- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Coaching Changes
- 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: When did Republicans stop caring about bodily autonomy?
Posted on 5/16/19 at 10:50 am to civiltiger07
Posted on 5/16/19 at 10:50 am to civiltiger07
quote:
And you still wanted to support abortions for convenience.
Just as nefariously, BamaAxis and the Demons want to warehouse children who aren't aborted into ghettos so they can starve, grow up angry and vote for Democrats who will continue to promote legislation that continues the cycle of suffering...
One generation of "tough love" cures much of America's ills, but the Demons are against it because starving, angry children grow up to be faithful Democrat voters...
0
Posted on 5/16/19 at 10:51 am to BamaAtl
quote:
That's a pretty good explanation of why one person's rights don't supersede another's.
I’d recommend you do the same.
Posted on 5/16/19 at 10:51 am to BamaAtl
quote:It is.
if contraception were widely available
quote:Nope. One could potentially drive drunk, and NOT cause an accident. That doesn’t relieve a drunk driver from responsibility when they kill someone else.
If that were the 100% guaranteed outcome and if contraception were widely available and 100% effective and if rape/abuse never happened, sure.
quote:So if one person load one bullet in revolver, spins he cylinder, points it at another person and pulls the trigger... it wouldn’t be murder because the outcome was “uncertain”?
But none of that happens in that way, so we have to account for uncertainty. Clearly.
This post was edited on 5/16/19 at 10:52 am
Posted on 5/16/19 at 10:51 am to BamaAtl
quote:
People who are surviving with medical intervention
are non-viable according to the definition you supplied:
quote:
non-viable = unable to survive regardless of medical intervention
So, is viability a consideration for the right to kill something, or isn't it?
This post was edited on 5/16/19 at 10:51 am
Posted on 5/16/19 at 10:51 am to Revelator
quote:
When did Republicans stop caring about bodily autonomy?
When the decision affects two bodies.
So you're okay with the rights of one human superseding the rights of another, even at risk to the latter?
Posted on 5/16/19 at 10:51 am to genro
If someone is keeping you from paying yo bills, you can vacuum out they brain.
Do you even Constitutitutition?
Do you even Constitutitutition?
Posted on 5/16/19 at 10:51 am to RogerTheShrubber
quote:Exactly.
Autonomy? Holy shite..
Posted on 5/16/19 at 10:51 am to BamaAtl
Not this new Republican.
I'm ALL for you and your ilk aborting yourselves away.
Too bad your mother didn't choose an abortion.
I'm ALL for you and your ilk aborting yourselves away.
Too bad your mother didn't choose an abortion.
Posted on 5/16/19 at 10:51 am to Dawgfanman
quote:
You said earlier in the thread there were no exceptions..
For rape/incest, which there aren't. Guess Roy Moore still lives on in Alabama.
Posted on 5/16/19 at 10:52 am to therick711
quote:
There is no legislation.
Can the state force you to provide a kidney to transplant to an individual who is dying, provided you'll both live? It's to save a life, so you should have no problem with it.
Posted on 5/16/19 at 10:52 am to Oilfieldbiology
State Health departments hand out free condoms all day long .. every day. As well as oral contraceptives.
Posted on 5/16/19 at 10:52 am to BamaAtl
quote:When are you going to provide anything of substance? Are you that scared? Come on little girl, put your money where your mouth is...
If you believe that, you've clearly not been reading the thread.
Posted on 5/16/19 at 10:52 am to FooManChoo
quote:
Her right to do what she wants with her body is most certainly superseded by the right of another person to exist.
Not when that individual can exist only through her giving up her rights.
Posted on 5/16/19 at 10:53 am to BamaAtl
quote:Yet another self boom. You’ve stepped into another logic trap.
She has the right to not have her bodily autonomy superseded by another.
Posted on 5/16/19 at 10:53 am to LSUGrrrl
quote:
Women absolutely have control of their own body.
Unless they don't want to bring a fetus to term, per Republicans.
Posted on 5/16/19 at 10:53 am to the808bass
In some abortions all but the head is born. So we have a baby from neck down and the head is still a fetus. Luckily they slice the head open and suck out the brains. No harm done. Just don't nick that torso or those limbs flailing around or it's assault with a deadly weapon
This post was edited on 5/16/19 at 10:54 am
Posted on 5/16/19 at 10:53 am to BamaAtl
quote:For most women, all they have to do is take care of themselves and they take care of their unborn children. They don't have to "do" anything in that regard. The actions that are being taken in this discussion are women purposefully ending the lives of their children.
Can the state force you to provide a kidney to transplant to an individual who is dying, provided you'll both live? It's to save a life, so you should have no problem with it.
Posted on 5/16/19 at 10:53 am to BamaAtl
quote:
Can the state force you to provide a kidney to transplant to an individual who is dying, provided you'll both live? It's to save a life, so you should have no problem with it.
No. But the state can stop me from taking someone else’s kidney because it’s more convenient for me to have it.
Posted on 5/16/19 at 10:53 am to genro
quote:
contraception isn't available and some people aren't even sure what causes pregnancy
Given the state of abstinence-only education in these Republican strongholds (what's Alabama, 50th in education? 49th?), that's a fairly accurate statement.
Posted on 5/16/19 at 10:54 am to BamaAtl
quote:
Can the state force you to provide a kidney to transplant to an individual who is dying, provided you'll both live? It's to save a life, so you should have no problem with it.
Can the state force you to feed, clothe, bathe, provide shelter for, etc another person? do you feel you have bodily "autonomy" when you are forced to labor to keep another person alive, by the state?
Page 11 of 52
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News