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.

 

THE ABORTION AGENDA: Its Benefactors & What You Don’t Know

page: 6
49
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 1 2019 @ 11:08 PM
link   
a reply to: Grambler

Are you saying that women will go to term just to use the wider scope in the wording of this law?

Why should we look at what the wider scope is? Obviously, even if the law was written to only include life or death situations, it is just a matter of finding a shady doctor but like I said before, if they have 24 weeks no questions asked then why take a chance at being denied after that?




posted on Feb, 1 2019 @ 11:09 PM
link   
Reducing the number of African American births, while simultaneously harvesting body-parts/Adrenochrome, is one aspect of Planned nonParenthood's agenda.

ATS Thread on this Satanic ritual: www.abovetopsecret.com...



posted on Feb, 1 2019 @ 11:11 PM
link   

originally posted by: strongfp
a reply to: Grambler

That's a much bigger issue. And you're digging into poverty issues, where the male figure is absent in the scenario.

You are branching out from the initial laws we were discussing.


No I am not

The New York law is written to effectually allow any woman to claim the pregnancy is affecting her physical, mental, emotional, or familial well being, and this a third trimester abortion is now legal for any pregnant woman

I argue that law is terrible, because it will be used by women who want to abort in the third trimester for non medical reasons

This study shows that is likely to be the case

So the question remains, do you think it’s ok for women to have third trimester abortions for these reasons

If so just say

If not, then you should be against this law that makes non serious medical third trimester abortions far more likely



posted on Feb, 1 2019 @ 11:12 PM
link   
a reply to: carewemust

Not this Adrenochrome stuff again?



posted on Feb, 1 2019 @ 11:13 PM
link   

originally posted by: daskakik
a reply to: Grambler

Are you saying that women will go to term just to use the wider scope in the wording of this law?

Why should we look at what the wider scope is? Obviously, even if the law was written to only include life or death situations, it is just a matter of finding a shady doctor but like I said before, if they have 24 weeks no questions asked then why take a chance at being denied after that?




Read the study I just linked

There are many reasons women seek late term abortions, medical emergency is not one of the top reasons

Saying we should not limit the scope because women will find a shady doctor is absurd

That’s like saying we shouldn’t have murder be illegal because eventually someone will committ murder



posted on Feb, 1 2019 @ 11:17 PM
link   
a reply to: Grambler

What are you talking about?

If a woman walks into a hospital and demands an abortion, she won't get it just because she doesn't want it anymore.

Where are you getting these ideas from?

Have you ever met someone who has had an abortion?
edit on 1-2-2019 by strongfp because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 1 2019 @ 11:20 PM
link   
a reply to: Grambler

The link shows that 98.7% of abortions are carried out at 21 weeks or arlier. Like I said women are not going to go to term just to "use" the new law.


Saying we should not limit the scope because women will find a shady doctor is absurd

I didn't say that. You made the sarcastic remark about unethical abortion recommendations when someone brought up Kermit Gosnell.

I'm saying that most women will opt for the abortion before week 24 instead of having to find someone who will bend the rules.



edit on 1-2-2019 by daskakik because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 1 2019 @ 11:24 PM
link   
a reply to: strongfp

He's probably getting it from the wording of the law.

Because you know someone that has had an abortion, you now think you know why all women seek them?

Hell...some women give birth and toss it in the dumpster.

Yes, under the "new and improved shiny new abortion laws", a woman can walk into a NY facility and announce a psychological, emotional, familial, or economical trauma that has put her mental health in jeopardy, and SOME "licensed health practitioner" can abort her 9-month fetus. Yes.



posted on Feb, 1 2019 @ 11:24 PM
link   
a reply to: strongfp

Yes I have known people that have had a abortions

I showed what the text of the new law means

You said it was only to stop women or doctors from being arrested for having life saving abortions

I showed that is not the case

I showed studies that show the most common reasons for late term abortions are not serious medical issues

Against you deflect the question

It very simple

Do you think a woman should be allowed to legally have a third trimester abortion because she doesn’t want to raise a kid alone?



posted on Feb, 1 2019 @ 11:26 PM
link   
a reply to: daskakik

Just because 98 percent of abortions are earlier doesn’t mean this law won’t be used

Could you answer the question I posed to strong above?



posted on Feb, 1 2019 @ 11:28 PM
link   
a reply to: queenofswords

No where does it say that a mental health issue can allow an abortion. The VA laws are the ones that are to worry about, we're arguing over the NY laws. Which aren't as, I guess strange.



posted on Feb, 1 2019 @ 11:34 PM
link   

originally posted by: strongfp
a reply to: queenofswords

No where does it say that a mental health issue can allow an abortion. The VA laws are the ones that are to worry about, we're arguing over the NY laws. Which aren't as, I guess strange.


Again, go back to my first posy in this thread

The New York law says Or if it affects a woman’s health

That was defined by the court in doe v Bolton as physical, emotional, MENTAL, or even familial well being

Hence the law says if the pregnancy is affecting a woman’s emotional, manual, physical, or familial well being, a third trimester aboryis legal



posted on Feb, 1 2019 @ 11:37 PM
link   

originally posted by: Grambler
Just because 98 percent of abortions are earlier doesn’t mean this law won’t be used

Of course it will be used, that is what it is there for. My point is that it won't turn every other abortion into a late term abortion. That is what I am calling hype.


Could you answer the question I posed to strong above?

Sure, if that is what the law allows. I mean, the legality of it is based solely on the laws.
edit on 1-2-2019 by daskakik because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 1 2019 @ 11:38 PM
link   
a reply to: Grambler

The laws never even mentioned mental health. I linked you the laws, no where does it mention metal health.

If a mother isn't mentally healthy to birth a child it's in the hands of medical professionals at that point and child services are in charge at that point.



posted on Feb, 1 2019 @ 11:39 PM
link   
a reply to: daskakik

Thank you for your honesty

I find the notion of allowing a woman to have a third trimester abortion fbecause she doesn’t want to raise a baby alone to be disgusting and barbaric

I am glad we have come to an agreement that’s what this law allows to happen more often now



posted on Feb, 1 2019 @ 11:41 PM
link   
a reply to: strongfp

The law says “health”

How do you define health?

The court defines it as I linked, which includes mental health

If you chose to pretend that is not the case, so be it

Again, can you answer the question I asked you?



posted on Feb, 1 2019 @ 11:44 PM
link   

originally posted by: Grambler
Thank you for your honesty

I find the notion of allowing a woman to have a third trimester abortion fbecause she doesn’t want to raise a baby alone to be disgusting and barbaric

Would that be much different than having an abortion at 8 weeks for the same reason?


I am glad we have come to an agreement that’s what this law allows to happen more often now

I disagree, I don't think it will make much of a difference in frequency.



posted on Feb, 1 2019 @ 11:45 PM
link   
a reply to: Grambler

I made my point earlier. Many times, and you're ignoring it.

When did I ever agree with a woman just walking into a hospital and demanding an abortion?

I am repeating myself.



posted on Feb, 1 2019 @ 11:46 PM
link   

originally posted by: daskakik

originally posted by: Grambler
Thank you for your honesty

I find the notion of allowing a woman to have a third trimester abortion fbecause she doesn’t want to raise a baby alone to be disgusting and barbaric

Would that be much different than having an abortion at 8 weeks for the same reason?


I am glad we have come to an agreement that’s what this law allows to happen more often now

I disagree, I don't think it will make much of a difference in frequency.


Yes, an 8 week abortion is much different than a 32 week one

I find it incredible you don’t think so



posted on Feb, 1 2019 @ 11:47 PM
link   

originally posted by: strongfp
a reply to: Grambler

I made my point earlier. Many times, and you're ignoring it.

When did I ever agree with a woman just walking into a hospital and demanding an abortion?

I am repeating myself.


Your point was not clear

If you asked me the question above, I would answer clearly and concisely

I assume you answer is no then, you are not ok with that abortion

Neither am I

This law makes those types of abortions far more likely, and this

I am against it
edit on 1-2-2019 by Grambler because: (no reason given)




top topics



 
49
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in

join