Do you support Roe Vs. Wade?

PainIsLIfe said:
"Middle-income" households have an annual income between 66 percent and 200 percent of the median U.S. household income, according to the Pew Research Center. As of 2014, that falls between $24,000 and $73,000 for one person and $42,000 and $126,000 for a family of three.

www.npr.org/2016/07/07/484941939/a-portrait-of-americas-middle-class-by-the-numbers


Women with kids get assistance - food stamps (what ever they call it now), housing assistance, sometimes free daycare, heating assistance, etc.
Click to expand...

You really can't count my graph was for a 3 person household. Mom + Dad + Kid = 3 people. You have to use the number of people in the household to determine if they are in middle income. Can you count?

If someone has a kid, the mother or father in the least have to take care of the kid. So in the very least you have a 2 person household. Can you count?

If someone is living by themselves, they are part of a one person household? Can you count?

2a0kozm.jpg

http://www.pewsocialtrends.org/2016...se-look-at-changes-within-metropolitan-areas/


So if a mother takes care of her kid, she needs to make $34,000 to be in middle income. If both parents take care of the kid, they need to make $41,641 to be middle income. This is well above 200% the poverty level. You don't get to use numbers without actually counting the kid. Even without the kid, the woman by herself at 2 x (Federal Poverty Level) = 2x 11,670 = $23,340 is below the cutoff for middle income. There isn't anyway to argue most women who get abortions are middle income. 59% already have at least one kid so there are a lot of women way below the poverty level prior to their first abortion.

aps_finals_demographics.jpg


Why are you moving back around from "oh, that is enough money" to "Women with kids get assistance - food stamps (what ever they call it now), housing assistance, sometimes free daycare, heating assistance, etc."? You blow off the hardship of being poor because often they get assistance. It is like you quit even yourself trying to argue that they are middle class.
 
Last edited:
Roe didn't even support that court decision for most of her life.
 
SMillard said:
That argument could work both ways. If you had women getting abortions illegally there would be fewer women getting the abortions due to lack of knowing where to go, higher prices due to black market influences (ie. supply and demand as well as risk), fear of breaking the law and general fears about quality control. Now let's look at that same thing from the gun side; again fewer people would be getting the guns due to availability, knowledge of where to get the guns, fear of breaking the law, fear/apprehension about product quality, add to that if guns were illegal ammunition would also be at a premium.

So despite what you think on either issue, abortions would be down and gun violence would be down.

Personally, I believe in rights. If a woman wants to have an abortion and go buy an assault rifle while smoking a blunt; I don't really care.
Click to expand...

Abortions could be made illegal but guns aren't going to magically disappear.
 
IGIT said:
will women who vote GOP all feel comfortable with "big government" telling them what they can do with their own bodies? some may...but i think most women are going to find that idea offensive, in the end.
Click to expand...

Do you think a fetus that could survive outside the womb on its own (~29 weeks) is still a woman's body? (Yes/No)

Is it okay to abort that same baby at an abortion centre? (Yes/No)

If the woman gives birth to that same baby, is it murder if the mother bludgeons it with a baseball bat right after birth? (Yes/No)

__
Note: In almost a dozen states, there is no ban on any term abortion
 
Teppodama said:
Abortion should always be an independent and personal choice available to women. The government should have no say in the matter nor should it subsidize it.
Click to expand...

Should people be allowed to abort a baby and go about their life the next day at 36 weeks pregnancy?

If so, is it still murder if the mother gives birth to that abortion-legal fetus and she smashes its face in with a doctor's mallet right after it exits her?
 
tkotom said:
Should people be allowed to abort a baby and go about their life the next day at 36 weeks pregnancy?

If so, is it still murder if the mother gives birth to that abortion-legal fetus and she smashes its face in with a doctor's mallet right after it exits her?
Click to expand...
If it's still in her body it's still her choice. Your melodramatic post delivery scenario would be murder.
 
Teppodama said:
If it's still in her body it's still her choice. Your melodramatic post delivery scenario would be murder.
Click to expand...

Haha you’re embarrassing.

You: “5 minutes before birth it’s awesome, 5 minutes after it’s murder”.

I will always feel uneasy around people like you.
 
I would, except for the fact that men have no choice in whether or not they are fathers. Give men the right to just sign away all rights and responsibilities to a child from conception on, then I will have no problem with it. Until then, sorry but no.
 
I’m pro murdering babies (sorry I just hate the term pro-choice) but I’m ambivalent on Roe v Wade simply because I don’t know that it’s really up to the Supreme Court to decide that.

The way we have it now is much better than potentially allowing states to criminalize and potentially having unsafe abortions (more likely though women will cross state lines)

So Roe v Wade is at the very bottom of things we should resolve IMO
 
tkotom said:
Haha you’re embarrassing.

You: “5 minutes before birth it’s awesome, 5 minutes after it’s murder”.

I will always feel uneasy around people like you.
Click to expand...
Unless you want to completely limit the ability to have abortions in a safe legal manner, you have to draw an distinction somewhere. You will never be able to completely stop the process whether it's banned or not. It will just happen in a more clandestine manner that is assuredly going to be less safe and make criminals of a multitude of your citizens for a process that is at its heart none of your business. While the infant is still within the mother I firmly believe its her choice. It's not a choice I would personally choose but it's a choice I believe is their right. Once the infant leaves the womb then it's a citizen with all the rights thereof including the protection of the law against murdering it.

As for feeling uneasy around people like me, that's a reasonable position to take given that I'm pretty certain I have less qualms about decisions regarding the taking of life. I am not unsympathetic to those around me, and am often more than willing to help where appropriate, but I am also pragmatic about the taking of life if I feel the situation is one where its warranted. I have no problem with the death penalty for instance for particularly heinous crimes, especially ones involving children. To point of fact, I believe that if guilt is proven beyond a shadow of a doubt, such as the criminal being caught in the act, that execution should be swift and without needless drama.

As it pertains to abortion, I simply believe that is a personal choice with all attendant issues of moral judgement. It's simply not my place to make that choice for them. Now if I was the father of the child, I believe that I should have a say of some form in the matter but once again, it's the mothers body that will incubate the child not mine. My solution in such a situation would be to offer to pay for all of the relevant expenses for neonatal care and compensate her for any loss of income due directly to circumstance related to the pregnancy and in return she would legally agree to sign over all rights to the child to me. She could go on with her life and me and my child could move on with ours. In effect, she would function as a surrogate.
 
tkotom said:
Should people be allowed to abort a baby and go about their life the next day at 36 weeks pregnancy?

If so, is it still murder if the mother gives birth to that abortion-legal fetus and she smashes its face in with a doctor's mallet right after it exits her?
Click to expand...

Thinking people view the issue as being a painful struggle between rights and interest. The only viewpoints which have zero merit are religious talk of souls, or absurd statements about doctor mallets.
 
JonnyRingo84 said:
do you see a fetus/embryo as a living human with rights? if so, why should the manner of its conception change that?
Click to expand...

Because up to a point I support the rights of the woman that was a victim not to be punished by forcing her to relive the crime every day of her life. In other words the health of the mother makes it her choice up to a point. In most cases with plan B this can be avoided .
 
Teppodama said:
Unless you want to completely limit the ability to have abortions in a safe legal manner, you have to draw an distinction somewhere. You will never be able to completely stop the process whether it's banned or not. It will just happen in a more clandestine manner that is assuredly going to be less safe and make criminals of a multitude of your citizens for a process that is at its heart none of your business. While the infant is still within the mother I firmly believe its her choice. It's not a choice I would personally choose but it's a choice I believe is their right. Once the infant leaves the womb then it's a citizen with all the rights thereof including the protection of the law against murdering it.

As for feeling uneasy around people like me, that's a reasonable position to take given that I'm pretty certain I have less qualms about decisions regarding the taking of life. I am not unsympathetic to those around me, and am often more than willing to help where appropriate, but I am also pragmatic about the taking of life if I feel the situation is one where its warranted. I have no problem with the death penalty for instance for particularly heinous crimes, especially ones involving children. To point of fact, I believe that if guilt is proven beyond a shadow of a doubt, such as the criminal being caught in the act, that execution should be swift and without needless drama.

As it pertains to abortion, I simply believe that is a personal choice with all attendant issues of moral judgement. It's simply not my place to make that choice for them. Now if I was the father of the child, I believe that I should have a say of some form in the matter but once again, it's the mothers body that will incubate the child not mine. My solution in such a situation would be to offer to pay for all of the relevant expenses for neonatal care and compensate her for any loss of income due directly to circumstance related to the pregnancy and in return she would legally agree to sign over all rights to the child to me. She could go on with her life and me and my child could move on with ours. In effect, she would function as a surrogate.
Click to expand...

I think even you can see that your position is evil. You can’t say it’s a completely viable child and justify its murder without coming off like a craZy person.
 
tkotom said:
I think even you can see that your position is evil. You can’t say it’s a completely viable child and justify its murder without coming off like a craZy person.
Click to expand...
Then I guess I'm evil. I don't value life as much as you are appearing to profess to. I can live with that.
 
Teppodama said:
Then I guess I'm evil. I don't value life as much as you are appearing to profess to. I can live with that.
Click to expand...

It’s not that I value life to X degrees.

Your thought process is deranged. You’re justifying murdering an innocent child at 36 weeks because of one sentence that is absolutely, scientifically wrong: “it’s her body so it’s okay to murder.”

A 36 weeks, it’s literally not her body.

You’re justifying murder. Reevaluate your life. You’re odd.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
1,281,044
Messages
58,337,261
Members
176,003
Latest member
HeneryH

Share this page

Back
Top