(01-30-2019 04:29 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(01-30-2019 04:05 PM)Oman Wrote:  

(01-30-2019 01:57 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  Oh STFU, I haven't even read the details or watched the comments in context yet.

OK Tom.... fair enough.

Read it, then be man enough to either come back and condemn the horror that this is, or support your fellow leftist.

I certainly will...it just won't be today or maybe even tomorrow. I've got too many work commitments right now.

I'll have something by Friday.

That being said, I will remind you again that my basic position on abortion is none after 20 weeks (or so) unless the health of the mother/baby (as determined by certified medical personnel) is at stake or in the cases or rape or incest. Full stop.

Tom my friend, I guess I've missed it. I've read over this thread and seen arguments and parsing of phrases and a shift to the VA law, but I have not see that you have read and agree or do not agree with the governor of NY? Do you agree in principle with the law of the State?

(02-01-2019 01:49 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(02-01-2019 11:48 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(02-01-2019 10:55 AM)EverRespect Wrote:  

(02-01-2019 10:52 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(02-01-2019 10:48 AM)EverRespect Wrote:  So I could pass med school just set up an abortion shop in Detroit and offer an abortion to anyone that walks in the door at any time as long as I "make that call"?

This hardly even justifies a response.
Ridiculous.

What's ridiculous? It is a question. If Redwingtom was emperor, would that be legal?

The premise. You'd go to medical school for years, racking up hundreds of thousands of dollars in costs, to open a clinic and violate all the ethics you swore to uphold and would provide a service with an extremely limited client base. Good plan!
Bottom line, no, it would not be legal, just as it isn't now, for doctors to lie about the health of the baby or mother just to provide an abortion.

"In my opinion, she needs an abortion." How can that be a lie? It's an expression of opinion.

And don't kid yourself if you think that doesn't go on now.

To respond to your absurd hypothetical, probably nobody starts out that way. But some do end up there.

Yeah, they're called criminals. Not people who just want to kill babies as this ridiculous hypothetical portrays.

(02-01-2019 03:04 PM)Oman Wrote:  

(01-30-2019 04:29 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(01-30-2019 04:05 PM)Oman Wrote:  

(01-30-2019 01:57 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  Oh STFU, I haven't even read the details or watched the comments in context yet.

OK Tom.... fair enough.

Read it, then be man enough to either come back and condemn the horror that this is, or support your fellow leftist.

I certainly will...it just won't be today or maybe even tomorrow. I've got too many work commitments right now.

I'll have something by Friday.

That being said, I will remind you again that my basic position on abortion is none after 20 weeks (or so) unless the health of the mother/baby (as determined by certified medical personnel) is at stake or in the cases or rape or incest. Full stop.

Tom my friend, I guess I've missed it. I've read over this thread and seen arguments and parsing of phrases and a shift to the VA law, but I have not see that you have read and agree or do not agree with the governor of NY? Do you agree in principle with the law of the State?

NY? I thought you were talking about the comments of the VA governor.

(02-01-2019 01:27 PM)solohawks Wrote:  

(02-01-2019 10:16 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(01-31-2019 10:28 PM)solohawks Wrote:  

(01-31-2019 05:29 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(01-30-2019 08:32 PM)solohawks Wrote:  Let's say a woman who "qualifies" under the rape/incest exception says no abortion for 8 months. Then in the 9th month changes her mind.

Is that allowable in your eyes RWT

I think I pretty clearly stated that I'd prefer the decision be made within 20 weeks, but that should be decided by each state. My preference in that case would be for the baby to be born and given up for adoption.

And to be clear, I never intimated that rape and incest were any huge percentage of abortion cases, but it is an area where I am fine with exceptions. Women who suffered this trauma get some leeway to figure things out as far as I'm concerned.

Your preference...so you would not oppose a 9th month abortion of a viable baby due to circumstances

Of course I would oppose it if there's nothing wrong with the baby and the health of the mother is not in danger, but it's not my decision to make.

You contradicted yourself. You said you would oppose it but it's not your decision to make

Therefore you advocate allowing it to happen if that's what the mother wants

Right...opposing something doesn't mean you have to take steps to stop it or have any power to do so regardless. No amount of opposition from me is going to change anything here as it's possible for me to actually change anything here.

(02-01-2019 01:25 PM)solohawks Wrote:  

(02-01-2019 10:35 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(02-01-2019 10:30 AM)EverRespect Wrote:  

(02-01-2019 10:16 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(01-31-2019 10:28 PM)solohawks Wrote:  Your preference...so you would not oppose a 9th month abortion of a viable baby due to circumstances

Of course I would oppose it if there's nothing wrong with the baby and the health of the mother is not in danger, but it's not my decision to make.

Define health of the mother. Does this include mental health? If so, where do you draw that line?

You could argue that the health of the mother is always in danger. Any new mother is in danger of postpartum depression, right? Regardless the intent, whatever it may be (and I think the VA gov made his clear), using academic speak and legalese, the passed NY law and the failed VA law would cover me to have an abortion up until the last second no matter what, right?

I assume that means you oppose the laws? Or are you also using academic speak to polish the turd that is a despicable position under the surface?

Certified medical professionals (medical doctors and mental health specialists) make that call. Not me or you...and certainly not the government. Full Stop.

And yes, you could always argue that if you want to act like there's some movement to just start killing perfectly healthy babies that women have carried for 8+ months and just for no reason decide they no longer want the baby and do not want to give it up for adoption...you know...that thing that likely never happens that you guys are all so worked up about.

Gosnell never happened either huh

So clearly that means the whole industry is corrupt then huh? Lemme guess...you're one who condemns the left when they protest law enforcement because of the actions of the few?

(02-01-2019 11:56 AM)ericsrevenge76 Wrote:  

(02-01-2019 11:51 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(02-01-2019 11:00 AM)ericsrevenge76 Wrote:  

(02-01-2019 10:50 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(02-01-2019 10:44 AM)ericsrevenge76 Wrote:  This shows just what liars and scumbags people are today.

He absolutely advocated the position of possibly killing a baby AFTER its been born if it has heath issues or complications.

Anyone suggesting otherwise is an obvious liar.

Of course...non viable health issues. That means the baby is going to die no matter what...and these decisions are made every day now by doctors and medical professionals. This will change next to nothing on babies already born who have no chance at survival. All the VA bill will do is make the process easier for these families dealing with this devastation...but I suppose you think the Christian thing to do is to prolong their suffering apparently. Sad.

Your darned right the christian thing to do is not MURDER a baby because it has possible complications. UNBELIEVABLE that that has to be pointed out. What is this now? Nazi Germany or the Klingon Empire? Death to all babies born with complications? Sometimes they live and even recover.

And NO, the issue was not ONLY about a baby that was sure to die. That is a lie. Sometimes babies that are expected to die actually LIVE.

You're nothing more than a purposeful liar. I didn't say complications, I SAID NON-VIABILITY! That means trained medical professionals have determined that the baby won't live. But yes, that one in a million case in which the baby does survive to lead what most likely would be a horrific or short life is well worth the pain suffering the baby would endure along with the parents. SMH.

You truly are a disgusting human being on every level.

So tell me Eric, you wife has a baby basically born without any brain function, you gonna leave it on life support, or will you turn off the life support so it doesn't suffer anymore? That's really all that's happening here...and it happens all over this country quite often. It's a decision that's made by the family of the baby in coordination with their doctor.

If me supporting the wishes of these families in this most difficult of times makes me disgusting, then I'll gladly wear your condescending label with honor.

And again, I'm talking about cases where trained medical professionals have determined their to be no chance for the baby to survive.

(02-01-2019 04:17 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(02-01-2019 11:56 AM)ericsrevenge76 Wrote:  

(02-01-2019 11:51 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(02-01-2019 11:00 AM)ericsrevenge76 Wrote:  

(02-01-2019 10:50 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  Of course...non viable health issues. That means the baby is going to die no matter what...and these decisions are made every day now by doctors and medical professionals. This will change next to nothing on babies already born who have no chance at survival. All the VA bill will do is make the process easier for these families dealing with this devastation...but I suppose you think the Christian thing to do is to prolong their suffering apparently. Sad.

Your darned right the christian thing to do is not MURDER a baby because it has possible complications. UNBELIEVABLE that that has to be pointed out. What is this now? Nazi Germany or the Klingon Empire? Death to all babies born with complications? Sometimes they live and even recover.

And NO, the issue was not ONLY about a baby that was sure to die. That is a lie. Sometimes babies that are expected to die actually LIVE.

You're nothing more than a purposeful liar. I didn't say complications, I SAID NON-VIABILITY! That means trained medical professionals have determined that the baby won't live. But yes, that one in a million case in which the baby does survive to lead what most likely would be a horrific or short life is well worth the pain suffering the baby would endure along with the parents. SMH.

You truly are a disgusting human being on every level.

So tell me Eric, you wife has a baby basically born without any brain function, you gonna leave it on life support, or will you turn off the life support so it doesn't suffer anymore? That's really all that's happening here...and it happens all over this country quite often. It's a decision that's made by the family of the baby in coordination with their doctor.

If me supporting the wishes of these families in this most difficult of times makes me disgusting, then I'll gladly wear your condescending label with honor.

And again, I'm talking about cases where trained medical professionals have determined their to be no chance for the baby to survive.

Can you come up with an argument, in academic speak, of euthanizing homeless children?

(02-01-2019 04:06 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(02-01-2019 03:04 PM)Oman Wrote:  

(01-30-2019 04:29 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(01-30-2019 04:05 PM)Oman Wrote:  

(01-30-2019 01:57 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  Oh STFU, I haven't even read the details or watched the comments in context yet.

OK Tom.... fair enough.

Read it, then be man enough to either come back and condemn the horror that this is, or support your fellow leftist.

I certainly will...it just won't be today or maybe even tomorrow. I've got too many work commitments right now.

I'll have something by Friday.

That being said, I will remind you again that my basic position on abortion is none after 20 weeks (or so) unless the health of the mother/baby (as determined by certified medical personnel) is at stake or in the cases or rape or incest. Full stop.

Tom my friend, I guess I've missed it. I've read over this thread and seen arguments and parsing of phrases and a shift to the VA law, but I have not see that you have read and agree or do not agree with the governor of NY? Do you agree in principle with the law of the State?

NY? I thought you were talking about the comments of the VA governor.

I was actually referring to NY, but I see that I was not clear. The Gov of VA was less gruesome, but to me still appalling.

I'm leaving for the weekend on this:
Conception creates an unique individual, with it's own DNA. Any discussion about abortion being ok up until XX weeks assumes the fetus is not a "person" although they are inargueably human.
The political definitions of what makes a developing infant into a "person" are frightening, there are many who will make arbitrary definitions for their own convenience, and all they have to do is convince enough people that this is true to make infanticide the law of the land.

have a great weekend

(02-01-2019 10:17 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(01-31-2019 11:37 PM)Jjoey52 Wrote:  

(01-31-2019 09:50 PM)Machiavelli Wrote:  No one celebrates these things. You guys just don’t have a clue and that’s a good thing. These late term abortions aren’t contraceptives. These families were given horrible news.

Like in Virginia, when they want to abort after the birth.

This is just plain ignorant and in no way represents what the law in Virginia was trying to cover. What part of not viable or not able to survive after birth do you not understand?

When the governor says the baby was born and they will make it comfortable until they decide what to do with it, screams murder. If the baby is born, it is alive. Also, what is the difference between a baby born alive and one that is a day from being born?


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

(02-01-2019 10:35 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(02-01-2019 10:30 AM)EverRespect Wrote:  

(02-01-2019 10:16 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(01-31-2019 10:28 PM)solohawks Wrote:  

(01-31-2019 05:29 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  I think I pretty clearly stated that I'd prefer the decision be made within 20 weeks, but that should be decided by each state. My preference in that case would be for the baby to be born and given up for adoption.

And to be clear, I never intimated that rape and incest were any huge percentage of abortion cases, but it is an area where I am fine with exceptions. Women who suffered this trauma get some leeway to figure things out as far as I'm concerned.

Your preference...so you would not oppose a 9th month abortion of a viable baby due to circumstances

Of course I would oppose it if there's nothing wrong with the baby and the health of the mother is not in danger, but it's not my decision to make.

Define health of the mother. Does this include mental health? If so, where do you draw that line?

You could argue that the health of the mother is always in danger. Any new mother is in danger of postpartum depression, right? Regardless the intent, whatever it may be (and I think the VA gov made his clear), using academic speak and legalese, the passed NY law and the failed VA law would cover me to have an abortion up until the last second no matter what, right?

I assume that means you oppose the laws? Or are you also using academic speak to polish the turd that is a despicable position under the surface?

Certified medical professionals (medical doctors and mental health specialists) make that call. Not me or you...and certainly not the government. Full Stop.

And yes, you could always argue that if you want to act like there's some movement to just start killing perfectly healthy babies that women have carried for 8+ months and just for no reason decide they no longer want the baby and do not want to give it up for adoption...you know...that thing that likely never happens that you guys are all so worked up about.

Worked for Gosnell, this law will create more butchers just like him.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

(02-01-2019 10:47 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(02-01-2019 10:41 AM)ericsrevenge76 Wrote:  

(02-01-2019 10:35 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(02-01-2019 10:30 AM)EverRespect Wrote:  

(02-01-2019 10:16 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  Of course I would oppose it if there's nothing wrong with the baby and the health of the mother is not in danger, but it's not my decision to make.

Define health of the mother. Does this include mental health? If so, where do you draw that line?

You could argue that the health of the mother is always in danger. Any new mother is in danger of postpartum depression, right? Regardless the intent, whatever it may be (and I think the VA gov made his clear), using academic speak and legalese, the passed NY law and the failed VA law would cover me to have an abortion up until the last second no matter what, right?

I assume that means you oppose the laws? Or are you also using academic speak to polish the turd that is a despicable position under the surface?

Certified medical professionals (medical doctors and mental health specialists) make that call. Not me or you...and certainly not the government. Full Stop.

And yes, you could always argue that if you want to act like there's some movement to just start killing perfectly healthy babies that women have carried for 8+ months and just for no reason decide they no longer want the baby and do not want to give it up for adoption...you know...that thing that likely never happens that you guys are all so worked up about.

Its illegal you moron, that's why it hardly ever happens.

And you are darned right we are worked up about keeping it that way. There are hard core pro abortionists that absolutely believe that should be allowed.

Spare me your hyperbole. There's no such thing as a pro abortionist.

These laws do not and will not lead to women carrying babies for 8+ months and then ending the pregnancies for no reason other than they don't want the baby.

It's nothing more than the typical right-wing nonsense to assure GOP votes. The abortion issue always has been. The sad part is that you don't even know you're being used.

Gosnell, was pro choice then, right? Him and his counterparts are the epitome of pro abortion. And before you say he was an exception, there are more just like that butcher out there. Only a few countries are pro abortion: China, N. Korea, Martinique, Cuba, Guadalupe, Russia, and several E European countries that were under Soviet rule for many years. Great company for us.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Margaret Sanger and eugenics are back,, just the way they wanted it. It is also a racist practice, it is not a coincidence most abortion factories are close to minority areas. 50% of New York black pregnancies end as abortions. Lib racism at its worst.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

(02-01-2019 04:17 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(02-01-2019 11:56 AM)ericsrevenge76 Wrote:  

(02-01-2019 11:51 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(02-01-2019 11:00 AM)ericsrevenge76 Wrote:  

(02-01-2019 10:50 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  Of course...non viable health issues. That means the baby is going to die no matter what...and these decisions are made every day now by doctors and medical professionals. This will change next to nothing on babies already born who have no chance at survival. All the VA bill will do is make the process easier for these families dealing with this devastation...but I suppose you think the Christian thing to do is to prolong their suffering apparently. Sad.

Your darned right the christian thing to do is not MURDER a baby because it has possible complications. UNBELIEVABLE that that has to be pointed out. What is this now? Nazi Germany or the Klingon Empire? Death to all babies born with complications? Sometimes they live and even recover.

And NO, the issue was not ONLY about a baby that was sure to die. That is a lie. Sometimes babies that are expected to die actually LIVE.

You're nothing more than a purposeful liar. I didn't say complications, I SAID NON-VIABILITY! That means trained medical professionals have determined that the baby won't live. But yes, that one in a million case in which the baby does survive to lead what most likely would be a horrific or short life is well worth the pain suffering the baby would endure along with the parents. SMH.

You truly are a disgusting human being on every level.

So tell me Eric, you wife has a baby basically born without any brain function, you gonna leave it on life support, or will you turn off the life support so it doesn't suffer anymore? That's really all that's happening here...and it happens all over this country quite often. It's a decision that's made by the family of the baby in coordination with their doctor.

If me supporting the wishes of these families in this most difficult of times makes me disgusting, then I'll gladly wear your condescending label with honor.

And again, I'm talking about cases where trained medical professionals have determined their to be no chance for the baby to survive.

Its infanticide, no matter how you try to frame it, no matter how extreme of a case you try to sight. You don't make it legal to kill living babies. PERIOD. There is a MASSIVE difference between taking one off life support and outright KILLING IT.

You are disgusting.

(02-01-2019 04:10 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(02-01-2019 01:25 PM)solohawks Wrote:  

(02-01-2019 10:35 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(02-01-2019 10:30 AM)EverRespect Wrote:  

(02-01-2019 10:16 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  Of course I would oppose it if there's nothing wrong with the baby and the health of the mother is not in danger, but it's not my decision to make.

Define health of the mother. Does this include mental health? If so, where do you draw that line?

You could argue that the health of the mother is always in danger. Any new mother is in danger of postpartum depression, right? Regardless the intent, whatever it may be (and I think the VA gov made his clear), using academic speak and legalese, the passed NY law and the failed VA law would cover me to have an abortion up until the last second no matter what, right?

I assume that means you oppose the laws? Or are you also using academic speak to polish the turd that is a despicable position under the surface?

Certified medical professionals (medical doctors and mental health specialists) make that call. Not me or you...and certainly not the government. Full Stop.

And yes, you could always argue that if you want to act like there's some movement to just start killing perfectly healthy babies that women have carried for 8+ months and just for no reason decide they no longer want the baby and do not want to give it up for adoption...you know...that thing that likely never happens that you guys are all so worked up about.

Gosnell never happened either huh

So clearly that means the whole industry is corrupt then huh? Lemme guess...you're one who condemns the left when they protest law enforcement because of the actions of the few?

I've had Kap get mad at me for calling out law enforcement before if that helps my case with you

(02-01-2019 04:10 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(02-01-2019 01:25 PM)solohawks Wrote:  

(02-01-2019 10:35 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(02-01-2019 10:30 AM)EverRespect Wrote:  Define health of the mother. Does this include mental health? If so, where do you draw that line?
You could argue that the health of the mother is always in danger. Any new mother is in danger of postpartum depression, right? Regardless the intent, whatever it may be (and I think the VA gov made his clear), using academic speak and legalese, the passed NY law and the failed VA law would cover me to have an abortion up until the last second no matter what, right?
I assume that means you oppose the laws? Or are you also using academic speak to polish the turd that is a despicable position under the surface?

Certified medical professionals (medical doctors and mental health specialists) make that call. Not me or you...and certainly not the government. Full Stop.
And yes, you could always argue that if you want to act like there's some movement to just start killing perfectly healthy babies that women have carried for 8+ months and just for no reason decide they no longer want the baby and do not want to give it up for adoption...you know...that thing that likely never happens that you guys are all so worked up about.

Gosnell never happened either huh

So clearly that means the whole industry is corrupt then huh? Lemme guess...you're one who condemns the left when they protest law enforcement because of the actions of the few?

No, but it means that the corrupt people within the industry are corrupt.

http://thefederalist.com/2019/01/31/new-...un-moment/
Cuomo had his John C. Calhoun moment.

"...That phrase—“a positive good”—signaled that Calhoun and others like him were committed to their cause, and no reason, science, or moral suasion would divert them from their chosen path. Slavery advocates now proclaimed the institution as actually superior to any other sort of labor arrangement....


Although Cuomo lacks Calhoun’s rhetorical skill, his devotion to an unjust cause matches the South Carolinian’s. The #ShoutYourAbortion campaign began in 2015, and in 2019 it has only increased in reach. Abortion’s defenders now see that unholy act as a positive good in the world, not just a necessary evil. The lights of the World Trade Center were a burnt offering to Moloch, a pledge of allegiance to the cause of infanticide. This is abortion’s Calhoun moment.

Comparing abortion to slavery is only meaningful if we can learn something from it. Sadly, the course of the 19th century’s great debate does not foreshadow a simple end to our current dispute. It is a mistake to say that our Civil War was inevitable, but once the Slave Power began to embrace slavery as a positive good, once they began to see it as an end in itself and not merely the means to achieve financial comfort, the two sides were no longer aiming at the same eventual result. A negotiated solution became a lot less likely.... <same applies to Pelosi's Calhoun moment-the wall is immoral>