Georgia Supreme Court keeps six-weeks abortion ban in effect

a reply to: JAGStorm


It actually doesn't always take two. Guys CAN be taken advantage of.
Some nuts Borderline Personality women will poke holes in condoms and lie about taking their birth control pills,
and some men find out when they search a night-stand and find a condom with a hole with a sewing needle next to it,
confront the lass, and she fesses up. Hell, some of those women might change their minds late term when the guy leaves their @ss for being a Decepticon, and reality hits her that her plan backfired. Which is why guys need a birth control medication too. I might be speaking from experience here. LMAO. It's another piece of the fuller picture.

I'm with you though. IDC about first trimester abortions 6 weeks and earlier.
Sad that people were abusing the right when they had it.

My wife had 2 periods while pregnant with both of our kids. 8+ weeks. As far as "choice" goes, that's her body, and those weren't kids when we found out that she was pregnant.

If they can tell you what to do with your body, then a vaccine shouldn't be a problem then, right? This is the "slippery slope" you guys talk about with guns. Same here.

a reply to: JAGStorm


We're talking vastly different numbers.

www.cdc.gov...

In 2020, 620,327 legal induced abortions were reported to CDC from 49 reporting areas.

www.reuters.com...

Using the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's mortality database, the study published on Monday in the AAP's journal Pediatrics found that 4,752 children died from gun-related injuries in 2021, the latest year for which data was available, up from 4,368 in 2020 and 3,390 in 2019.

a reply to: Leviathan4

What a shame. Georgia is similar to Poland in this. We have the strictest anti-abortion laws in the whole EU. Maybe, just maybe, it will change with the new government now.

The problem with anti-abortion activists is that they can't be easily appeased. If they manage to have the law made stricter, they will demand more and more until the abortion is totally prohibited. They aren't willing to accept any compromise.

When it comes to abortion, I'm quite liberal. Women should have a right to terminate their pregnancy whenever they want. A child should acquire its human rights at the moment of birth.

originally posted by: Sookiechacha

originally posted by: DBCowboy

originally posted by: grey580
a reply to: Leviathan4

Again. Letting the government tell you what you can or cannot do with your body is a mistake. This will have unintended consequences.

Agreed.

Since this in another body though, seems off topic.

But at 5 weeks it isn't another body?

the moment the sperm enters the egg the process of life has started. The argument is at what point is it murder, and society's majority seems to think it's when the heart starts to beat. Some think it's murder at any stage. Currently, a middle ground is being searched for, but as usual, the boundaries must be pushed by both sides looking for a win. There is no win here. There are reasons where an abortion might be the best option, and I still think it's murder. But I'm not getting preggo anytime soon, so my opinion is pointless.

I think this is one instance where women should decide this, but we can't have that, because currently half the country can't explain what a "woman" is.

originally posted by: Sookiechacha

originally posted by: DBCowboy

originally posted by: grey580
a reply to: Leviathan4

Again. Letting the government tell you what you can or cannot do with your body is a mistake. This will have unintended consequences.

Agreed.

Since this in another body though, seems off topic.

But at 5 weeks it isn't another body?

Yes

originally posted by: network dude

originally posted by: Sookiechacha

originally posted by: DBCowboy

originally posted by: grey580
a reply to: Leviathan4

Again. Letting the government tell you what you can or cannot do with your body is a mistake. This will have unintended consequences.

Agreed.

Since this in another body though, seems off topic.

But at 5 weeks it isn't another body?

the moment the sperm enters the egg the process of life has started. The argument is at what point is it murder, and society's majority seems to think it's when the heart starts to beat. Some think it's murder at any stage. Currently, a middle ground is being searched for, but as usual, the boundaries must be pushed by both sides looking for a win. There is no win here. There are reasons where an abortion might be the best option, and I still think it's murder. But I'm not getting preggo anytime soon, so my opinion is pointless.

I think this is one instance where women should decide this, but we can't have that, because currently half the country can't explain what a "woman" is.

Most States allow abortions until weeks 16-20 in the pregnancy. It's always a dilemma for both women and society.

a reply to: Leviathan4

if it was truly "safe and rare" I don't think it would be as big of an issue, but when it's used for birth control, it becomes that. As a dude, it's not my place to tell a woman what the right thing to do is. But when asked, yea, I have an opinion. But it's difficult to legislate morality. And to some, murder is cool if it's convenient. It's a shame that can't be a blanket excuse. After all, it's all about fairzies.

The is a literal case of FAFO.

The left should have stuck with 'safe, legal and rare'. But like with most issues they had to push the issue to the point of absurdity.

If the left wasn't willing to compromise, why should the right?

originally posted by: Zanti Misfit

originally posted by: Sookiechacha

originally posted by: DBCowboy

originally posted by: grey580
a reply to: Leviathan4

Again. Letting the government tell you what you can or cannot do with your body is a mistake. This will have unintended consequences.

Agreed.

Since this in another body though, seems off topic.

But at 5 weeks it isn't another body?

Life Begins at Conception . Go ahead and try to " SPIN " that Any Way you want , but Biology says you would be Wrong .

Okay. I get that you believe that. So why give a woman 6 weeks to abort? Why not just ban abortion (on demand) all together? Why dangle an impossible compromise that most woman won't be able to reach?

(Now, I put "on demand" in parenthesis, because I am hopefully assuming that none of you would force a woman to risk her life or take serious life threatening risks, or carry a dead or doomed fetus.)

a reply to: grey580

It blows my mind that people fail to acknowledge the slippery slope concept. The democrats spent three years telling us what to do with our bodies. I would have not received a useless experimental injection, but my livelihood was threatened. I've lost all sympathy for the "my body my choice" crowd. Also, something like 96% of abortions are contraceptive based. Almost no abortions are due to rape or incest, but you knew that already didn't you? So, yeah, if you sleep around d with dudes not using protection you definitely should be taking pregnancy tests regularly, if not plan B as well.

a reply to: loam

The left should have stuck with 'safe, legal and rare'. But like with most issues they had to push the issue to the point of absurdity.

I don't know if you really believe this, or are just frustrated and spouting false information.

Abortion statistics, at the time Roe was overturned, were at their lowest point. Less women in all age groups were getting abortions than ever before. It was never pro-choice advocates pushing for more abortion. It was always anti-choice activists chipping away at Roe, erecting more and more roadblocks and hoops for woman to navigate to access safe abortions.

Now, the same people want to go after birth control. This isn't a fight about the sanctity of life. This is a fight over our human right to autonomy, your and mine.

a reply to: Sookiechacha

Well then, maybe the masses on the left should have reigned in the crazies who expressly advocated for no limits, and even in some cases infanticide.

I'm from the school of thought that if someone says they intend to do something, you should believe them.

Like I said, FAFO.

a reply to: loam

Because the GOP's extremist views on abortion are costing them elections.

originally posted by: loam
a reply to: Sookiechacha

Well then, maybe the masses on the left should have reigned in the crazies who expressly advocated for no limits, and even in some cases infanticide.

More BS.

No one is advocating for infanticide, period. That's a lie.

No one was advocating for no limits. Roe V Wade provided limits which pro-choice advocates considered the status quo. That is the viability limit, which protects the life and wellbeing of the pregnant woman. These abortion bans don't respect reasons why a 6-week limit, or even a 20-week limit on abortions with no exceptions for the health and wellbeing the woman. So, you get a woman whose water breaks at 18 weeks required to bleed more, risk sepsis, risk losing her uterus, all because the doomed fetus still has a heartbeat. You get a woman whose fetus has no brain being required to carry that fetus to birth, only to die an excruciating pain after birth.

Roe V Wade was the status quo and that's all pro-choice advocates ever wanted, to maintain the status quo. It was the anti-choice lobby that chipped away at Roe until it was gone.

originally posted by: Sookiechacha
originally posted by: loam
a reply to: Sookiechacha

Well then, maybe the masses on the left should have reigned in the crazies who expressly advocated for no limits, and even in some cases infanticide.

More BS.

No one is advocating for infanticide, period. That's a lie.

No one was advocating for no limits. Roe V Wade provided limits which pro-choice advocates considered the status quo. That is the viability limit, which protects the life and wellbeing of the pregnant woman. These abortion bans don't respect reasons why a 6-week limit, or even a 20-week limit on abortions with no exceptions for the health and wellbeing the woman. So, you get a woman whose water breaks at 18 weeks required to bleed more, risk sepsis, risk losing her uterus, all because the doomed fetus still has a heartbeat. You get a woman whose fetus has no brain being required to carry that fetus to birth, only to die an excruciating pain after birth.

Roe V Wade was the status quo and that's all pro-choice advocates ever wanted, to maintain the status quo. It was the anti-choice lobby that chipped away at Roe until it was gone.

so what is the latest the democrats are willing to go? 12 weeks? 26 weeks? until Birth, but call it something different?

And if you do put limits on it, won't that upset some who don't want limits?

Oh, and how do you speak for all on the left?

a reply to: Leviathan4

Serious Question…..

If people are SOOOOOOOO concerned about the life of another person, why are we OK with parents feeding
Junk food to their kids? Isn’t that killing them a slow death? Isn’t obesity and heart disease the biggest killer of both men and women?

Too abstract? I’ll hit a little closer.
If we really care about someone else’s children (we don’t, we really don’t)
Why don’t we do more and protest about the foster care system? Why don’t we put cameras in every single classroom
And live stream it to the parents?

You know why, because we really don’t care about other people’s kids, some people barely provide enough for their own kids to survive. Do you think they really care if some unfit mom makes a choice that will have zero impact on them.

Abortion is simply a topic a people call feel good about forcing control over another person. No, Yes?
If we care about life so much, why not force people to be organ donors?? Ohhhh, that’s too much control?
What about blood donation…. it’s to save a life right..pro life.

originally posted by: Sookiechacha
originally posted by: loam
a reply to: Sookiechacha

More BS.

No one is advocating for infanticide, period. That's a lie.

Well, we can start with this moron, Michael Tooley

I believe, that a newborn baby does not possess the concept of a continuing self, any more than a newborn kitten pos-sesses such a concept. If so, infanticide during a time interval shortly after birth must be morally acceptable. Pdf Link

Or these morons, published in the Journal of Medical Ethics,Alberto Giubilini & Francesca Minerva

...the authors argue that what we call ‘after-birth abortion’ (killing a newborn) should be permissible in all the cases where abortion is, including cases where the newborn is not disabled.

Like so much today, they 're-imagined' and 're-monikered' the murder of infants as ‘after-birth abortion’.

And of course, the most obvious example, Virginia Gov. Ralph Northam.



The internet is filled with 'intellectual' morons on the left from activists to people on the street seeing no problem with these arguments.

a reply to: network dude

so what is the latest the democrats are willing to go? 12 weeks? 26 weeks? until Birth, but call it something different?

Democrats have always been willing to accept viability as the limit. Since some fetuses will never achieve viability, there is no appropriate limit in terms of weeks or trimesters.