.

---

Please note that the above is the main point of my argument.

However, also note that I am overall supportive of the bill, after reviewing it a little closer. Women should not be utilizing abortion as a form of birth control, but certain exceptions which I felt were required were made with this bill.