- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Here's the quote from the Virginia governor's press conference on their new abortion bill
Posted on 1/30/19 at 6:19 pm to ShortyRob
Posted on 1/30/19 at 6:19 pm to ShortyRob
quote:Shorty, I am discussing why legislators might see a need for enacting legislation to protect Roe-type rights in the face of potential changes in SCOTUS.
It is not in my realm of mental capacity to imagine the depraved nature as someone who would think there is a need to write a bill that allows a perfectly healthy baby to be aborted for mental health reason during labor
If you're able to wrap your brain around that goodonya
If we are talking about the specifics of this legislation, I have ALWAYS said that I personally oppose late-term convenience abortions.
1
Posted on 1/30/19 at 6:19 pm to AggieHank86
quote:That is a bit like saying states are legalizing pot because they believe the Feds might step in and outlaw it. One needn't be a "scholar" to realize that is a nonsensical position.
am simply expressing an opinion as to why statue legislators (who are NOT scholars) might want to enact preemptive legislation.
Posted on 1/30/19 at 6:21 pm to NC_Tigah
quote:What it WOULD do is force the Feds to intervene in exactly the way states supposedly feared.
That is a bit like saying states are legalizing pot because they believe the Feds might step in and outlaw it.
Posted on 1/30/19 at 6:23 pm to AggieHank86
quote:
Shorty, I am discussing why legislators might see a need for enacting legislation to protect Roe-type rights in the face of potential changes in SCOTUS.
I'm no legal scholar but I'm failing to see how legalization of post birth murder is necessary. Maybe you can explain the nuance to is neanderthals
Posted on 1/30/19 at 6:23 pm to L.A.
anyone that is a willing participant and/or who believes in the right to abort babies need to burn in hell...
Posted on 1/30/19 at 6:24 pm to L.A.
Link please? Want to share with dumbass liberals on fb
Posted on 1/30/19 at 6:29 pm to ThruThickandThin
quote:
Link please? Want to share with dumbass liberals on fb
Google the first sentence of the text and a YouTube video will appear.
Posted on 1/30/19 at 6:31 pm to Powerman
quote:First, the governor seems to have been running his mouth about a topic NOT EVEN COVERED by the proposed legislation.quote:I'm no legal scholar but I'm failing to see how legalization of post birth murder is necessary. Maybe you can explain the nuance to is neanderthals
Shorty, I am discussing why legislators might see a need for enacting legislation to protect Roe-type rights in the face of potential changes in SCOTUS.
Second, none of these proposed statutes deal with a post-birth situation. They are abortion-rights statutes, none of which are NEARLY as broad as the Board hysteria would lead one to believe.
Third, the idea of a SCOTUS that would negate ROE scares a LOT of people. Is it really surprising that they are enacting legislation to protect rights that they see as having been essentially-immutable for fifty years?
Posted on 1/30/19 at 6:32 pm to L.A.
That is sick. 
Late-term abortions and post-birth murder will go along way to ending Roe v. Wade as we know it. This will push a lot of people who were on the fence about abortions clearly in to the pro-life movement.
quote:
Third, the idea of a SCOTUS that would negate ROE scares a LOT of people.
Late-term abortions and post-birth murder will go along way to ending Roe v. Wade as we know it. This will push a lot of people who were on the fence about abortions clearly in to the pro-life movement.
This post was edited on 1/30/19 at 6:37 pm
Posted on 1/30/19 at 6:33 pm to AggieHank86
quote:
First, the governor seems to have been running his mouth about a topic NOT EVEN COVERED by the proposed legislation
Fine. But let's all at least acknowledge that his rhetoric on the matter is genocidal.
Posted on 1/30/19 at 6:34 pm to Powerman
quote:I disagree, because it appears to me that he was taking about a non-viable birth.quote:Fine. But let's all at least acknowledge that his rhetoric on the matter is genocidal.
First, the governor seems to have been running his mouth about a topic NOT EVEN COVERED by the proposed legislation
I don't see anything remotely "genocidal" about allowing a non-viable birth to receive palliative care and a pain-free death.
Non-viable births are a TINY fraction of one percent of births. That is not "genocide" under ANY definition of the term.
This post was edited on 1/30/19 at 6:38 pm
Posted on 1/30/19 at 6:37 pm to AggieHank86
quote:Really.
First, the governor seems to have been running his mouth about a topic NOT EVEN COVERED by the proposed legislation.
Because I literally just heard the bill's author state that the bill would allow for abortion at any point in labor.
Posted on 1/30/19 at 6:38 pm to AggieHank86
quote:
I disagree, because it appears to me that he was taking about a non-viable birth
Sure if you completely ignore his comments about severe deformities.
You can't murder people because they're deformed.
Posted on 1/30/19 at 6:40 pm to Powerman
quote:If he was ACTUALLY talking about VIABLE births with deformities, I agree with you completely, but follow-up statements from his office seem to confirm that he was talking about deformities that result in non-viable births ... not a harelip.quote:Sure if you completely ignore his comments about severe deformities.
I disagree, because it appears to me that he was taking about a non-viable birth
You can't murder people because they're deformed.
This post was edited on 1/30/19 at 6:41 pm
Posted on 1/30/19 at 6:41 pm to AggieHank86
quote:
If he was ACTUALLY talking about VIABLE births with deformities, I agree with you completely, but follow-up statements from his office seem to confirm that he was talking about non-viable births.
Yes after his comments clearly advocated the murder of the deformed I'd imagine it would necessitate some damage control.
Posted on 1/30/19 at 6:42 pm to L.A.
Can’t get it to post but basically his response about his comment is that he totally didn’t mean that. Just what would happen if a “non viable fetus or severely deformed fetus” was with the mother and she went into labor
This post was edited on 1/30/19 at 6:43 pm
Posted on 1/30/19 at 6:42 pm to Powerman
quote:
You can't murder people because they're deformed.
This guy did:
Posted on 1/30/19 at 6:44 pm to AggieHank86
quote:
statements from his office seem to confirm that he was talking about deformities that result in non-viable births ... not a harelip.
There is no logical reason to even bring deformities into the discussion. If they're so severe that the child isn't viable then it would just fall under that umbrella.
I'm guessing the governor is educated. Do you think he would choose his words that poorly?
Posted on 1/30/19 at 6:44 pm to Sentrius
quote:
What the mother and the family want is irrelevant and should be disregarded when it comes to an infant that is still alive.
Nonsense
Posted on 1/30/19 at 6:45 pm to L.A.
quote:
"If a mother is in labor, I can tell you exactly what would happen. The infant would be delivered. The infant would be kept comfortable. The infant would be resuscitated if that’s what the mother and the family desired, and then a discussion would ensue between the physicians and the mother,"
The situation where this makes perfect sense is clear to anyone who has ever spent time in a NICU.
Page 6 of 12
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News