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.

 

Texas GOP skirts law on anti-abortion bill

page: 2
4
<< 1   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 8 2013 @ 03:08 PM
link   

Originally posted by NOTurTypical
reply to post by muse7
 


Well, with laws passed against abortion. The numbers would fall quite a bit from the murder-fest that is currently going on today. Remember Obama's statement, "But if we can save just one life..."

We could save millions of them.


So you gonna adopt and feed all those babies? Take care of them all day too?

You're such a hypocrite. You're against a public healthcare system yet you pretend to be concerned with fetuses being murdered. You should probably start caring about the people already alive suffering due to having awful insurance or no insurance at all.


edit on 8-7-2013 by WaterBottle because: (no reason given)




posted on Jul, 8 2013 @ 03:57 PM
link   
reply to post by WaterBottle
 


False dichotomy fallacy. What I am for is for people to take the necessary prrcautions not to get pregnant in the first place if they don't have the financial means to feed another human.



posted on Jul, 8 2013 @ 04:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by buster2010

Originally posted by NOTurTypical
reply to post by muse7
 


Well, with laws passed against abortion. The numbers would fall quite a bit from the murder-fest that is currently going on today. Remember Obama's statement, "But if we can save just one life..."

We could save millions of them.


And what would be done with these millions of unwanted children? Stick them in orphanages which are overcrowded already? Raise them in homes where the way they are treated almost guarantees them to grow up to be criminals? Adoption is out of the question seeing how people are more interested in buying third world kids instead of helping a child at home.


See above post.

I realize personal responsibility is basically hate-speech in this day and age, but it's still my position.



posted on Jul, 8 2013 @ 04:04 PM
link   

Originally posted by NOTurTypical
reply to post by WaterBottle
 


False dichotomy fallacy. What I am for is for people to take the necessary prrcautions not to get pregnant in the first place if they don't have the financial means to feed another human.


Sooo only people that are well off financially should be allowed to have kids? I just don't get your position. I mean if you love fetuses so much then you must be for providing these kids with food stamps and medical services in case their parents are not well off financially?



posted on Jul, 8 2013 @ 04:45 PM
link   
What a great idea! Since we have already established that we can't afford to feed, and shelter the children if they are not aborted because they can't take care of themselves then we should treat every human the same way.

Being an orphan myself, I am VERY glad I wasn't aborted! I also grew up poor and have had my fair share of hard times. I didn't turn out to bad if I do say so myself. I have and always have worked an honest job, never been to prison, and don't deal or do drugs. So the stereotypical statement that all these orphans will turn out bad is flat out ridiculous. Every human should at least have a chance at life instead of being flushed down the sewer. An abortion is performed, a baby is dead, it's murder in my opinion.

Pladuim



posted on Jul, 8 2013 @ 05:20 PM
link   
reply to post by txinfidel
 


If it's treated as murder, what should the punishment be? Would it be retro-active?



posted on Jul, 8 2013 @ 05:31 PM
link   
Did we not just cut food stamps because we can't afford to feed the poor? Oh, starvation must be the preferred birth control for the GOP.



posted on Jul, 8 2013 @ 06:00 PM
link   
reply to post by CB328
 


I agree with you 100% this about how laws are shove up the rears of people want them or not, if you let the religious right get away with their crap women will be barefooted and pregnant for the entire adult productive lives, not better that pushing sharia law in the US.

As for abortion is still legal in the US as per supreme court up to this day.

Those republicans that shove this laws like dictators will be dealt with a challenge to rights to abortion soon enough.

And for anybody defending this show of dictatorship powers Shame on you. No wonder we as citizens are getting screw by our own leaders everyday with corruption. shame, shame and more shame.



posted on Jul, 8 2013 @ 06:20 PM
link   
reply to post by CB328
 


I commend you for pointing out the dirty little truth about republican politics but I fear that you may have opened yourself up for quite the debate, seeing how the topic on the Texas senate floor at the time, was late term abortions. Just the same, F&S for the OP!

However, the real story here is how the Texas GOP attempted to falsify the voting records after the session had ended. This IMO, should be punishable by law.

From the same source article; www.cnn.com...


And then, after Texans watching in the gallery erupted in jeers at the strong-handed tactics Republicans were using, the GOP leadership held a vote after midnight, after the special session had officially ended. They then changed the time stamp on the official record of the vote, only changing it back after they were caught red-handed.


I wouldn't go so far as to say that every republican feels the same way when it comes to the abortion issue, but there is ample evidence to prove that the party as a whole, would do everything in their power to eliminate the ability of women to obtain one. While I put most of the blame for this phenomena on the "Bible-thumping" wing of the GOP, the rest of the party must also share some of the responsibility.

While they, (the GOP) continue to lean on their argument that it's all about saving a life, they also are opposed to birth control, the morning after pill, Medicaid, unemployment insurance, food stamps, school lunch programs and pretty much everything intended to assist and promote the general welfare of disadvantaged americans.

For starters, I don't think that anyone is "pro-abortion" and that's especially true when it comes to late term abortions. On the other hand, I think that anyone who has looked into the issue would agree that those abortions conducted after 20 wks. constitute a very small percentage of abortions and they are usually the ones where the mother's life is at stake. The fact that she had already carried the fetus for 20 wks. would seem to indicate that she was attempting to bear the child if possible.

Not knowing a person's individual circumstances, I don't feel comfortable putting an "all inclusive" ban in place, but that's just me. Personally, I'm inclined to believe that the people best suited to make that decision would be the woman who's life it affects and the physician treating her. As far as all the other crap that was put in the bill for the sole purpose of shutting down women's health clinics, well let's just say that it's a perfect lead-in demonstration to the subject of my next paragraph.

On another note, there is also ample evidence that when they, (the GOP) can't seem to win over an issue under the current rules, they just change the rules. That's exactly what we're witnessing with respect to the recent gerrymandering, shorter voting hours and reduced polling sites, as well as the new voter ID laws sweeping the country. If they can't get you to vote the way they want you to, they'll limit your ability to do so or just take away your right to vote all together.

That's precisely why they say that "all politics are local."


edit on 8-7-2013 by Flatfish because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 8 2013 @ 06:56 PM
link   

Originally posted by muse7

Originally posted by NOTurTypical
reply to post by WaterBottle
 


False dichotomy fallacy. What I am for is for people to take the necessary prrcautions not to get pregnant in the first place if they don't have the financial means to feed another human.


Sooo only people that are well off financially should be allowed to have kids? I just don't get your position. I mean if you love fetuses so much then you must be for providing these kids with food stamps and medical services in case their parents are not well off financially?


You can go to any Planned Parenthood office and get a garbage bag-full of free condoms. Sorry, I'm not taking the bait on the appeal to emotion argument.



posted on Jul, 8 2013 @ 07:00 PM
link   
reply to post by Flatfish
 


Changing the rules is what seems to become the norm when a country is run by morons, crocks and corruption.

After all what can we expect for those that fill their pockets with interest money, like whores they are no matter where the money comes from, be dirty, honest or corrupted.

More often than not is nothing but corruption paying out corruption.



posted on Jul, 8 2013 @ 07:25 PM
link   
reply to post by CB328
 


cheaters do win. Your planet is run by A$$holes.



posted on Jul, 8 2013 @ 08:18 PM
link   

Originally posted by NOTurTypical

Originally posted by muse7

Originally posted by NOTurTypical
reply to post by WaterBottle
 


False dichotomy fallacy. What I am for is for people to take the necessary prrcautions not to get pregnant in the first place if they don't have the financial means to feed another human.


Sooo only people that are well off financially should be allowed to have kids? I just don't get your position. I mean if you love fetuses so much then you must be for providing these kids with food stamps and medical services in case their parents are not well off financially?


You can go to any Planned Parenthood office and get a garbage bag-full of free condoms. Sorry, I'm not taking the bait on the appeal to emotion argument.


Not everyone lives near a Planned Parenthood. Condoms also break.

People have sex, babies are made, some people have no means to take care of these babies, this is a reality of life. The personal responsibility argument is irrelevant unless you live in a world where everyone has money, a stable household, no mental/physical handicaps, no drug addictions, a good job on and on.

The personal responsibility argument ignores the outcome of starving, neglected and abused babies once they are born.


edit on 8-7-2013 by WaterBottle because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 8 2013 @ 10:07 PM
link   
reply to post by WaterBottle
 


A long time ago I learned that it was never and has never been about saving "babies", because babies need to feed, need care and cost money.

Is about saving "fetuses" see ones the babies are born is not longer the problem of the anti abortion right, that is when the scorn to the single mothers start, is only their problem when is a "fetus".



posted on Jul, 8 2013 @ 11:10 PM
link   
I highly doubt abortion clinics will close their doors. There is just too much money in the business. They have to update their standards and operations will be as usual. The first ones to update their standards will be the ones making a whole lot of money.

The whole liberal agenda is retarded using fear mongering tactics as if abortion will go extinct.



posted on Jul, 9 2013 @ 05:21 AM
link   
reply to post by WaterBottle
 


Well if it's too far for a person to drive to a PP clinic for condoms then I guess they won't be driving there for an abortion now will they? And if they are too poor to buy condoms from the drug store or supermarket how do you expect them to afford an abortion? People need to be responsible and take ownership of their choices.



posted on Jul, 9 2013 @ 07:14 PM
link   
reply to post by Philodemus
 


My questions were not hypothetical.....any answers? Anyone? Hello? This thread died fast.....Almost as fast as a fetus in its.....I'll stop



posted on Jul, 11 2013 @ 05:41 PM
link   
Definitely cheap and underhanded. I really can't see this being done for other issues though (pro lifers could simply say it's a matter of life and as such it's acceptable), but I could be wrong.

Originally posted by neo96
Take a good look at abortion activists are fighting for:

They are not fighting for reproductive rights they already have them what they are fighting for is the RIGHT to murder.

Just like the other laws against murder.
edit on 8-7-2013 by neo96 because: (no reason given)
I did take a good look at what they're fighting for, and quite frankly, I can't blame you and other pro-lifers for trying to paint them as murderers, considering that you're fighting against a woman having the right to her own body.


Originally posted by txinfidel
reply to post by neo96
 


If they had they're way it would be illegal to have more than one child.
Yes, people opposed to controlling what a woman does with their body would clearly support a measure that controls what a woman does with their own body.
edit on 11-7-2013 by technical difficulties because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 11 2013 @ 05:52 PM
link   
This foolish bill won't stop abortions. At least not among the women that can afford to book a flight to Puerto Vallerta or Guadalajara. And the poor women will be left to the backalley clothes hangers, drano douches and cytotec.


Flea market abortions will become a growth industry in Texas.

www.theatlanticwire.com...

Is this really what Texans want?
edit on 11-7-2013 by olaru12 because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
4
<< 1   >>

log in

join