• Welcome to OGBoards 10.0, keep in mind that we will be making LOTS of changes to smooth out the experience here and make it as close as possible functionally to the old software, but feel free to drop suggestions or requests in the Tech Support subforum!

R-Rep Joe Walsh " No Exception For Life of Mother for Abortion"

ThinkingWithMyDeac

ThinkingWithMyDeac

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 16, 2011
Messages
8,035
Reaction score
844
Location
Atlanta, Ga
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/10/18/joe-walsh-abortion-exception_n_1983701.html

I just saw this on one of my friends facebook feed. Now we are just piling on the stupidity. Why are there so many people ignorant about science and health. Is it a religious thing? an uneducated thing? It just doesn't make sense. A simple Google search "pregnancy risks" would help this dumbass learn a thing or two. Sorry mom you had a good run but the babies life is more important than yours, besides with today's technology I guarantee you will live. Ectopic pregnancy no problem, pleeclampsia forget about it.
 
The GOP really needs to muzzle these guys for a few weeks. Jeez.
 
Ectopic pregnancies, or pregnancies that occur outside the uterus, are a life-threatening condition that occur in one in every 40 to one in every 100 pregnancies, according to the National Institutes of Health.



SERIOUSLY REPUBLICANS, WHAT THE FUCK. THIS IS NOT RARE. YOU HAVE NO FUCKING EXCUSES
 
And we don't need the ladies cryin'
'Cause the story's sad
'Cause the Rocky Mountain way
Is better than the way we had
 
ThinkingWithMyDeac said:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/10/18/joe-walsh-abortion-exception_n_1983701.html

I just saw this on one of my friends facebook feed. Now we are just piling on the stupidity. Why are there so many people ignorant about science and health. Is it a religious thing? an uneducated thing? It just doesn't make sense. A simple Google search "pregnancy risks" would help this dumbass learn a thing or two. Sorry mom you had a good run but the babies life is more important than yours, besides with today's technology I guarantee you will live. Ectopic pregnancy no problem, pleeclampsia forget about it.
Click to expand...

Mostly yes. The vast majority of people who are religious are certainly not idiots (and clearly there are non-believers who are morons). But the ones like this clown have their common sense blinded by unwavering dogmatic beliefs.
 
I liked him a lot better when he played guitar for the James Gang.
 
not my words, but closely mirror my thoughts on the matter:

The lack of far-reaching advocacy demonstrated by most Pro-Life folks is discouraging. The Right to Life focus usually omits the crucial before and after parts of the issue, as I see the same people fighting against universal pre- and postnatal care, easier access to contraception (2/3rds of all US citizens are unchurched, so it is unrealistic to expect them to adhere to Christian abstinence, you know, like all the Christian singles are...ahem), better nutrition for new mothers, affordable health care for all, the offer of true community to young and vulnerable pregnant women…as these are the tools that will actually reduce abortions. There is a high correlation between social policies like family planning, contraception promotion, comprehensive sex education, and increased health insurance coverage and lower abortion rates.

from Jen Hatmaker's blog post: The Election: Thoughts From a Christian Independent
 
IamThunderbolt said:
not my words, but closely mirror my thoughts on the matter:

The lack of far-reaching advocacy demonstrated by most Pro-Life folks is discouraging. The Right to Life focus usually omits the crucial before and after parts of the issue, as I see the same people fighting against universal pre- and postnatal care, easier access to contraception (2/3rds of all US citizens are unchurched, so it is unrealistic to expect them to adhere to Christian abstinence, you know, like all the Christian singles are...ahem), better nutrition for new mothers, affordable health care for all, the offer of true community to young and vulnerable pregnant women…as these are the tools that will actually reduce abortions. There is a high correlation between social policies like family planning, contraception promotion, comprehensive sex education, and increased health insurance coverage and lower abortion rates.

from Jen Hatmaker's blog post: The Election: Thoughts From a Christian Independent
Click to expand...

She's good.
 
My struggle with abortion was a Constitutional one. Every person in the US is protected by the Constitution. Based on all the knowledge and opinions and science and logic I could gather, I agreed with the SCOTUS on viability as the determining factor as to when personhood begins. To me, that passes Constitutional muster. The law is correct.
 
Last edited:
Only if Mrs. Walsh could have had one for the health of the country.
 
WakeandBake said:
My struggle with abortion was a Constitutional one. Every person in the US is protected by the Constitution. Based on all the knowledge and opinions and science and logic I could gather, I agreed with the SCOTUS on viability as the determining factor as to when personhood begins. To me, that passes Constitutional muster. The law is correct.
Click to expand...

This is where we would disagree. For me, the issue is that without intervention, the baby would reach viability. In most cases, the only thing stopping the baby from being viable is the abortion.
 
IamThunderbolt said:
This is where we would disagree. For me, the issue is that without intervention, the baby would reach viability. In most cases, the only thing stopping the baby from being viable is the abortion.
Click to expand...

But that is not a Constitutional issue. Up to viability, the host (potential mother) has control over that is happening to her body and is not infringing on the Constitutional rights of a person.
 
I am in the Bill Clinton camp when it comes to abortion. It should be safe, rare and legal. I think the we as a society could do a better job on the rare front. "Pro-life" people would be much more effective IMO trying to limit unwanted pregnancies before they exists, opening up adoption channels for traditional and nontraditional adopting parents and educating women on options other than abortion. I am "pro-choice" but I do think abortion is used FAR too often as birth control.
 
WakeandBake said:
But that is not a Constitutional issue. Up to viability, the host (potential mother) has control over that is happening to her body and is not infringing on the Constitutional rights of a person.
Click to expand...


Yeah, our disagreement is over when rights of a person begin. I disagree with them as they are currently defined.
 
I thought that it isn't that the fetus isn't a person, and therefore without rights. Rather the fetus is a person, but that the rights of the mother prevail up until viability. Is that not correct?
 
IamThunderbolt said:
Yeah, our disagreement is over when rights of a person begin. I disagree with them as they are currently defined.
Click to expand...

Understood, andI respect your opinion. I think viability is the best measurement for personhood, and in turn Constitutional protection. It is very logical to me.

Before viability, the woman is protected by the Constitution to determine what happens within her own body. If she chooses to allow what is happening in her body to reach a point where a viable person exists there, she of course cannot trample on the rights of that person.
 
The viability standard was never a good one. Long term, science/medicine will be able to push "viability" earlier and earlier. Is a fertilized egg "viable" if it could be incubated from conception? At some point, the law will have to answer that question.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top