posted by ptown_trojans_1

1. Just making sure. Your view is way out line compared to a vast majority or Americans that are in favor of options and not a ban like you are suggested from conception. In your case then, you would favor a complete and total ban of abortion like the ones voters in states have rejected? You obviously ate against the Ohio issue that is now in the Ohio Constitution. 

2. Look into the Texas law and the stories that are coming from it. It makes your view look really cruel and detached from reality. The health of the mother is so broad it is hard to really pin down when the case can be applied. As such, doctors are being very cautious for fear of being sued or losing their license. 

3. I agree everyone takes risks into consideration, but your paragraph was sounding very unrealistic and not practical. People can take precautions and get pregnant, completely up ending their life. Your very ridge view is not practical in the real world and how people make decisions in this case. I read your statement like a bad sex education teacher. 

1. You obviously didn’t read my post at all, either that or you just made up what you thought I meant in your brain.  Did you gloss over the word IF when I said IF biology figures out when life officially begins? Or you just being your normal obtuse self and assuming what you thought I meant? The same is true for my stance if biology says life begins at birth. That would be vastly out of the majority of current beliefs in the US, to say all abortions are ok until birth yet you didn’t chime in on that (which I said earlier in a post). You aren’t that stupid ptown so I assume you are miss characterizing what I say on purpose. Thats the only choices, you didn’t read what I typed, you are ignorant, or you purposely miss characterized what I typed. Which is it?

2. Saying the health of mother is serious bodily harm is cruel and heartless? Get out of here with your sanctimonious bullshit.

3. Again, your confirmation bias on what you want to believe I said comes through. No way you are this ignorant, you are just twisting what is said to get people riled up.

You either need to actually read what is typed, be a smarter person, or be a better person. You choose which of those 3 fits this situation.

posted by ptown_trojans_1

I'm for options and allowing the women and/ or significant other to make that choice in a safe and legal manner. Safe, legal, and rare have others have said. I'm in the majority view on this too. 

What you have said above has nothing to do with “rare” though. 

If abortion was illegal except in rape, incest, and serious health of the mother, would you be happy with that?

If you say no, then you are not being truthful with your “rare” comment.

posted by ptown_trojans_1

You obviously don't know the personhood movement. Look it up. You would support it I'm sure. 

I said when biology, science, determines when human life begins we, by our own beliefs in the DoI and Constitution, can’t kill that life unless it is currently or will cause serious bodily harm or death to someone else. Thats literaly the definition difference between murder and self defense.

posted by jmog

You either need to actually read what is typed, be a smarter person, or be a better person. 

For the love of God, please come up with a new line.  You’ve beaten this one to death.  Plus it make sound like the condescending asshole that I’m sure you are not.

posted by jmog

1. You obviously didn’t read my post at all, either that or you just made up what you thought I meant in your brain.  Did you gloss over the word IF when I said IF biology figures out when life officially begins? Or you just being your normal obtuse self and assuming what you thought I meant? The same is true for my stance if biology says life begins at birth. That would be vastly out of the majority of current beliefs in the US, to say all abortions are ok until birth yet you didn’t chime in on that (which I said earlier in a post). You aren’t that stupid ptown so I assume you are miss characterizing what I say on purpose. Thats the only choices, you didn’t read what I typed, you are ignorant, or you purposely miss characterized what I typed. Which is it?

2. Saying the health of mother is serious bodily harm is cruel and heartless? Get out of here with your sanctimonious bullshit.

3. Again, your confirmation bias on what you want to believe I said comes through. No way you are this ignorant, you are just twisting what is said to get people riled up.

You either need to actually read what is typed, be a smarter person, or be a better person. You choose which of those 3 fits this situation.

1. I asked you for several posts and you keep saying biologists say at conception, so if that is not your own view, then fine. But, you did not specify. You only have been quoting biology when I am asking for you as a citizen, your view. You are lecturing people on here. I'm trying to hone in on your view. 

2. I said look at the Texas law and get back to me. 

3. That's your reply? 

posted by jmog

What you have said above has nothing to do with “rare” though. 

If abortion was illegal except in rape, incest, and serious health of the mother, would you be happy with that?

If you say no, then you are not being truthful with your “rare” comment.

Well, depends on your definition of rare. I think we should work at reducing them, but the option should be there. That's the view of most Americans.

posted by jmog

I said when biology, science, determines when human life begins we, by our own beliefs in the DoI and Constitution, can’t kill that life unless it is currently or will cause serious bodily harm or death to someone else. Thats literaly the definition difference between murder and self defense.

You keep saying that but do you jmog, believe it? Is that your own view? Life begins at conception? What do you believe and when do you think an abortion is acceptable? 

I think what jmog is driving at is that biology, the medical science of it, has not yet set a specific day/date/period of when life begins. I would find it interesting to see that conclusion. If it ever happens. Po Tay Toe, Po Tah Toe.

For now, I'm rather enjoying watching two guys hash it out without any women (me) intruding too much.

Carry on.

I know I'm not a mod here, but I made an abortion discussion thread. Please take advantage of it so that we can keep this thread more "neat".

Thanks in advance!

posted by Dr Winston O'Boogie

For the love of God, please come up with a new line.  You’ve beaten this one to death.  Plus it make sound like the condescending asshole that I’m sure you are not.

I’m the condescending asshole when ptown purposefully changes what I say? If that makes me the asshole then I will take that.

Anyone with a 4th grade reading comprehension level can see that I didn’t say what ptown said I “believed” so did he purposefully miss characterize what I said or not?

posted by ptown_trojans_1

1. I asked you for several posts and you keep saying biologists say at conception, so if that is not your own view, then fine. But, you did not specify. You only have been quoting biology when I am asking for you as a citizen, your view. You are lecturing people on here. I'm trying to hone in on your view. 

2. I said look at the Texas law and get back to me. 

3. That's your reply? 

1. I answered multiple times whenever biology says it’s life, on one reply I said “conception, heartbeat, brainwaves, viability, birth, etc” and even pointed out that viability would be odd as that is subjective to current technology.  So yes, I absolutely answered the question and have repeatedly. If you missed it or ignored it that’s not on me. 

I have made my view crystal clear, my view on the what the law should be differs from what my personal belief in my own family would be.  

My view, again for the umteenth time, whenever the science behind biology decides that it is a human life, that should be the cut off as we are to protect human life except in dire circumstances. Like someone is harming you, someone has murdered someone and deserves the death penalty, etc. Except in some extreme circumstances we are not allowed, by US law, to purposefully take a life. So when science/biology determines where life begins at that point should be some pretty severe abortion restrictions with exceptions for life/death circumstances.

Ask me again and I will say the same thing for the 10th time if you like.

I don’t believe that my, or anyone else’s personal or religious beliefs should dictate when we can kill a human life. For that reason when biology confirms it’s a human life we can’t kill it except in some rare cases.

posted by ptown_trojans_1

Well, depends on your definition of rare. I think we should work at reducing them, but the option should be there. That's the view of most Americans.

If it’s an option for all for any reason that is the opposite of rare, and you know this. 

posted by ptown_trojans_1

You keep saying that but do you jmog, believe it? Is that your own view? Life begins at conception? What do you believe and when do you think an abortion is acceptable? 

For the 11th time, my belief is irrelevant to what the law should be. Unless one wants to be a dictator that is never relevant.

I have said over and over again, except in rare cases, when life has been determined (by biology, not ptown, jmog, any religion, not even the mother) then we can’t kill it.

I don’t know when that is yet as I am not certain it has been proven to begin. 

posted by CenterBHSFan

I think what jmog is driving at is that biology, the medical science of it, has not yet set a specific day/date/period of when life begins. I would find it interesting to see that conclusion. If it ever happens. Po Tay Toe, Po Tah Toe.

For now, I'm rather enjoying watching two guys hash it out without any women (me) intruding too much.

Carry on.

Pretty much, when biology lays out that conclusion, our own political system says we can’t kill it after that date except in rare cases/situations.

You got it and understood just fine, not sure why ptown doesn’t….unless I’m right and he is just assuming what he wants to believe that I believe. I thought I had been quite clear.

posted by jmog

I’m the condescending asshole when ptown purposefully changes what I say? If that makes me the asshole then I will take that.

Anyone with a 4th grade reading comprehension level can see that I didn’t say what ptown said I “believed” so did he purposefully miss characterize what I said or not?

I said you’re not a condescending asshole, so don’t sound like one with that same stupid line.

posted by Dr Winston O'Boogie

I said you’re not a condescending asshole, so don’t sound like one with that same stupid line.

Good rule of thumb, don't purposefully miss characterize what people say to fit what you want them to, and they won't sound condescending afterwards in their reply back to you.

posted by jmog

For the 11th time, my belief is irrelevant to what the law should be. Unless one wants to be a dictator that is never relevant.

I have said over and over again, except in rare cases, when life has been determined (by biology, not ptown, jmog, any religion, not even the mother) then we can’t kill it.

I don’t know when that is yet as I am not certain it has been proven to begin. 

When setting policy and voting for policy, your view does matter, as does mine. I think you are using the biology question as an excuse and crutch to avoid answering the question. 

I understand you are deferring to an answer that we do not have now,which as a result, is not relevant to today's discussion. 

People around the country are debating and discussing the issue now.

For example, did you vote for or against Issue 1 here in Ohio? 

posted by ptown_trojans_1

When setting policy and voting for policy, your view does matter, as does mine. I think you are using the biology question as an excuse and crutch to avoid answering the question. 

I understand you are deferring to an answer that we do not have now,which as a result, is not relevant to today's discussion. 

People around the country are debating and discussing the issue now.

For example, did you vote for or against Issue 1 here in Ohio? 

So you go from purposefully miss characterizing what I said to fit your belief of what you think I said, to now Acting like you understood the whole time and accusing me of being disingenuous by using biology as a crutch?

Are you always this insufferable?

People are still pushing Gavin Newsome for a dem presidency (replace Biden). The idea has escaped Twitter and is now being talked about and/or pushed on YouTube, Rumble and all the other social medias.

And dammit, I still hope it happens. Let the cup runneth over!

posted by ptown_trojans_1

Trump also pulled out of the Iran deal. Say what you want about it, but Iran is much closer to a nuclear weapon today than they would have been if the agreement was still in place. 

Nah Iran is just a little more out in the open about it.  Any concessions they can get from the West help move things along.

posted by CenterBHSFan

People are still pushing Gavin Newsome for a dem presidency (replace Biden). The idea has escaped Twitter and is now being talked about and/or pushed on YouTube, Rumble and all the other social medias.

Not going to happen.  Too many people behind the scenes with a lot of power that would be lost.  Plus Gavin does not have an uncle that was shot down during WWII over New Guinea and devoured by cannibals. 

posted by majorspark

Not going to happen.  Too many people behind the scenes with a lot of power that would be lost.  Plus Gavin does not have an uncle that was shot down during WWII over New Guinea and devoured by cannibals. 

Lol, I read about that. The last couple days have been GREAT for our two prospective "leaders". Biden with that story and Trump with some bizarre Gettysburg story where Robert E. Lee was very against fighting uphill "me boys". Combine them into one person and you might have 60% of a working brain. Might.

posted by Heretic

Lol, I read about that. The last couple days have been GREAT for our two prospective "leaders". Biden with that story and Trump with some bizarre Gettysburg story where Robert E. Lee was very against fighting uphill "me boys". Combine them into one person and you might have 60% of a working brain. Might.

I've not heard either of those yet. I'll be looking them up for sure

posted by Heretic

Lol, I read about that. The last couple days have been GREAT for our two prospective "leaders". Biden with that story and Trump with some bizarre Gettysburg story where Robert E. Lee was very against fighting uphill "me boys". Combine them into one person and you might have 60% of a working brain. Might.

Biden was elected to the US Senate in 1972 the same year I was born.  He feels the need to project hardships.  Trump on the other hand is confused by his recolction of  watching "Gods and Generals" Longstreet did not want to fight uphill and Picket fell off his horse and got back up wondering what happened to "his boys" and Lee failed. 

posted by jmog

Good rule of thumb, don't purposefully miss characterize what people say to fit what you want them to, and they won't sound condescending afterwards in their reply back to you.

Or don’t say “be better” anymore.