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 Left Viciously Attacks Texas Gov. Rick Perry After He Calls Second Special Session

page: 2
4
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 26 2013 @ 09:22 PM
link   
reply to post by Shimri
 


Okay, we get it. You think abortion is bad.


But that's not what this bill is about. It's about BETTER abortions! Do you get that!




posted on Jun, 26 2013 @ 09:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by Shimri




Then perhaps people should think about that before having unprotected sex like their personal parts are going to fall off soon.


And here it is folks, this is what the abortion debate is really about. Trying to legislate morality and keep the Godless heathens from having sex. If you put a fraction of effort focusing on what is wrong with you instead of worrying about what everyone else is doing in the bedroom, one day you might get to have sex with a real live girl too.

And no it still is not standing on it's own. It was put in the special session because it would not have passed in the regular session. You can try and dance around that fact all you want, but it is a fact. And for one more fact. On this issue Rick Perry says "In Texas, we value all life". The night before he executes the States 500th Death Row inmate.



posted on Jun, 26 2013 @ 09:28 PM
link   

Originally posted by Shimri

Originally posted by muse7

You can try to pass all the laws you want regarding a woman's reproductive system, and abortions will still happen. But instead of happening in a clinic they will happen in restrooms with coat hangers.


Ahh yes. The old fallback . . . the coat hanger argument.

Maybe we should make bank robbery safer by legalizing it, so that the poor bank robber won't get shot by the guard and maybe bleed to death slowly and painfully in a back alley, too.

Yes?

Oh, and your coat hanger back-alley argument is a lie. Google the following:

CONFESSION OF AN EX-ABORTIONIST
By Dr. Bernard Nathanson

It would help immensely in denying ignorance.


How about you stop trying to impose your morality on other people?


First, how about you stop trying to impose your immorality on other people.

Second, I assume you are fine with murder, theft, rape, etc. Since you do not like other people "imposing their morality."

Anarchy for all!



If you take away choice from women what good does that do? It simply creates more unwanted kids unplanned pregnancies and more horror stories from clandestine abortion clinics.


Horrible appeal to emotion.

edit on 26-6-2013 by Shimri because: (no reason given)


And I assume you would be happy to oblige if the government passed a law saying that you needed to have your anus probed every week? After all it's the moral thing to do.



posted on Jun, 26 2013 @ 09:33 PM
link   
reply to post by muse7
 


They have 20 weeks to make a choice.

I understand that incest and rape victims should not be forced to carry a baby to term. Neither should a young woman whose health is at question and frankly any and all woman should be able to up to a certain point. But come on after 20 weeks it's a freaking baby, it kicks and you feel it and theres just no denying it.

I might be hypocritical for saying this but at 20 weeks it should seem that the choice was made.


I'm always baffled by the left on one hand they are all about "save the children, save the children" (guns, crazy school bans, and the famous the "children belong to the entire community"..) but then when it comes to little babies no one wants it's "let them die, they have no right"

Perry has a hard fight ahead of him but it's a worthy cause.



posted on Jun, 26 2013 @ 09:36 PM
link   
I agree with introV, why is this bill such a slap in the face? It bans them after 20 weeks except in special cases, and requires cleaner facilities for the procedure. It does not ban building more of the cleaner facilities.

Whats the big deal? How does this restrict anyone's choice? How does it set women's rights back?




posted on Jun, 26 2013 @ 09:40 PM
link   

Originally posted by brandiwine14
reply to post by muse7
 


They have 20 weeks to make a choice.

I understand that incest and rape victims should not be forced to carry a baby to term. Neither should a young woman whose health is at question and frankly any and all woman should be able to up to a certain point. But come on after 20 weeks it's a freaking baby, it kicks and you feel it and theres just no denying it.

I might be hypocritical for saying this but at 20 weeks it should seem that the choice was made.


I'm always baffled by the left on one hand they are all about "save the children, save the children" (guns, crazy school bans, and the famous the "children belong to the entire community"..) but then when it comes to little babies no one wants it's "let them die, they have no right"

Perry has a hard fight ahead of him but it's a worthy cause.










First of all I think you're confusing fetuses with babies. a fetus is a potential human being. Stop confusing the two. I think we should give women the choice whether to let the fetus fully develop and give birth to it or to abort it. Taking the choice away from them not only promotes clandestine abortion clinics but it also leads to more unwanted children.

Conservatives love to bring up the rights of a fetus, but yet when it's born they don't care about it. No food stamps, no medicaid, no insurance. So who really are the hypocrites here?



posted on Jun, 26 2013 @ 09:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by XTexan
I agree with introV, why is this bill such a slap in the face? It bans them after 20 weeks except in special cases, and requires cleaner facilities for the procedure. It does not ban building more of the cleaner facilities.

Whats the big deal? How does this restrict anyone's choice? How does it set women's rights back?



Why ban them after 20 weeks? Why not leave the choice up to women when to have an abortion?

This bill would close 37 clinics out of the 42, leaving the whole state with only 5 operating clinics.



posted on Jun, 26 2013 @ 09:43 PM
link   
People! It's not about the weeks. 19 - 24 weeks is already the ban, depending on the state. I tried to find out what the cut off point is in Texas, but I keep getting answers like "DON"T KILL YOUR BABY!" and can't get a straight answer. Maybe someone else can? From what I can gather, Texas' present cut is 19 1/2 weeks......?

No folks. This is about making abortion too expensive and far away for your average (s*&t) I mean poor easy girl. Women with means will get the BEST abortions! Complete with vaginal probes!


Any of those sl&%ty girls can just go Mexico.


edit on 26-6-2013 by windword because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 26 2013 @ 09:51 PM
link   
reply to post by windword
 
I live in Texas and have yet to hear of an abortion clinic that will perform the procedure after 12 weeks unless maybe there are a few in the Dallas/Fort worth area as I haven't spoken to any women who are "in the know" in that corner of the state. Maybe someone here may know about that particular area.



posted on Jun, 26 2013 @ 09:54 PM
link   
reply to post by muse7
 


Are you in favor of abortions at 8 1/2 months?

Yes it would close a good chunk of them, but more will be built it is not banned to build more.



posted on Jun, 26 2013 @ 09:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by windword
reply to post by Shimri
 


Why does an anti-abortion bill need a special session in the first place? Why isn't on the docket? AND, Why does it merit a second special session!!!!!!!

Put it on the docket, instead of trying to sneak a bill that NOBODY wants at the tail end, with some special, special session!

This bill IS NOT about woman's health, that's blatantly obvious.


It was not the only thing on the list.

Here is what the 30 day special session was for

*Consider legislation which ratifies and adopts the interim redistricting plans ordered by the federal district court as the permanent plans for districts used to elect members of the Texas House of Representatives, Texas Senate and United States House of Representatives. [Mon May 27, 2013]

*Consider legislation relating to the funding of transportation infrastructure projects. [Mon Jun 10, 2013]

*Consider legislation relating to establishing a mandatory sentence of life with parole for a capital felony committed by a 17-year-old offender. [Tue Jun 11, 2013]

*Consider legislation relating to the regulation of abortion procedures, providers, and facilities. [Tue Jun 11, 2013]



Contrary to what you believe, special sessions are not to try and sneak anything in. In fact, I would argue that special sessions are more highly reported than regular sessions.

And just in case you think that callinga special session, or multiple special sessions is peculiar, it is not.

www.lrl.state.tx.us...



posted on Jun, 26 2013 @ 09:58 PM
link   
Muse, I am not trying to take a women's choice away, other than not giving them the choice by my own means. I bet you're thinking "Omg, you don't want to give them a choice?" No, I said by my own means, let me explain.

I've had my young sex crazed days. Subjectively, I wouldn't be who I am without that part of my life. Two years ago, I stopped having sex by choice, mainly because I was bored with it, not Religious. It caused my girlfriend and I to separate. In my abstinence, I've discovered I can be happier by finding a partner who will respect sex with me. I am also happy knowing I won't risk bringing a child into the world that I cannot support financially. And ultimately, I am happy knowing I won't ever have to make a Woman make the choice to have an Abortion. None of those things that make me happy are reasons why I quit having sex. They are simply things I noticed, that have made me happy, in the wake of my abstinence. I also don't care if people want to have sex all the time, go for it, I don't care, doesn't affect me.

Just a small biography. I do not wish to take away a woman's choice. Matter of fact, I do not care. Astonishing right? Hardly. An abortion will not be on my conscience either way, so I'll let you guys scrap it out, I am simply asking questions. Abortion clinics, no abortion clinics; matters not to me.. I'll still sleep fine at night; I just hope you guys can sleep with your decisions.

So please do not tell me I am taking away a woman's choice. I am honoring women, myself, and babies that SERIOUSLY don't exist. Unlike the fetus you claim isn't anything but some non-living tissue.

Now back to me asking my questions. I am beginning to think my questions were out of left field by the way you responded, so please correct me if I have the wrong facts.

Doesn't this allow a woman to have an abortion still? Within 20 weeks?

And you completely dismissed my proposition/thought of Rep's and Dem's having negotiations. Would you prefer if the bill be put on hold until there were equally as many Surgical Center's as existing Clinics?

What's wrong with a safe, clean, Surgical Center? Too much cost? I'm asking valid serious questions here, please don't attack me with the rhetoric, just answer the questions. It will probably help your cause more than slandering me.

edit on 26-6-2013 by introV because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 26 2013 @ 09:58 PM
link   
reply to post by littled16
 


12 1/2 weeks is what I was told too. But I couldn't believe it. I thought they were just telling me that so that I would make an early decision. Some one said that the Dallas / Ft Worth area has a clinic that accepts patients at 19 1/2.

I don't understand the rush? Do they want to extend the weeks and yet raise the prices? Greedy Mfers!


EDIT: I'm not pregnant folks!
Don't U2U me! All the online boards that I was inquiring to, as to the cut off week of Texas abortion law thought I was!



edit on 26-6-2013 by windword because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 26 2013 @ 09:59 PM
link   
reply to post by XTexan
 


That's pretty much exactly what I was going to say....Strange how no difference is seen at all.


And though rare babies have been born at twenty weeks and survived. A co-worker's grandson was born at 21 weeks and not only survived but is a healthy twelve year old typical boy now. That makes them babies

edit on 26-6-2013 by brandiwine14 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 26 2013 @ 10:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by windword
reply to post by Shimri
 


Okay, we get it. You think abortion is bad.


But that's not what this bill is about. It's about BETTER abortions! Do you get that!


SO you support better abortions.

Good, so you are in favor of SB5 that supports better and safer abortions?



posted on Jun, 26 2013 @ 10:09 PM
link   
reply to post by Shimri
 



No. You misread me. This bill is a sham to get more money for abortions while alienating the at risk and disenfranchised. They say it's about protecting women's health, but it's about making money.




edit on 26-6-2013 by windword because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 26 2013 @ 10:15 PM
link   

Originally posted by KeliOnyx

And here it is folks, this is what the abortion debate is really about. Trying to legislate morality and keep the Godless heathens from having sex.



Really? First, nowhere did I mention religion. That is called a straw man.

Secondly, it is not legislating morality to say that one must deal with the consequences of their actions.

Drinking alcohol makes one drunk. If you do not wish to be drunk, do not drink.

Sex produces babies. If you do not want babies, do not have sex.

Common sense != morality

How about wanting people to deal with the consequences of your actions.


If you put a fraction of effort focusing on what is wrong with you instead of worrying about what everyone else is doing in the bedroom,


Could the same not be said about most every single law in the books? Yet here we are . . .


one day you might get to have sex with a real live girl too.


Hold on. My wife is laughing at you. My 4 children belie the hilariousness of your ad hom.


And no it still is not standing on it's own. It was put in the special session because it would not have passed in the regular session. You can try and dance around that fact all you want, but it is a fact. And for one more fact.


Try actually learning how special sessions work. Then come back and play.


On this issue Rick Perry says "In Texas, we value all life". The night before he executes the States 500th Death Row inmate.


Please learn the difference between innocent and guilty.

unborn human = innocent
deathrow = guilty



posted on Jun, 26 2013 @ 10:16 PM
link   
I'm surprised no one caught this yet, but there was an update to how the first legislative session ended that I thought worth sharing for context of why he's calling a second one. I absolutely would too, in his position. I hadn't seen these details but working for a community site in Texas, they do tend to focus on such things a bit more in-depth.


In the end, after the 13-hour filibuster and all the wrangling over rules, Wendy Davis and her fellow Texas Democrats could do only so much. In the end, it was the citizens in the gallery who made the difference late Tuesday night. With the Texas Senate poised to approve one the harshest anti-abortion laws in the country—just 15 minutes before the midnight deadline—and Senate Democrats apparently out of maneuvers, the crowd took over.

Thousands of orange-clad abortion-rights activists who packed the Texas Capitol all day began roaring louder and louder until they literally shouted down the final minutes of the 30-day special session before Republicans could pass the bill. What followed was three hours of confusion during which no one was sure if the bill actually passed. Republican senators were running around claiming the bill had passed before a midnight deadline, but many observers who watched the debate live didn’t see it that way. The initial time stamp on the Capitol website and on Senate documents placed the vote at 12:02 or 12:03 on June 26. But then someone mysteriously changed the time stamp to make it appear SB 5 passed before the deadline (see the post below for photographic evidence).
Source

That's in the update A.P. Comments at the bottom and came awhile after the announcement had been made that the bill had passed the Senate based on number vote.

Now, for the record, I wouldn't be tolerant or at all respectful toward people pulling a cheap stunt like this to foil a bill I hated, let alone how this one went. Frankly. it puts anarchy over law and chaos over order as the rule of the day. What can be done which one side LIKES...can SURE BE REPEATED on things they don't care to see it done on...and Oh, it will be now, I'm sure.

When they start prohibiting spectators/public from the last portion of important or controversial voting? Recall this moment as to why it happened, IMO. We're a nation of law or we aren't. That has to carry as a value, not a tool of convenience.



posted on Jun, 26 2013 @ 10:16 PM
link   
reply to post by windword
 
I posted about this in another thread and I think I have a good idea as to why they would like to make the official cutoff period 20 weeks. I do agree with a woman's right to choose and to have safe, legal means available in able to make that choice- but I agree with 20 weeks. Here is a quote from my post that explains why:


I am biased on this as when a friend and I were both pregnant with our first children my friend went into premature labor at slightly less than 20 weeks and thanks to an excellent neo-natal ICU and the dedication of the hospital staff and the parents that child will be 25 years old this fall and a mother herself.


Up until that time I had absolutely no idea that a child could be born at such an early point in a pregnancy and be a whole child who could grow up to be healthy and normal in every way. I understand why some people might not feel the same as I since they have probably never witnessed such a thing and only consider a child to be a fetus at 20 weeks, but I have seen differently. Having an abortion is probably one of the hardest decisions a woman ever has to make, but considering a pregnancy at 20 weeks to be an actual child would make that decision extremely harder so I can understand why they wouldn't want to see it that way. It's like being between a rock and a hard place.



posted on Jun, 26 2013 @ 10:18 PM
link   

Originally posted by muse7

Originally posted by Shimri

Originally posted by muse7

You can try to pass all the laws you want regarding a woman's reproductive system, and abortions will still happen. But instead of happening in a clinic they will happen in restrooms with coat hangers.


Ahh yes. The old fallback . . . the coat hanger argument.

Maybe we should make bank robbery safer by legalizing it, so that the poor bank robber won't get shot by the guard and maybe bleed to death slowly and painfully in a back alley, too.

Yes?

Oh, and your coat hanger back-alley argument is a lie. Google the following:

CONFESSION OF AN EX-ABORTIONIST
By Dr. Bernard Nathanson

It would help immensely in denying ignorance.


How about you stop trying to impose your morality on other people?


First, how about you stop trying to impose your immorality on other people.

Second, I assume you are fine with murder, theft, rape, etc. Since you do not like other people "imposing their morality."

Anarchy for all!



If you take away choice from women what good does that do? It simply creates more unwanted kids unplanned pregnancies and more horror stories from clandestine abortion clinics.


Horrible appeal to emotion.

edit on 26-6-2013 by Shimri because: (no reason given)


And I assume you would be happy to oblige if the government passed a law saying that you needed to have your anus probed every week? After all it's the moral thing to do.




Somehow in your mind creating and nurturing a baby = anus probing?

Apples and oranges, mate.

Keep spinning those wheels



new topics

top topics



 
4
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join