A major step back

[rgraham666]

Oklahoma legislature overrides governor's veto on anit-abortion bill.

 

[JAMESBJOHNSON]

it truly is, since usual suspects get most of the abortions.

 

[elfin_odalisque]

And just how many of those 80+ legislative votes were male?

 

[Zeb_Carter]

It is truly sad when government just can't keep it's nose out of the private affairs of the populace. Even the thought of what OK is trying to do is invasive and abusive. It is between a woman and her doctor. And is a matter of choice, not almost choice.

 

[Stella_Omega]

It is truly sad when government just can't keep it's nose out of the private affairs of the populace. Even the thought of what OK is trying to do is invasive and abusive. It is between a woman and her doctor. And is a matter of choice, not almost choice.

Agreed.

 

[Zeb_Carter]

Agreed.

See there are things we agree on.

 

[sr71plt]

Except this is real life. The choices aren't really just one person's, are they? They almost always are making decisions for the rest of us at the same time, aren't they? And to the extent they do, society should have a say in the matter.

 

[rgraham666]

In that case I want women, should they decide to abort, get that abortion in a sterile environment performed by a competent medical professional. Beyond that, I have no say in their decision.

 

[Stella_Omega]

Except this is real life. The choices aren't really just one person's, are they? They almost always are making decisions for the rest of us at the same time, aren't they? And to the extent they do, society should have a say in the matter.

In this case the choice was in the hands of 83 people regarding thousands of other people, all of whom are burdened with xx chromosomes. And that's real life, at least as it stands right now.

 

[Zeb_Carter]

Except this is real life. The choices aren't really just one person's, are they? They almost always are making decisions for the rest of us at the same time, aren't they? And to the extent they do, society should have a say in the matter.

Ah...the closet Republican finally shows his feathers. I'm really surprised we are on opposite sides on this issue. But maybe I shouldn't.

When it comes right down to it, it's a medical procedure that is the choice of the woman and is between her and her doctor. Although I hope she has talked to the father, it's not his decision to make unless he can carry the fetus to term and then will take full responsibility for the child after it's born.

As for pro-life advocates, I don't see them stepping forward to offer help except to flap their jaws and blowup clinics.

 

[sr71plt]

Ah...the closet Republican finally shows his feathers. I'm really surprised we are on opposite sides on this issue. But maybe I shouldn't.

When it comes right down to it, it's a medical procedure that is the choice of the woman and is between her and her doctor. Although I hope she has talked to the father, it's not his decision to make unless he can carry the fetus to term and then will take full responsibility for the child after it's born.

As for pro-life advocates, I don't see them stepping forward to offer help except to flap their jaws and blowup clinics.

Sorry, I'm an Eleanor Roosevelt Democrat. (who was an early supporter for Planned Parenthood), and I think I'm just being logical here. I responded to a single flat, sweeping statement. I don't think a decision of the woman is the only factor to be considered on either side (to have/not have) unless that woman is living by herself on an otherwise deserted and completely unserviced island. So, it isn't abortion rights itself that I'm commenting on, it's the flat statement that it's only the woman who is either involved in or affected by the choice--and I think all of those who, in reality, are affected have varying slices of legitimate say in the issue.

 

[JAMESBJOHNSON]

In that case I want women, should they decide to abort, get that abortion in a sterile environment performed by a competent medical professional. Beyond that, I have no say in their decision.

A moron with a spatula works for me.

 

[stephen55]

A moron with a spatula (would have) work(ed) for me.

If only...sigh...

 

[stephen55]

Trop de vilaine la momma de Jimbo momma ont fait pas rougir lui quand les le temps était équitable. Le c'est une plaindre. Maintenant nous avons étudier son shit. Toutefois , au moins les minus c'est bon pour une ris. Les Minus de Tampa Bay!! .

 

[JAMESBJOHNSON]

Trop de vilaine la momma de Jimbo momma ont fait pas rougir lui quand les le temps était équitable. Le c'est une plaindre. Maintenant nous avons étudier son shit. Toutefois , au moins les minus c'est bon pour une ris. Les Minus de Tampa Bay!! .

Here's a translation: Hooray for Jimbo! Canadians eat shit.

 

[Stella_Omega]

Sorry, I'm an Eleanor Roosevelt Democrat. (who was an early supporter for Planned Parenthood), and I think I'm just being logical here. I responded to a single flat, sweeping statement. I don't think a decision of the woman is the only factor to be considered on either side (to have/not have) unless that woman is living by herself on an otherwise deserted and completely unserviced island. So, it isn't abortion rights itself that I'm commenting on, it's the flat statement that it's only the woman who is either involved in or affected by the choice--and I think all of those who, in reality, are affected have varying slices of legitimate say in the issue.

I agree. the other people who may be affected by her decision are most likely to be;

1) the father of the child

2) her immediate family-- parents, siblings, maybe close relatives if they are in fact close to her.

3) her children, if she has any.

4) her future children, if she should have them.

Am I missing anyone?

 

[Zeb_Carter]

I agree. the other people who may be affected by her decision are most likely to be;

1) the father of the child

2) her immediate family-- parents, siblings, maybe close relatives if they are in fact close to her.

3) her children, if she has any.

4) her future children, if she should have them.

Am I missing anyone?

And when you come right down to it none of them really has a say in what she does. It's called freedom of choice for a reason.

I'm (using a euphemism) going to let my parents tell me what to do with my body? (Maybe if I am not of legal age) My brother? My sister? My children? Future children don't really matter in the hear and now so they are out, except to be told what had happened so long ago. The father? If he is not her husband and is not willing to support her or the future child, then the choice is up to her.
If he is her husband they have hopefully discussed it and made the decision together. If not then they are probably headed for divorce court.

It is not up to politicians, religious leaders or nosy old busybodies. Especially the likes of JBJ.

 

[sr71plt]

I agree. the other people who may be affected by her decision are most likely to be;

1) the father of the child

2) her immediate family-- parents, siblings, maybe close relatives if they are in fact close to her.

3) her children, if she has any.

4) her future children, if she should have them.

Am I missing anyone?

Yes, on one end of the spectrum. If she decides (on her own) to have a child and she's functioning in the same society I am, I too inevitably have an involvement in raising that child, the more the least she is able to care for it. But even at her wealthiest and most responsible level, I will probably be paying more than our combined share of shared societal services to cover that child just because, even when that child arrives to adulthood, there is little chance he/she will be putting into the overall kitty what I will be when I kick off.

(I've posted to other threads, though, of course, that some of those children will be taking care of me in various ways if I live to needing the help).

There's no scientific percentage that can be made between any two folks here, of course--I'm just saying on this end of the spectrum (choosing to have the child), a sweeping "it affects no one but the woman--and, I would hope, the baby" is just too too sweeping. No single person takes care of all of their needs and that of an offspring in a society of any size that provides even basic services.

In real life, we talking more unemployed/otherwise unable to hack it without a lot of help women than we are ones who can nearly entirely support their offspring. And the more I'm expected to help underwrite this support, the more involved I am--and the less I consider it all the woman's decision.

On the other end of the spectrum, I think you've covered it--in my view. To say it isn't all the woman's decision to NOT have a child, I think you'd have to be in the realm of situations like a marriage, where it was agreed they would have children, and they agreed to have sex, and then the woman gets pregnant with what is, to all available knowledge, a healthy fetus. In a case like that, I think you can't flatly say it's all the woman's decision. (I doubt I'd be in favor of making her have the baby even in this situation--but I'd find some way to punish her enough to try to rattle her out of self-centeredness.)

 

[jomar]

Here's a translation: Hooray for Jimbo! Canadians eat shit.

Discussion aside, I laughed.

 

[sr71plt]

Discussion aside, I laughed.

Sorry to say I did too.

 

[Austin8]

not even in this, but I laughed too!

 

[Stella_Omega]

Yes, on one end of the spectrum. If she decides (on her own) to have a child and she's functioning in the same society I am, I too inevitably have an involvement in raising that child, the more the least she is able to care for it. But even at her wealthiest and most responsible level, I will probably be paying more than our combined share of shared societal services to cover that child just because, even when that child arrives to adulthood, there is little chance he/she will be putting into the overall kitty what I will be when I kick off.

(I've posted to other threads, though, of course, that some of those children will be taking care of me in various ways if I live to needing the help).

There's no scientific percentage that can be made between any two folks here, of course--I'm just saying on this end of the spectrum (choosing to have the child), a sweeping "it affects no one but the woman--and, I would hope, the baby" is just too too sweeping. No single person takes care of all of their needs and that of an offspring in a society of any size that provides even basic services.

In real life, we talking more unemployed/otherwise unable to hack it without a lot of help women than we are ones who can nearly entirely support their offspring. And the more I'm expected to help underwrite this support, the more involved I am--and the less I consider it all the woman's decision.

On the other end of the spectrum, I think you've covered it--in my view. To say it isn't all the woman's decision to NOT have a child, I think you'd have to be in the realm of situations like a marriage, where it was agreed they would have children, and they agreed to have sex, and then the woman gets pregnant with what is, to all available knowledge, a healthy fetus. In a case like that, I think you can't flatly say it's all the woman's decision. (I doubt I'd be in favor of making her have the baby even in this situation--but I'd find some way to punish her enough to try to rattle her out of self-centeredness.)

yes to all of this!

And regarding your last comment, yes even more. Because a woman who does not have to make that decision alone-- probably will take her SO's thoughts into account. Women, to make a sweeping generality, are funny that way...

 

[Loring2]

Wat seg je

Trop de vilaine la momma de Jimbo momma ont fait pas rougir lui quand les le temps était équitable. Le c'est une plaindre. Maintenant nous avons étudier son shit. Toutefois , au moins les minus c'est bon pour une ris. Les Minus de Tampa Bay!! .

Te veel vilaine Jimbo momma momma heeft hem niet maken wanneer de tijd eerlijk was. Het is jammer. Wij bestuderen nu zijn shit. Echter, op ten minste het min is goed voor een ris. Het min in Tampa Bay!.

Is da recht?

Guyen dag

Loring

 

[Zeb_Carter]

Te veel vilaine Jimbo momma momma heeft hem niet maken wanneer de tijd eerlijk was. Het is jammer. Wij bestuderen nu zijn shit. Echter, op ten minste het min is goed voor een ris. Het min in Tampa Bay!.

Is da recht?

Guyen dag

Loring

Translation: I agree that Jimbo is great and all Canadians eat shit. He just took the long way around in agreeing is all.

 

[TE999]

It's a woman's body to do with as she chooses. If she chooses to end the life within it, so be it. It's between her and her god...or concience. People decide to end others lives all the time...judges, police, soldiers, criminals...the only difference is their victims are outside the womb.