Ask a vocal pro-choicer this question:
“At what point in your mother’s pregnancy with you would it have become unacceptable for her to abort you?”
Not some abstract “woman” excercising “reproductive rights”. Your mother.
Not some abstract “Fetus” or “clump of cells” or “tissue mass”. You. The person you were born as, and became.
When would you, Mr/Ms. Pro-Choicer celebrating legislature considering abortion through 40 weeks of gestation on demand, tell your mother the life you’re living now had enough worth to consider it human?
Mohammed Ali in his prime didn’t duck and weave and gyrate like what you’re about to see.
Thumbs up on version2. Well stated. Good post.
… I might mention that I recall there is a subset of “baby killers” who’s self-worth (self-respect) is so low that they would answer the question, “Any time she wanted. I should never have been born”. Which does line up with the well-known and wide-spread mental health issues among the left.
The question of when you became you gets into metaphysics (since many people believe that “you” requires metaphysics to define).
I am bothered by abortion being seen as a positive good by perhaps 20% of Americans & perhaps 100% of Democrat politicians.
The idea is that somehow a woman is not truly human if she cannot legally abort her child.
I think that a more interesting question is “is it ever wrong for a woman to choose to abort her child?”
That’s a good question too, UMMP.
if abortion is a positive good
as it prevents unwanted children
which single mothers cannot care for
and reduces overpopulation
which produces climate change
perhaps we should ecourage abortion
among the population that seems
unable to care for its children
and has too many of them already
heading for prison or an early grave
what if we pay a bounty for
mothers in certain classes
to abort their babies
whats the price point at which
paying a bounty for certain abortions
offsets the long term societal cost of
not killing those babies
and should it be a sliding scale
paying more for some people to abort
than for others
The key to the Supreme Court decision is that the political issue of abortion can never die. No matter what is in place, no matter for how long it is place, no matter what the people voted it can be brought forward to be changed with no real way for an end to be made.
Roe sought to give each side a partial victory preserving the rights of each woman while protecting viable fetuses equally across all jurisdictions. The Court now has closed the door to any reason and any equality ensuring that power available will be used to the extreme at any opportunity.
Emery on January 25, 2023 at 9:08 am said:
The key to the Supreme Court decision is that the political issue of abortion can never die.
It wasn’t settled before Roe V Wade, it wasn’t settled after Casey, and it’s not settled after Dobbs.
The bozoes who drone on and on and on and on about “our democracy” are anxious to impose abortion from conception past birth by the SC or by the federal legislature imposing its will on unwilling states.
Emery’s comments are either banal truths or falsehoods. His 9:08 was a bit of each.
Emery
At what point in your mother’s pregnancy with you would it have become unacceptable for her to abort you?
A state could make abortion illegal and call it murder. A neighboring state could allow for abortion and make it legal. How does that work?
Some states it’s murder — others it’s legal…
Emery always has to answer from the POV of The Collective™ (“My name is Legion”). He has to, for him to speak as an individual would make him a class traitor subjecting him and his collective to immediate sanction. For Emery and his leftist ilk the only thing that matters is the collective, individual members come and go but the only thing that survives, is The Collective™ (“My name is Legion”). All value, all good, and all of the future resides in The Collective™ (“My name is Legion”)
If Emery were to answer in the individual voice he would rapidly find himself in an old style Maoist struggle session.
To revert to old style Anglo-Saxon english;
Emery is a coward!
Right now, Utah could pass a law making gambling a capital crime.
But in neighboring Nevada gambling is legal!
How can this be? My is spinning!
The question “When does life begin?” is similar to the question of the number of angels capable of dancing on the point of a needle. There will be answers, but there will be many, and they’re all irrelevant to informing any practical policy decisions.
In fact, that characteristic is precisely why Republicans settled upon abortion as what has become a famously potent cudgel for political purposes. There is no perfect answer, there are no perfect solutions, but invoking the emotionally-charged hot-button issue has peeled-off a sector of the population to vote reliably Republican.
Public policy where abortion is available as a regulated medical procedure available to a woman, and based on her own decision, in privacy, with medical consultation is both the popular, practical, moral public policy. It protects the life/health of the mother, places the decision where it belongs, and mitigates dangerous black-markets for the procedure.
The policy in no way affects religious practice, and avoids draconian measures by government.
Emery, Always the equivocator answers as he perforce must in the name of The Collective™ (“My name is Legion”)
Emery,
At what point in your mother’s pregnancy with you would it have become unacceptable for her to abort you?
Mac, hey that’s my line, but yes Emery is a coward!
minnesota is well on its way to becoming an baby killing sanctuary state
hopefully we will draw abortion tourists from the dakotas and iowa and beyond
a boom for our hospitality industry while reducing unwanted pregnancies
and reducing overpopulation which leads to climate change
why would we want to jeopardize that by supporting a national law
which might be more restrictive than ours
and would deprive us of the tourism
states rights baby
well not baby
but you take my meaning
Emery squeaked, “where abortion is available as a regulated medical procedure available to a woman, and based on her own decision, in privacy, with medical consultation”
Apparently his collective hasn’t received the memo yet; several state legislators are proposing bills that would allow abortions by trained technicians other than doctors or nurse practitioners. While these proposals would not legalize the back alley abortion it would create an environment where you could go to a Nail Salon, get a manicure and an abortion provided by trained technicians.
Emery on January 25, 2023 at 9:52 am said:
The question “When does life begin?” is similar to the question of the number of angels capable of dancing on the point of a needle.
Is the egg alive? Yes. Is the sperm alive? Without a doubt. What happens when they meet and join? Still alive. You can actually look at it under a microscope and see all of the processes that keep a cell alive going on.
People who know nothing about biology should refrain from discussing biology.
The question of personhood is tough. We know that people who cannot live indentently are people, or we treat them as though they are. A newborn will survive a few hours if it not cared for. I think the record is around a week under some unusual circumstances. The Roe V Wade viability test might have been good fifty years ago, but if you grab onto that straw what happens when artificial wombs are developed? I admit that may not be a problem, the mother may just want it out of her, but what if the process is burdensome? Surgery, maybe, that will leave a scar and cause pain.
You have a real problem if your personhood test involves physical helplessness or consciousness because it is easy to think of persons who are helpless and or not conscious.
You can make it simple by saying that personhood depends on the mother’s choice to abort or carry to term a baby, but then you have a problem if the mother changes her mind.Surely a baby in the womb cannot be a person or not a person depending on the mother’s state of mind! Plus it throws a monkey wrench into the “people are just a kind of animal” argument, because we wouldn’t accept that a thing was a chimp depending on what its mother thought.
Among Americans overall, most people (72%) say that “the decision about whether to have an abortion should belong solely to the pregnant woman” describes their views at least somewhat well, and more than half (56%) say the same about the statement “human life begins at conception, so a fetus is a person with rights.”
The 34% is the share among abortion rights supporters who say “human life begins at conception, so a fetus is a person with rights.”
https://www.pewresearch.org/religion/2022/05/06/americas-abortion-quandary/
@John “Bigman” Jones
My hard-left parroting boss revealed his inner racist when he suggested a payoff for certain women to get sterilized or have abortions. He didn’t understand why we all thought he was racist. We all LOL’d after he left.
@ Woolly: What kind of entitlement on the body of another does a human have?
excellent question e
woman gives birth to baby
sets it out in the snow
baby dies
cops arrest mom for child neglect
mom says hey that child is outside my body
she is not entitled to anything from me
i just committed a very very late term abortion
leave me alone
e cheers
Emery is blathering again. “entitlement on the body of another” is a meaningless phrase. Does a child have an entitlement to the care of his or her mother?
Two points:
1. If the numbers are in the pro-choice crowd’s favor, how is it in the FIFTY YEARS of Roe v. Wade standing did the pro-choice crowd, especially those years when those politically aligned with them controlled both houses of Congress and the Presidency, did a federal law not get proposed and passed? After all, even their blessed saint RBG conceded Roe v. Wade was bad law.
2. I asked recently on Twitter when someone crowed about how it shouldn’t be controversial what a woman does with her own body (except when it comes to administering an experimental vaccine for a deadly virus with 95+% survival rate): At what point does a fetus become a baby? At what point does that fetus/baby considered a person? Because at that moment, that person’s rights may not trampled by the mother’s “rights over her own body”. They are sharing the body on a short-term basis. Of course, we have exceptions to the rule such as a grave risk to the mother’s health. Government does a lot of things nowadays that it has not business doing, but ensuring one person’s exercise of rights does not impede on another’s exercise of their rights.
Emery puked;
@ Woolly: What kind of entitlement on the body of another does a human have?
Sheer sophistry!
the most significant difference between emery and ChatGPT(that he obviously cribs from) is that ChatGPT has the demonstrated ability to learn.
This question, when does life begin, depends on how much you value girl’s and women’s lives, health, autonomy, and equality. A focus on the fetus diverts attention away from women and girls. Many people are comfortable with that and see nothing wrong with putting girls and women last. Some people choose to attack women through their biology and pretend that each zygote — each that is in the body of a girl or woman they want to control, that is — is so precious it is more valuable than she is.
Emery
You have deflected like crazy, but you still have not answered…
At what point in your mother’s pregnancy with you would it have become unacceptable for her to abort you?
Emery does not believe that a woman has any responsibility for her part in the sex act.
If she consents to sex she implicitly assumes the responsibilities inherent in that consent. If she wants to be a fuck bunny she should get a tubal ligation.
So the red wave turned into light spotting, because Roe v. Wade was overturned, and the right-wing answer is to double down on restricting women’s rights.
Brilliant. Way to learn.
Emery sniveled;
So the red wave turned into light spotting…
Once again Emery displays his raging misogyny by using a normal female biological function to describe his enemies, intimating that they are as unclean and contemptible as any woman.
Way to go Emery!
Regarding the claim that abortion is about women’s health, not really. STDs have skyrocketed since Roe was decided, as have the various forms of rape. One might assume that legal abortion serves primarily as a way for cads to avoid responsibility for the children they help to conceive.
Which would be why pro-life sentiments are higher among women than among men. They know what the realities are.
That noted, it’s worth saying that a key part of the anti-infanticide battle is making it clear to doctors that they have a choice. They can practice medicine, or they can perform abortions, but not both. When that case is made, there will not be a sufficient market for abortion outside big cities.
“A focus on the fetus diverts attention away from women and girls.”
Only if you don’t consider the fetus to be worthy of attention. Only if you have already decided it is not entitled to rights. Only if you refuse to honestly discuss the most important question in the debate.
E uses circular reasoning: we don’t need to consider whether an unborn child is entitled to rights because a child is not entitled to rights as long as it is unborn.
Liberals convinced the Roe court to poison the discussion by limiting it to women and the state. Republicans want to free the discussion by expanding it to include the one person whose interests are most affected by the decision whether to abort or not – the unborn child.
Apparently Emery is having his usual difficulties perceiving reality:
Emery to me:
Go ahead and push for them. If you think the backlash in 2022 hurt you wait until 2024.
—
This is nuts. The only comments I have made about the midterms & abortion was to note that in WI in 2022, despite extremely strict anti-abortion laws, and despite the Dems running heavily on a pro-abortion theme, the GOP kept the US senate seat that was on the ballot, flipped a Dem seat in the US congress to GOP, and increased its near veto proof majority in both the state house & senate.
Emery is delirious. He literally believes that his hallucinations are real.
Emery also does not seem to understand that the GOP gained control of the US house, and in terms of popular vote, won 53%-47% over the dems. The GOP gained US house seats in both the 2020 & 2022 elections.
Emery’s comment could not have been more wrong about the facts.
http://www.shotinthedark.info/wp/?p=84283#comments
Y’know, from the comments on this post, you would never guess that Emery never saw a covid mandate he didn’t love.
It’s obviously not about freedom, it is about turning women from the font of life to, as aristotle said, spindly, mutilated men.
Wanna see some gymnastics?
Late term abortions aren’t a thing the way you’ve allowed yourself to be trickled into thinking they are. The only thing that restricting access to abortion later in pregnancy will ever do is cause unnecessary death and additional physical and emotional pain to women who have just received the worst news of their lives, that the wanted child they have been carrying for many months has catastrophic abnormalities and won’t survive.
There is no woman casually strolling into an abortion clinic at 8 months pregnant and no abortion clinic that would ever perform such a procedure for this imaginary woman. Being pregnant, itself, is not a casual thing. Have you ever been pregnant? If so, you know full well no one would ever choose to go through the majority of an unwanted pregnancy before considering an abortion just because they couldn’t make space in their calendar earlier. The idea is flat out ridiculous. If you think this is a real thing that is happening or would ever happen, I have a bridge to sell you.
Restrictions on when women can receive abortions are actually not the reasonable middle ground you think they are. Educate yourselves and stop buying in to misinformation.
Uh-oh… the misinformation card has been played.
Now you are getting the Emery shuffle.
Start with one gambit, when that fails, try another, when that fails, try another.
I think that the reason most bourgeois are pro-abortion is because they didn’t raise little Michelle to be a single mom, or get married to some idiot boy with no career prospects.
It’s not about the girl at all, it is about mom & dad valuing their daughter’s career prospects more than the life of their grandchild.
People will say something like “on their death bed, no one wishes that they had spent more time at the office.” And those same people will say “Of course my daughter’s career is more important than her raising children!”
so late term abortions are so rare they practically never happen, which is why we must be sure they can happen, for the one in a million chance we need it?
and now the Emeries think they are Lot bargaining with God not to destroy Sodom, if we can find the rare but possible one honest man
the exception proves the rule, it doesn’t justify abolishing the rule entirely
Regarding late term abortions, there are actual lists of who provides them (e.g. Warren Hern , Leroy Carhart) and how many are done each year, Emery. 1.3% of abortions, or about ten thousand, are late term, and an awful lot of them are for reasons unrelated to fetal abnormalities, let alone conditions incompatible with life outside the womb.
“Just walk in and get the abortion”, no. It takes a day or so for the laminaria to expand and open the cervix, but the reality is that, yes, people can and do walk in there and get their children killed, generally because of a relationship gone bad.
My position there is that if your relationship won’t support a child, there are thousands of families waiting to adopt.
Bikebubba, given the moral implications of abortion, it is surprising that the pro-abortion people downplay the alternative of adoption.
I suspect that they know that many pregnant women, if they carry the child to birth, will choose to raise the child themselves rather than give it up, and this puts the woman back at the center of a family which goes against the goals of feminists.
UMMP; yes, and it’s very striking that modern feminism seems to work hardest to downplay the distinctives of actually being a woman, e.g. being able to carry and nurse a child. At times, you would think that they think it’s more dignified for a woman to work in a day care center and barely break even on costs than it is for a woman to care for her own children at home.
They certainly don’t understand what it’s like for women in the lower middle class who are working retail, manufacturing, and other jobs to make ends meet. I vividly remember working at a little factory in Waseca that made electronics parts. Most of the employees were women, and the county welfare office was appropriately right next door. I’d take my coffee breaks in the lobby sometimes and watch them go back and forth.
I got my first real job in 1979, Bikebubba. So I came of age in the 1980s. I remember seeing these popular television shows about college educated women in good careers, while all the women I knew were either stay at home single moms on welfare or still childless young women working low end retail or assemblers in a factory or cutting hair. None of them were independent, they made ends meet without a government check or mom & dad covering their rent or car payment.
One single mom I knew was so good at working the system she got the state to buy her a car (so could get a job) PLUS a monthly clothes budget so she would have something to wear for the job interviews she never went to.
She was not a bad looking woman, so after her kid turned 18 and welfare cut her off, she would shack with a guy until he got tired of paying for her booze & then she would move on to the next guy.
She has now sadly passed (liver gone), but as far as I know, she never worked a day in her life.
There was something almost admirable about that.
There is no woman casually strolling into an abortion clinic at 8 months pregnant and no abortion clinic that would ever perform such a procedure for this imaginary woman.
Then why is the left so unwilling to compromise on banning late term abortions if it never happens and if no clinic would just perform such a late term abortion? Because it does, and they do.
E’s comment from January 25, 2023 at 2:37 pm contains some emotional projection, as if a woman wrote it. Interesting.
UMMP’s comment from 7:42 am is spot on. 97% of the pro-infanticide crowd aren’t smart enough to understand the underlying motivation of the other 3%. The 97% are just all about no accountability.
Republicans proposed a 15 week limit for abortions. Democrats proposed 24 weeks.
Split the difference @ 20 weeks and call it a day.
Unless of course you’re an absolutist and will not compromise.
Emery
You present yourself as an expert on all things abortion, yet you still have failed to answer this question…
At what point in your mother’s pregnancy with you would it have become unacceptable for her to abort you?
Disingenuous question.. Are you the expert? Who else here is the expert—I have opinions but certainly no expert.
Easiest answer ever..
At viability.
Dumb question, though.
So wanna see an anti-choicer do gymnastics, ask them this question,
Based on what standard of life is a fertilized embryo a “life.”? And let’s be clear, heartbeat is one measure that something is dead, but people w/o the ability to sustain a heartbeat are kept alive and are considered alive. Lack of higher brain function, though, = dead.
Conveniently, that aligns pretty well with viability.
BTW Mitch, anecdotal (or personally motivated) policy and decision making like “When could they abort YOU” is about the dumbest decision making. It’s about as viable as asking what should be done to someone who beats your child? Most people are going to say things like “Kill ’em”, or “cut off their hands.” It’s a completely biased response and so, useless.
A better question is, where do your personal rights end and mine begin? YOU want to decide for me (in this case the me is the mother) what I get to do with my own health choice based on nothing other than your religious position, not a scientific or otherwise logical definition of a life. Some small government there…
As I said, easiest, but dumbest, question you’ve ever asked.
Try another one out for size, why are Democrats the only ones who should have to sacrifice to get the debt ceiling raised? You claim the GOPers (or as i like to call you the Repubs) represent the “Non-Feudalists” YET they keep cutting taxes on the wealthy and corporations – ballooning the debt. NOW they want to eliminate the Estate Tax, Corporate Taxes and CAPITAL GAINS taxes, taxes that are almost EXCLUSIVE to the wealthy and of course big companies – the wealthy get a huge amount of their income from capital gain – and instead shift the tax burden downward (once again). Sure, you Repubs aren’t “step and fetch it” for the rich, and the economic feudatories they control, sure.
The GOP has represented the rich and powerful since long before I was born and almost nothing else, and they still do.
The Democrats have repeatedly voted to protect workers rights, rights to overtime, rights to a safe workplace, and against shifting the tax burden further onto the middle class.
So, wanna explain again how eliminating Capital Gains and instead instituting a 30% sales tax is anything other than shifting the tax burden downward?
Let the gymnastics begin.
You can make it simple by saying that personhood depends on the mother’s choice to abort or carry to term a baby, but then you have a problem if the mother changes her mind. Surely a baby in the womb cannot be a person or not a person depending on the mother’s state of mind!
Schroedinger’s Uterus.