Do you have adblock enabled?
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Yahoo)   National poll reflects that the 20-week-ban bill may actually be a victory for Republicans - who have succeeded in bringing the abortion debate away from the difficult rape-and-incest exceptions in which Democrats insist on exclusively framing it   (news.yahoo.com) divider line 275
    More: Followup, Republican, Democrats, abortion rights, Late termination of pregnancy, Democratic Coalition, Marsha Blackburn, House Republicans, two-thirds vote  
•       •       •

1273 clicks; posted to Politics » on 26 Jun 2013 at 12:43 PM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



275 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-06-26 02:10:23 PM  

Ranger Rover: skullkrusher: Graffito: skullkrusher: what_now: skullkrusher: what_now: skullkrusher: nice subject change.

You brought up Europe.

skullkrusher: Do you now agree that society can and should restrict abortions after a certain point or we still going with the balls out "feminist" stupidity?

No. I will never, ever agree that "society" has a right to decide on my health care decisions,EVER, regardless of how stupid you think feminism is.

well, tough shiat, cupcake. Reasonable people have agreed that reasonable restrictions on abortion after a certain point is good. All over the world, actually.

/cupcake was for effect
//I do rather like you, ya crazy feminazi babykiller

It has been a long long time since I've heard any politician make a reasonable argument for restricting abortion access.

just to be clear, we are referring to your apparent position that abortion should be unrestricted, for any reason, up until the moment of birth... presumably you think infanticide is bad. Hard to understand for people who support unfettered abortion up until the point the baby finishes its move through the birth canal but I must assume.

What's it to you?  I mean why do you care if someone gets an abortion or not?  Serious question.

I don't. Until we're talking about killing an actual human being who just happens to still reside within his or her mother. I oppose infanticide as well. Why do I care about that? I dunno, hard to say.

I don't know if I've said anything to you directly before, but your posts are always lit up in blue, a color that I like.


appreciated sir. I don't think I've had the pleasure. Post moar
 
2013-06-26 02:10:41 PM  

skullkrusher: what_now: skullkrusher: what_now: skullkrusher: nice subject change.

You brought up Europe.

skullkrusher: Do you now agree that society can and should restrict abortions after a certain point or we still going with the balls out "feminist" stupidity?

No. I will never, ever agree that "society" has a right to decide on my health care decisions,EVER, regardless of how stupid you think feminism is.

well, tough shiat, cupcake. Reasonable people have agreed that reasonable restrictions on abortion after a certain point is good. All over the world, actually.

/cupcake was for effect
//I do rather like you, ya crazy feminazi babykiller

It has been a long long time since I've heard any politician make a reasonable argument for restricting abortion access.

just to be clear, we are referring to your apparent position that abortion should be unrestricted, for any reason, up until the moment of birth... presumably you think infanticide is bad. Hard to understand for people who support unfettered abortion up until the point the baby finishes its move through the birth canal but I must assume.


The Spartans did, good enough for me. Hell, I'd even let there be a 30-day return policy on babies. Three weeks in, decide it isn't for you, send it back to the manufacturer, aka, god.

Also, you are coming off as a sanctimonious douchbag. If you don't like abortions, don't farking get one. how hard is that to accept. How does it affect you if some women, or as you seem to be implying, some ho bag piece of chattel floozey gets an abortion? it doesn't. Not one iota. So in summary, fark off asswipe.
 
2013-06-26 02:10:55 PM  

skullkrusher: Philip J. Fry: skullkrusher: no, I already said that serious risks to her health should be an acceptable reason for an exemption after a certain point.
I am happier with a baby born homeless to a poor mother than murdered in the womb though. Weird, I know.

You clearly don't consider it murder or as you condone killing a fetus if the mother's life is at risk.

that's not murder. That's a heartbreaking choice. Much like seeing your twin children drowning but only having 1 life preserver. You didn't murder the one you didn't throw the preserver to


You do know that in an abortion someone physically kills the fetus, right?
 
2013-06-26 02:11:29 PM  

spiderpaz: what_now: skullkrusher: what_now: skullkrusher: what_now: skullkrusher: nice subject change.

You brought up Europe.

skullkrusher: Do you now agree that society can and should restrict abortions after a certain point or we still going with the balls out "feminist" stupidity?

No. I will never, ever agree that "society" has a right to decide on my health care decisions,EVER, regardless of how stupid you think feminism is.

well, tough shiat, cupcake. Reasonable people have agreed that reasonable restrictions on abortion after a certain point is good. All over the world, actually.

/cupcake was for effect
//I do rather like you, ya crazy feminazi babykiller

It has been a long long time since I've heard any politician make a reasonable argument for restricting abortion access.

just to be clear, we are referring to your apparent position that abortion should be unrestricted, for any reason, up until the moment of birth... presumably you think infanticide is bad. Hard to understand for people who support unfettered abortion up until the point the baby finishes its move through the birth canal but I must assume.

Fallacy. People do not abort a healthy 7-9 month fetus. It doesn't happen.

Good, then there's no problem legally preventing them from doing so hypothetically, if a thorough enough law could be written that politicians didn't sneak all sorts of ridiculous crap into.  Just saying "they won't ever do it trust me" isn't good enough, for me at least in this case.  However, as you said earlier about not being able to "remember a politician talking about abortion reasonably", such a hypothetical law may not be realistic in our current state of politics, so the point may be moot altogether ... in which case I would agree with you that no restrictions is better that bad restrictions that do more harm than good.



Ok. Let's see that law, and then we'll talk.
 
2013-06-26 02:11:46 PM  

RedT: bdub77:

The woman can choose whether to do the cesarian or not. They can carry to full term if they wish. The state would pay for whatever procedure, for the time the woman is out of work, and for the care of the child for the first 18 years of life (as well as provide adoption services).

These are the same states that are fighting universal heath care.

/And does the mom get a unicorn as a parting gift?


Oh I totally get it, I'm totally on the level of rainbows and unicorns. But OK let's say that you are a Democratic strategist and you want to go to war on abortion as really one of the last talking points the GOP has any merit on. So you put together a very reasonable solution to it, backed up by data, that keeps both life of mother and fetus in consideration. Now you've got a real platform that most reasonable people can agree on.

You'll always have dissenters and disagreements in both parties. My mom, total anti-abortion nut. My mother-in-law, pro-abortion and in fact had one years ago. Both are total conservatives and love each other, both are borderline insane. I would love to put them in a room together and have them discuss abortion (OMG why have I not thought of that)?
 
2013-06-26 02:12:22 PM  

serial_crusher: If you can't afford to take a pregnancy test at least once every 20 weeks you probably can't afford a baby or an abortion either, so keep it wrapped up and/or in your pants.


But no, he doesn't want to punish women for having sex.
 
2013-06-26 02:13:25 PM  

what_now: Because we aren't talking about 7-9 month viable fetus abortions, we're talking about 5 month abortions of different levels of viableness.


to clarify, we haven't discussed any cut off point at all except for your desire for there not to be one. Correct me if I am wrong, but the impression I have is that you don't give a shiat about viability.

what_now: And lets not forget: this bill wasn't about restricting access to post-20 weeks. It was about restricting access to ANY abortion, by making absurd claims about the size of the janitors closet and other horseshiat.


this bill is horseshiat for reasons aside from the cutoff. Talking about horseshiat is dull, though.

what_now: You cannot tell me that a politician who votes to cut food stamps one day, and abortion access the next cares about poor children. I will laugh in the face of anyone who claims this.


I am not one of those politicians, nor do I sympathize with most politicians who wish to further restrictions on abortion access on virtually any issue. Believe it or not, I am really, really, really, really not a Republican. I am not kidding when I say that. I just happen to like fighting with liberals ;)
 
2013-06-26 02:14:17 PM  

Philip J. Fry: skullkrusher: Philip J. Fry: skullkrusher: no, I already said that serious risks to her health should be an acceptable reason for an exemption after a certain point.
I am happier with a baby born homeless to a poor mother than murdered in the womb though. Weird, I know.

You clearly don't consider it murder or as you condone killing a fetus if the mother's life is at risk.

that's not murder. That's a heartbreaking choice. Much like seeing your twin children drowning but only having 1 life preserver. You didn't murder the one you didn't throw the preserver to

You do know that in an abortion someone physically kills the fetus, right?


yep. You do know what a metaphor is, right? It is not meant to be a literal perfect match for the situation being described.
 
2013-06-26 02:14:54 PM  

what_now: serial_crusher: If you can't afford to take a pregnancy test at least once every 20 weeks you probably can't afford a baby or an abortion either, so keep it wrapped up and/or in your pants.

But no, he doesn't want to punish women for having sex.


I think we should punish women for not having sex, personally.

spankings, perhaps.
 
2013-06-26 02:16:04 PM  

Graffito: The AMA already stated that these standards do not improve safety.


Do you have a citation handy for that?  I'm not saying I doubt you, but I was looking for it last night and couldn't find anything.  I'd like to read what they said.

Obviously most of the Republicans voting for the bill ultimately wanted to use it as a way to shut the clinics down.  And it wouldn't surprise me to see the Democrats fighting even the most sane safety regulations, just on principle.
The AMA seems like a reasonably impartial organization though, so I'm interested to see their position.
 
2013-06-26 02:16:32 PM  

skullkrusher: yep. You do know what a metaphor is, right? It is not meant to be a literal perfect match for the situation being described.


You only want to use a metaphor to hide the reality of your belief.
 
2013-06-26 02:16:55 PM  
If it were a completely separate issue rather than in an omnibus bill, I suppose I'd be okay with a ban on abortions after 20 weeks. I'd still like to see medical exceptions and what not, but 20 weeks is close to the earliest point of fetal viability (I think I saw the youngest was estimated at just under 22 weeks). Balancing between 20 and 24 weeks is a weak preference to suss out for me.

Of course, you never see bills pushing just for a ban on abortions after 20 weeks. You see them packaged with tons of other garbage that treats the pregnant woman like incompetent children at best or slaves at worst. I would have done exactly what Wendy Davis did last night if I were in her shoes.
 
2013-06-26 02:17:32 PM  

there their theyre: Also, you are coming off as a sanctimonious douchbag. If you don't like abortions, don't farking get one. how hard is that to accept. How does it affect you if some women, or as you seem to be implying, some ho bag piece of chattel floozey gets an abortion? it doesn't. Not one iota. So in summary, fark off asswipe.


It is sanctimonious to be shocked and horrified that people support murdering infants pre-birth? Believing that we as a society owe it to these most defenseless humans to protect them from being murdered in the womb a day before they were scheduled to check out of it? If so, eat a sack of my sanctimonious cocks, ya baby murdering shiatbag
 
2013-06-26 02:18:14 PM  

skullkrusher: to clarify, we haven't discussed any cut off point at all except for your desire for there not to be one. Correct me if I am wrong, but the impression I have is that you don't give a shiat about viability.


I do give a shiat about viability, and so do the doctors and the patients involved in the late term abortion decision.

A reasonable law would be, "abortions are not allowed after 7 months on a healthy and viable fetus except for when the health and welfare of the mother are at risk", full stop.

But that's not the laws we get, and until we have REASONABLE people discussing this I will oppose any and all forms of restriction.

skullkrusher: I am not one of those politicians, nor do I sympathize with most politicians who wish to further restrictions on abortion access on virtually any issue. Believe it or not, I am really, really, really, really not a Republican. I am not kidding when I say that. I just happen to like fighting with liberals ;)


Yeah, this is an engaging and civil debate, which is good. But it's about 100X more reasonable than any that politicians in this country are having right now.
 
2013-06-26 02:19:23 PM  

serial_crusher: ZombieApocalypseKitten: spiderpaz: I don't have a dog in this fight.  I'm pro choice, but I don't support late term abortion, once the child would feasibly be viable if an emergency c-section were performed.  So obviously there's some room in MY "gray area" there.

Realistically, a reasonably responsible, sexually active person is going to know they're pregnant in the first 8 weeks.  If you don't know, it's because you're being negligent and lazy.  If you can't make up your mind which way to go in 4 months, I have trouble finding sympathy for you.  I don't want to punish anyone for having sex ... the more sex being had the better, and preventing unwanted children is always good.  But once it enters that gray area, I stop caring about your problems because you really went out of your way to be a dumbass.

Some pregnancies are so asymptomatic that the mother still have her period throughout their pregnancy.  Even women who have had previous pregnancies have gone through this.  shiat, there is even a reality tv show dedicated to this.  Some forms of birth control like depo provera also have pregnancy like symptoms adding to the confusion.


How many of those conditions would obscure the results of a common over-the-counter pregnancy test?  You know, the ones they sell at the grocery store for like $7 a pop.  Maybe sexually active people should just get tested once in a while.
If you can't afford to take a pregnancy test at least once every 20 weeks you probably can't afford a baby or an abortion either, so keep it wrapped up and/or in your pants.


Now I know you're trolling.  I wasn't sure before.  Why would you take a pregnancy test without symptoms?  Oh, they're closer to 15-20$ where I live.
 
2013-06-26 02:19:37 PM  

Philip J. Fry: skullkrusher: yep. You do know what a metaphor is, right? It is not meant to be a literal perfect match for the situation being described.

You only want to use a metaphor to hide the reality of your belief.


I thought I've been pretty up front about my belief. Do you have something to add or a question about that belief? No one is hiding anything.

I suppose you could make a semantic argument that killing the baby to save the mother after viability is "murder" but it seems a rather morally acceptable, albeit terrible, decision to have to make.
 
2013-06-26 02:20:06 PM  
Can someone please explain what a harlequin baby is exactly? Because thanks to these abortion threadsiI am now terrified of googling it for fear of pictures.
 
2013-06-26 02:22:02 PM  

what_now: skullkrusher: to clarify, we haven't discussed any cut off point at all except for your desire for there not to be one. Correct me if I am wrong, but the impression I have is that you don't give a shiat about viability.

I do give a shiat about viability, and so do the doctors and the patients involved in the late term abortion decision.

A reasonable law would be, "abortions are not allowed after 7 months on a healthy and viable fetus except for when the health and welfare of the mother are at risk", full stop.

But that's not the laws we get, and until we have REASONABLE people discussing this I will oppose any and all forms of restriction.
skullkrusher: I am not one of those politicians, nor do I sympathize with most politicians who wish to further restrictions on abortion access on virtually any issue. Believe it or not, I am really, really, really, really not a Republican. I am not kidding when I say that. I just happen to like fighting with liberals ;)

Yeah, this is an engaging and civil debate, which is good. But it's about 100X more reasonable than any that politicians in this country are having right now.


I think viability is determined to be 24-26 weeks at this point. It's getting sooner and sooner but I think that is the current range. You support restrictions after that point, I'm on board m'lady.

This is a civil and interesting discussion. Please ignore my invitation to one of our less intelligent comrades to eat a sack of my penises.
 
2013-06-26 02:22:37 PM  

stickmangrit: Can someone please explain what a harlequin baby is exactly? Because thanks to these abortion threadsiI am now terrified of googling it for fear of pictures.


it's farking terrifying.
 
2013-06-26 02:23:40 PM  

Serious Black: If it were a completely separate issue rather than in an omnibus bill, I suppose I'd be okay with a ban on abortions after 20 weeks. I'd still like to see medical exceptions and what not, but 20 weeks is close to the earliest point of fetal viability (I think I saw the youngest was estimated at just under 22 weeks). Balancing between 20 and 24 weeks is a weak preference to suss out for me.

Of course, you never see bills pushing just for a ban on abortions after 20 weeks. You see them packaged with tons of other garbage that treats the pregnant woman like incompetent children at best or slaves at worst. I would have done exactly what Wendy Davis did last night if I were in her shoes.


Yeah this is the main problem. I think 23 weeks is about the point I'd have to start saying, OK you've got viable fetus. Something upwards of 1/3 of healthy kids will live at that point, and that goes up exponentially the two weeks after that. Give them care options for mothers who don't want them, now you've got something that makes more sense to me. If the data shows that most post 20 week abortions are done because of problems with fetal development, then make exceptions for it backed up by scientific data and a (preferably bipartisan) panel of medical professionals. There are laws that refer to competent professionals for decision making.
 
2013-06-26 02:24:31 PM  

skullkrusher: there their theyre: Also, you are coming off as a sanctimonious douchbag. If you don't like abortions, don't farking get one. how hard is that to accept. How does it affect you if some women, or as you seem to be implying, some ho bag piece of chattel floozey gets an abortion? it doesn't. Not one iota. So in summary, fark off asswipe.

It is sanctimonious to be shocked and horrified that people support murdering infants pre-birth? Believing that we as a society owe it to these most defenseless humans to protect them from being murdered in the womb a day before they were scheduled to check out of it? If so, eat a sack of my sanctimonious cocks, ya baby murdering shiatbag


Welp, you got 'em here. You are clearly the superior human being because that's totally what this argument is about.

/people are murdered - medical conditions are treated
 
2013-06-26 02:24:48 PM  

stickmangrit: Can someone please explain what a harlequin baby is exactly? Because thanks to these abortion threadsiI am now terrified of googling it for fear of pictures.


Basically it's a condition where the skin hardens to the point that it looks like scales on a body. The hardened skin layer makes it difficult or impossible to move, and the cracks in the skin make the baby incredibly susceptible to infection. There's maybe a hundred people living today with the condition, and before the 1980s, nobody survived it.
 
2013-06-26 02:25:27 PM  

bdub77:  There are laws that refer to competent professionals for decision making.


You know. Death panels.

/sorry, I totally had to respond to my own post, having realized what I was just saying
 
2013-06-26 02:25:39 PM  

what_now: serial_crusher: If you can't afford to take a pregnancy test at least once every 20 weeks you probably can't afford a baby or an abortion either, so keep it wrapped up and/or in your pants.

But no, he doesn't want to punish women for having sex.


wow, you've got some pretty stretchy definitions of "punishment".  Is it the $7 every 20 weeks, or the peeing on a stick that is an onerous burden to you?

/ ok, in practice you'd probably have to go less than 20 weeks between tests if you want to make sure you still have time to schedule and get the abortion.  Maybe 10 weeks?  So, $35/year or so?  What horror.
 
2013-06-26 02:25:54 PM  

skullkrusher: I think viability is determined to be 24-26 weeks at this point.


Yes, but that's for a baby that will spend months in a NICU and cost millions of dollars, and Texas is a state that will override a parents decision and turn off life saving equipment to people who don't have health insurance.
 
2013-06-26 02:26:13 PM  

Epoch_Zero: Welp, you got 'em here. You are clearly the superior human being because that's totally what this argument is about.


thanks for noticing, my alt.

Epoch_Zero: /people are murdered - medical conditions are treated


viable fetuses are pre-birth humans, not "medical conditions".
 
2013-06-26 02:26:55 PM  

what_now: skullkrusher: I think viability is determined to be 24-26 weeks at this point.

Yes, but that's for a baby that will spend months in a NICU and cost millions of dollars, and Texas is a state that will override a parents decision and turn off life saving equipment to people who don't have health insurance.


I like the idea of gubmint healthcare. N/A
 
2013-06-26 02:26:56 PM  

what_now: skullkrusher: I think viability is determined to be 24-26 weeks at this point.

Yes, but that's for a baby that will spend months in a NICU and cost millions of dollars, and Texas is a state that will override a parents decision and turn off life saving equipment to people who don't have health insurance.


Yep exactly. Realistically we are nowhere near a compromise on a federal or state level. If anything I feel like we've just gone even more polar opposite.
 
2013-06-26 02:26:59 PM  

skullkrusher: Philip J. Fry: skullkrusher: yep. You do know what a metaphor is, right? It is not meant to be a literal perfect match for the situation being described.

You only want to use a metaphor to hide the reality of your belief.

I thought I've been pretty up front about my belief. Do you have something to add or a question about that belief? No one is hiding anything.

I suppose you could make a semantic argument that killing the baby to save the mother after viability is "murder" but it seems a rather morally acceptable, albeit terrible, decision to have to make.


It's not semantics.  You are taking the action of abortion, which you think should be illegal, except in a case you approve of, and you create this metaphor where your choice is passive.  You aren't killing the fetus.  It's just a result of circumstances!  Like your two drowning children.  It's the exact mentality that every pro-lifer who goes to have an abortion holds.    My abortion is the only moral abortion.

If it's murder on Monday, it's murder on Tuesday.  But for you suddenly it's just a "Well, my personal requirements are met, so the fetus is no longer being murdered."
 
2013-06-26 02:27:28 PM  

bdub77: There are laws that refer to competent professionals for decision making.


but the people making the laws think that rape kits "clean the mother out" and that evolution is a "lie from the pit of hell". So lets not let these people make laws on women's health.
 
2013-06-26 02:29:40 PM  

what_now: bdub77: There are laws that refer to competent professionals for decision making.

but the people making the laws think that rape kits "clean the mother out" and that evolution is a "lie from the pit of hell". So lets not let these people make laws on women's health.


I am honestly puzzled as to how anyone, especially a woman, thought that a rape kit prevented pregnancy.
 
2013-06-26 02:30:44 PM  

ZombieApocalypseKitten: serial_crusher: ZombieApocalypseKitten: spiderpaz: I don't have a dog in this fight.  I'm pro choice, but I don't support late term abortion, once the child would feasibly be viable if an emergency c-section were performed.  So obviously there's some room in MY "gray area" there.

Realistically, a reasonably responsible, sexually active person is going to know they're pregnant in the first 8 weeks.  If you don't know, it's because you're being negligent and lazy.  If you can't make up your mind which way to go in 4 months, I have trouble finding sympathy for you.  I don't want to punish anyone for having sex ... the more sex being had the better, and preventing unwanted children is always good.  But once it enters that gray area, I stop caring about your problems because you really went out of your way to be a dumbass.

Some pregnancies are so asymptomatic that the mother still have her period throughout their pregnancy.  Even women who have had previous pregnancies have gone through this.  shiat, there is even a reality tv show dedicated to this.  Some forms of birth control like depo provera also have pregnancy like symptoms adding to the confusion.


How many of those conditions would obscure the results of a common over-the-counter pregnancy test?  You know, the ones they sell at the grocery store for like $7 a pop.  Maybe sexually active people should just get tested once in a while.
If you can't afford to take a pregnancy test at least once every 20 weeks you probably can't afford a baby or an abortion either, so keep it wrapped up and/or in your pants.

Now I know you're trolling.  I wasn't sure before.  Why would you take a pregnancy test without symptoms?  Oh, they're closer to 15-20$ where I live.


$4.11 per test at Amazon, if you Subscribe-n-Save.

/ my "recommended products" section is going to be fun for the next couple of weeks.
// Oh, also on the "want to punish women for having sex" thing, I'd expect the male partner in a monogamous couple to put up half the cost.  Promiscuous single woman, well that's an unfortunate cost of the lifestyle.
 
2013-06-26 02:31:34 PM  

Philip J. Fry: skullkrusher: Philip J. Fry: skullkrusher: yep. You do know what a metaphor is, right? It is not meant to be a literal perfect match for the situation being described.

You only want to use a metaphor to hide the reality of your belief.

I thought I've been pretty up front about my belief. Do you have something to add or a question about that belief? No one is hiding anything.

I suppose you could make a semantic argument that killing the baby to save the mother after viability is "murder" but it seems a rather morally acceptable, albeit terrible, decision to have to make.

It's not semantics.  You are taking the action of abortion, which you think should be illegal, except in a case you approve of, and you create this metaphor where your choice is passive.  You aren't killing the fetus.  It's just a result of circumstances!  Like your two drowning children.  It's the exact mentality that every pro-lifer who goes to have an abortion holds.    My abortion is the only moral abortion.

If it's murder on Monday, it's murder on Tuesday.  But for you suddenly it's just a "Well, my personal requirements are met, so the fetus is no longer being murdered."


The word choice really doesn't matter to me. Maybe you like a metaphor that involves a deranged man about to attack a person with a knife. He is not responsible for his behavior and it completely innocent from a moral point of view yet you would be morally justified in "murdering" him to save the other person. Have you honestly read this thread and thought to yourself "skullkrusher is a pro-lifer"?

Full disclosure: I am. Personally. Not for you. For me. For you I am pro-choice with reasonable limits such as the ones we currently have in place. How the fark is someone who supports the abortion status quo a pro-lifer?
 
2013-06-26 02:32:08 PM  

serial_crusher: $4.11 per test at Amazon, if you Subscribe-n-Save.


I think you mean $13.  Unless you think Amazon will open the box and send you individual tests?
 
2013-06-26 02:32:09 PM  

skullkrusher: what_now: skullkrusher: hehe well he is right. People do often try to expand "health of the mother" to every conceivable possible pregnancy related complication regardless of whether there is an actual risk of it

which is why I want politicians out of the picture entirely.

which isn't going to happen because the overwhelming majority of people WANT to see abortion restricted to some degree.


And it is. So your arguing for more restrictions?
 
2013-06-26 02:32:49 PM  

Serious Black: what_now: bdub77: There are laws that refer to competent professionals for decision making.

but the people making the laws think that rape kits "clean the mother out" and that evolution is a "lie from the pit of hell". So lets not let these people make laws on women's health.

I am honestly puzzled as to how anyone, especially a woman, thought that a rape kit prevented pregnancy.


It's not that weird. Up until I read that article, I thought a rape kit contained chloroform and duct tape.

/not a woman
//that joke made even me a little creeped out
///watch a lot of SVU. I know what a rape kit is
 
2013-06-26 02:32:53 PM  

skullkrusher: viable fetuses are pre-birth humans, not "medical conditions".


Having a parasite is a medical condition.

You can easily categorize the condition of pregnancy as being a parasitic relationship between host and parasite, as the baby cannot grow without proper nutrition gained from the mother, who gets no physical benefits from the relationship.

And it still doesn't make it your decision or the decision of a fictitious sky wizard. If a woman carrying a fetus wants an abortion, it's her business and she has a constitutional right to one if she so wishes.
 
2013-06-26 02:33:30 PM  

Chewb1zz: skullkrusher: what_now: skullkrusher: hehe well he is right. People do often try to expand "health of the mother" to every conceivable possible pregnancy related complication regardless of whether there is an actual risk of it

which is why I want politicians out of the picture entirely.

which isn't going to happen because the overwhelming majority of people WANT to see abortion restricted to some degree.

And it is. So your arguing for more restrictions?


newp. I am arguing against less restrictions.
 
2013-06-26 02:34:25 PM  

Epoch_Zero: skullkrusher: viable fetuses are pre-birth humans, not "medical conditions".

Having a parasite is a medical condition.

You can easily categorize the condition of pregnancy as being a parasitic relationship between host and parasite, as the baby cannot grow without proper nutrition gained from the mother, who gets no physical benefits from the relationship.

And it still doesn't make it your decision or the decision of a fictitious sky wizard. If a woman carrying a fetus wants an abortion, it's her business and she has a constitutional right to one if she so wishes.


*yawn*. Although I suppose I should be impressed you managed to pack so many trite tropes into a such a short post.
 
2013-06-26 02:34:51 PM  

skullkrusher: Serious Black: what_now: bdub77: There are laws that refer to competent professionals for decision making.

but the people making the laws think that rape kits "clean the mother out" and that evolution is a "lie from the pit of hell". So lets not let these people make laws on women's health.

I am honestly puzzled as to how anyone, especially a woman, thought that a rape kit prevented pregnancy.

It's not that weird. Up until I read that article, I thought a rape kit contained chloroform and duct tape.

/not a woman
//that joke made even me a little creeped out
///watch a lot of SVU. I know what a rape kit is


LOL. I keep a Forget-Me-Now in my rape kit personally.
 
2013-06-26 02:34:52 PM  

Philip J. Fry: serial_crusher: $4.11 per test at Amazon, if you Subscribe-n-Save.

I think you mean $13.  Unless you think Amazon will open the box and send you individual tests?


[notsureifserious.jpg].
Did I miss something?  Do you have to use them all at once?
I figured they were 3 individually-wrapped tests inside the same box
 
2013-06-26 02:35:39 PM  

what_now: bdub77: There are laws that refer to competent professionals for decision making.

but the people making the laws think that rape kits "clean the mother out" and that evolution is a "lie from the pit of hell". So lets not let these people make laws on women's health.


Totally agree.
 
2013-06-26 02:36:14 PM  

skullkrusher: Epoch_Zero: skullkrusher: viable fetuses are pre-birth humans, not "medical conditions".

Having a parasite is a medical condition.

You can easily categorize the condition of pregnancy as being a parasitic relationship between host and parasite, as the baby cannot grow without proper nutrition gained from the mother, who gets no physical benefits from the relationship.

And it still doesn't make it your decision or the decision of a fictitious sky wizard. If a woman carrying a fetus wants an abortion, it's her business and she has a constitutional right to one if she so wishes.

*yawn*. Although I suppose I should be impressed you managed to pack so many trite tropes into a such a short post.


Nice non-answer. You're sort of sounding like a fedora-wearing "misandry" jerk in this thread.
 
2013-06-26 02:41:34 PM  

Epoch_Zero: skullkrusher: Epoch_Zero: skullkrusher: viable fetuses are pre-birth humans, not "medical conditions".

Having a parasite is a medical condition.

You can easily categorize the condition of pregnancy as being a parasitic relationship between host and parasite, as the baby cannot grow without proper nutrition gained from the mother, who gets no physical benefits from the relationship.

And it still doesn't make it your decision or the decision of a fictitious sky wizard. If a woman carrying a fetus wants an abortion, it's her business and she has a constitutional right to one if she so wishes.

*yawn*. Although I suppose I should be impressed you managed to pack so many trite tropes into a such a short post.

Nice non-answer. You're sort of sounding like a fedora-wearing "misandry" jerk in this thread.


to morons, perhaps.

parasites cannot live without a host. A viable fetus, by definition, can. Nothing to do with a "fictitious sky wizard" either. You gotta try a bit harder. Showing your hand so quickly is amateur hour bullshiat
 
2013-06-26 02:44:20 PM  

Jairzinho: A Dark Evil Omen: Even Fark has that farking Newsmax sidebar now.

Not even having ABP on Firefox prevents that :(


Install NoScript and block nmcdn.us
 
2013-06-26 02:46:47 PM  

Ambivalence: vernonFL: IF you are against abortion, go do a Google Image search for "harlequin baby"

Then tell me you're against all abortion.

/NEVER do a GIS for "harlequin baby."

OMG I wish I had just taken your word for it. I am not easily disgusted but...OMG I feel like I need a pint of bourbon to forget that.


You were warned.
 
2013-06-26 02:47:48 PM  
But the poll, notably, showed that women supported such a measure in greater numbers than men (50 percent of women in favor; 46 percent of men).

Yup, nothing to see here but evil men motivated by hatred of women.
 
2013-06-26 02:48:08 PM  

skullkrusher: Chewb1zz: skullkrusher: what_now: skullkrusher: hehe well he is right. People do often try to expand "health of the mother" to every conceivable possible pregnancy related complication regardless of whether there is an actual risk of it

which is why I want politicians out of the picture entirely.

which isn't going to happen because the overwhelming majority of people WANT to see abortion restricted to some degree.

And it is. So your arguing for more restrictions?

newp. I am arguing against less restrictions.


So your arguing against a law that doesn't exist and have gone off into your own imaginary world where everyone is against you and you are the last man standing in the moral high ground.

Do you frequently argue against imaginary problems? Getting all worked up about issues in your own head is generally considered unhealthy. You might want to get that checked out by a professional.
 
2013-06-26 02:50:51 PM  

pivazena: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Late_termination_of_pregnancy

Sorry it didn't link before. For women who were beyond 16 weeks (16-20 weeks account for 4.8 % of abortions, 20+ is around 1.5%). So we don't know how the reasoning shifts given the extra month of gestation, but:

71% Woman didn't recognize she was pregnant or misjudged gestation
48% Woman found it hard to make arrangements for abortion
33% Woman was afraid to tell her partner or parents
24% Woman took time to decide to have an abortion
8% Woman waited for her relationship to change
8% Someone pressured woman not to have abortion
6% Something changed after woman became pregnant
6% Woman didn't know timing is important
5% Woman didn't know she could get an abortion
2% A fetal problem was diagnosed late in pregnancy
11% Other


Prevent the woman from getting her abortion within the given legal window and hey look, now she can't legally get an abortion.
 
2013-06-26 02:52:19 PM  

skullkrusher: to morons, perhaps.

parasites cannot live without a host. A viable fetus, by definition, can. Nothing to do with a "fictitious sky wizard" either. You gotta try a bit harder. Showing your hand so quickly is amateur hour bullshiat


i1.kym-cdn.com
 
Displayed 50 of 275 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
Advertisement
On Twitter





In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report