It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Trump call to punish women for abortions

page: 30
32
<< 27  28  29    31  32  33 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 3 2016 @ 09:57 AM
link   
All this gotcha journalism reaks of fear and desperation.




posted on Apr, 3 2016 @ 10:02 AM
link   
a reply to: mothersuperior

Is that you Sarah Palin?



posted on Apr, 3 2016 @ 10:10 AM
link   

originally posted by: UKTruth

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: LifeisGrand
a reply to: mOjOm

None of it is play. It is all real. You may brush it away, in your mind. But I will stand firm. And so will science.



Frankly, your opinion on the matter - - can blow in the wind. That's how much I care about you trying to take some moral high ground.

If its not OK with you, don't do it.

Just stay out of my way.



You sound like Trump. Bravo.


Actually, the don's is more like "If I don't agree with it, I will stand in your way".

Abortion is legal now because it was deemed to be necessary in saving women's lives (in many varying scenarios) To revert back to the 50's (and earlier) mentality (religion-based?) regarding abortion would be disastrous for women's health.


edit on 3-4-2016 by InTheLight because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 3 2016 @ 11:21 AM
link   

originally posted by: windword
a reply to: UKTruth




The only way to have a proper debate on the subject, in my view, is to list out all the scenarios that one should consider and have clarity in the law - enough that you cover 95% of cases - and then treat the unique cases on a case by case basis. You just can't get a full policy position from an interview sound bite and actually, I don't think Trump has a full policy position yet.


So, you think the policy outlined by SCOTUS in Roe V Wade needs to be debated? You want to take the choice to terminate a pregnancy away for 95% of women seeking one, and only deal with abortion on a case by case emergency situation?

This is a problem for me, and why I'll never vote Republican, ever!



That is not what i said.



posted on Apr, 3 2016 @ 11:27 AM
link   

originally posted by: MOMof3
"Will men get more of a say than they do today?" Say over what?


The decision to abort.



posted on Apr, 3 2016 @ 11:30 AM
link   

originally posted by: InTheLight

originally posted by: UKTruth

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: LifeisGrand
a reply to: mOjOm

None of it is play. It is all real. You may brush it away, in your mind. But I will stand firm. And so will science.



Frankly, your opinion on the matter - - can blow in the wind. That's how much I care about you trying to take some moral high ground.

If its not OK with you, don't do it.

Just stay out of my way.



You sound like Trump. Bravo.


Actually, the don's is more like "If I don't agree with it, I will stand in your way".

Abortion is legal now because it was deemed to be necessary in saving women's lives (in many varying scenarios) To revert back to the 50's (and earlier) mentality (religion-based?) regarding abortion would be disastrous for women's health.



Who is suggesting reverting back to the 50's?
I have not heard any set of policies that mirror the 50's.

So many straw man arguments get created around this topic. Emotional over rational response.



posted on Apr, 3 2016 @ 11:33 AM
link   
a reply to: UKTruth

How would you make a law like that? The woman would have to name the father? Then the law would have to state the man has the right to take away her constitutional right?



posted on Apr, 3 2016 @ 11:38 AM
link   
a reply to: UKTruth

Almost everything the don is promising is reverting back to the days when America was great...was it really?

History of abortion in America.

www.ourbodiesourselves.org...
edit on 3-4-2016 by InTheLight because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 3 2016 @ 11:39 AM
link   

originally posted by: MOMof3
a reply to: UKTruth

How would you make a law like that? The woman would have to name the father? Then the law would have to state the man has the right to take away her constitutional right?


You are taking statements as black and white again, which is not what i am eluding to.

I believe men have no rights at all as it stands today on the abortion decision under any circumstances. In fact most of the time they don't even have the right to know. My point is that there are situations where this, in my view, is unfair. I would like to see the laws address specific circumstances where a father is given equal rights over a child they were jointly responsible for creating.



posted on Apr, 3 2016 @ 11:43 AM
link   

originally posted by: InTheLight
a reply to: UKTruth

Almost everything the don is promising is reverting back to the days when America was great...was it really?


America used to be held up as a shining example to the world of freedom and democracy - a country that faced it's problems and sorted them out.
Now, its seen as one of the most oppressive countries in the world. Russia is on the path to becoming the new America and beacon for the world, whilst America is moving in the opposite direction.

I guess whether you think America used to be great depends on your perspective. A communist, for example, would love the way the country is headed.
edit on 3/4/2016 by UKTruth because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 3 2016 @ 11:45 AM
link   
a reply to: UKTruth

I wonder if the medical/scientific community could research if removing the embryo from the womb of a woman and having it complete its gestation period either in a test tube or a human surrogate, for people (biological father? grandparents? potential adoptive parents?) wanting to take on the responsibility?
edit on 3-4-2016 by InTheLight because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 3 2016 @ 12:05 PM
link   
a reply to: InTheLight

I don't know about the medical science in removing an embryo from the womb, but I do that artificial wombs are being researched.

www.abovetopsecret.com...



posted on Apr, 3 2016 @ 12:09 PM
link   
a reply to: UKTruth

Yeah. It was just in the sixties that blacks could not use same facilities as whites, began ending. Women could not vote until 1908, long after slavery ended. 54,000 killed in Korea, 56,000 killed in Nam, count has not ended for 15 year war so far. Fighting to "spread democracy" when our country is not a democracy. The last time we were great was when we fought in unity for the American Revolution.



posted on Apr, 3 2016 @ 12:11 PM
link   

originally posted by: InTheLight
a reply to: UKTruth

I wonder if the medical/scientific community could research if removing the embryo from the womb of a woman and having it complete its gestation period either in a test tube or a human surrogate, for people (biological father? grandparents? potential adoptive parents?) wanting to take on the responsibility?


Sounds like a promising development.



posted on Apr, 3 2016 @ 12:13 PM
link   

originally posted by: UKTruth

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: LifeisGrand
a reply to: mOjOm

None of it is play. It is all real. You may brush it away, in your mind. But I will stand firm. And so will science.



Frankly, your opinion on the matter - - can blow in the wind. That's how much I care about you trying to take some moral high ground.

If its not OK with you, don't do it.

Just stay out of my way.



You sound like Trump. Bravo.


I am woman, hear me roar.

In a real life decision I had to make the choice.



posted on Apr, 3 2016 @ 12:16 PM
link   

originally posted by: UKTruth

originally posted by: InTheLight
a reply to: UKTruth

I wonder if the medical/scientific community could research if removing the embryo from the womb of a woman and having it complete its gestation period either in a test tube or a human surrogate, for people (biological father? grandparents? potential adoptive parents?) wanting to take on the responsibility?


Sounds like a promising development.


There are enough unwanted, unloved, uncared for LIVING CHILDREN in this world.

We don't need to grow more.



posted on Apr, 3 2016 @ 12:18 PM
link   

originally posted by: MOMof3
a reply to: UKTruth

Yeah. It was just in the sixties that blacks could not use same facilities as whites, began ending. Women could not vote until 1908, long after slavery ended. 54,000 killed in Korea, 56,000 killed in Nam, count has not ended for 15 year war so far. Fighting to "spread democracy" when our country is not a democracy. The last time we were great was when we fought in unity for the American Revolution.


America used to face it's challenges and correct them and her people drove that change. The country was never perfect, none are.
Over the last 20-30 years the people have let themselves be lulled into slumber whilst their govt runs riot and services special interests.
Its a corrupt cess pool of a country now, numbed to the murder of millions worldwide whilst citizens fight amongst themselves over inane topics. You might not know it but Trump is right, the world does take advantage of the American people and there is a lot of chuckling at how stupid the people are for allowing it.



posted on Apr, 3 2016 @ 12:25 PM
link   

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: UKTruth

originally posted by: InTheLight
a reply to: UKTruth

I wonder if the medical/scientific community could research if removing the embryo from the womb of a woman and having it complete its gestation period either in a test tube or a human surrogate, for people (biological father? grandparents? potential adoptive parents?) wanting to take on the responsibility?


Sounds like a promising development.


There are enough unwanted, unloved, uncared for LIVING CHILDREN in this world.

We don't need to grow more.


'grow more'.. you make it sound like a farm. Sick.

So if there were a way to not abort but transfer unborn babies to be developed outside the womb or transplanted, you'd be against it? Sounds like you really get off on the womans right to abort as opposed to her right to not have a baby that she does not want.

The last numbers I read showed that there was a shortage of children for adoption.



posted on Apr, 3 2016 @ 12:28 PM
link   
a reply to: UKTruth

Do you remember the Dixie Chicks and how they tried to stand up to President Bush over the Iraq invasion? You don't remember people standing up against Citizens United? Maybe at the time, it just wasn't important to you but now it is.



posted on Apr, 3 2016 @ 12:32 PM
link   

originally posted by: InTheLight

originally posted by: UKTruth

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: LifeisGrand
a reply to: mOjOm

None of it is play. It is all real. You may brush it away, in your mind. But I will stand firm. And so will science.



Frankly, your opinion on the matter - - can blow in the wind. That's how much I care about you trying to take some moral high ground.

If its not OK with you, don't do it.

Just stay out of my way.



You sound like Trump. Bravo.


Actually, the don's is more like "If I don't agree with it, I will stand in your way".

Abortion is legal now because it was deemed to be necessary in saving women's lives (in many varying scenarios) To revert back to the 50's (and earlier) mentality (religion-based?) regarding abortion would be disastrous for women's health.



Who is calling for that? Names, please.




top topics



 
32
<< 27  28  29    31  32  33 >>

log in

join