It’s evil to support abortion in the
ninth month without restriction.
shareI agree. Abortion should be legal in the ninth month with some restrictions.
shareDo you think that someone should have convinced your mother of that when you were still in her womb?
shareHis reply is more of a comment on the assertion that there are people who support abortion in the ninth month without restriction when in fact there are no such people supporting that with or without restriction.
Thats just yet another Republican fantasy about "libs"
You - know like that absolutely insane one that Trump keeps repeating ( thereby showing how he should be in a rubber room not the Whitehouse) that liberals support abortion after birth.
No. You are wrong. In the Vice President debate Walz was asked this very question and he would not answer it. You can look it up.
sharewell , i skimmed read this.
https://www.pbs.org/newshour/politics/fact-checking-the-vp-debate-between-vance-and-walz-on-abortion-immigration-and-iran
it says Vance said
"Vance: “As I read the Minnesota law that (Walz) signed into law … it says that a doctor who presides over an abortion where the baby survives, the doctor is under no obligation to provide lifesaving care to a baby who survives a botched late-term abortion.” "
and it says that is not true.
So ,yknow , I tried looking it up but i wasnt exactly sure what I was looking for.
What "very question" was Walz asked and what did he reply?
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=F5qyEd2Ohjc&pp=ygUeVmljZSBvcmVzaWRlbnQgZGViYXRlIGFiaXJ0aW9u
He was asked if Abortion in the ninth month was fine yes or no by the moderator and he did not answer the question.
Of course he didn’t answer it, because he knows it’s true.
The man deflected with "Trump this and Trump that" just like Harris does.
Seems like the (D) tactic is to lie, evade and deflect.
It's evil to support abortion at all. It wouldn't even be necessary if the stupid women who are sexually active would use birth control, and the baby could be given up for adoption, rather than just killing it like it's a parasite that's inconveniencing the selfish slut that created it.
sharerather than just killing it like it's a parasite that's inconveniencing
How are you even alive? You are disgusting to say something like that, like beyond belief! I can only guess that calling a woman with an unwanted pregnancy a “selfish slut” makes you feel better about the fact that no man will ever want to touch a rotting piece of human filth like yourself.
And I do hope no one you know is ever the victim of rape or incest, because your total lack of compassion makes it obvious that you would be the last person they would want around them.
You make me sick.
If you really want to see evil, here’s $5… go buy a mirror.
Why are you conflating sluts who end up pregnant with victims of rape and incest?
shareCan’t you read? Where in that thing’s response does it specify that it would make an exception for rape or incest? Read again and get back to me. Make note of AT ALL:
“It's evil to support abortion at all. It wouldn't even be necessary if the stupid women who are sexually active would use birth control, and the baby could be given up for adoption, rather than just killing it like it's a parasite that's inconveniencing the selfish slut that created it.”
Well?
What is "evil" is for the religious of the world to try to impose their PERSONAL CHOICE of beliefs of what constitutes "evil" onto everyone else. Full stop.
They're the ones risking reaping what they sow though, since the very act of trying to impose their personally chosen religious beliefs onto others is them basically putting THEMSELVES before the god they claim to worship (since that god never THEMSELVES stated a stance on abortion one way or the other), and we all know (whether religious or not) how that god feels about "his" followers putting ANYONE before HIM.
So good luck with that.
If only your birth mommy had that same attitude.
shareCongratulations, you AGAIN proved your apparently innate ability to miss the point entirely AND respond in a way that made absolutely no sense whatsoever with regards to what you were responding to.
YOUR momma must YET AGAIN be "SO" proud. ; )
I’m religious but you don’t have to be religious to be against abortion. It’s like you don’t have to be religious to oppose injustice. I’m sorry you are for ninth month abortions no matter the circumstance.
shareI’m sorry you are for ninth month abortions no matter the circumstance.
Look. This topic is about ninth month abortion with no conditions. It says so in the topic and first post. It’s very clear. It’s not about any other type of abortion. From your post you are disagreeing with me that it’s evil.
shareExcept that I was replying to someone else, not to you or the OP; instead, you misinterpreted my reply to him.
shareLook at both of you arguing over something that's not even a thing to begin with.
Ninth month abortion simply doesn't happen. It's simply yet ANOTHER of the "boogeymen" republicans have been lying about to rile up their oblivious, religious base who lack critical thinking skills their religion never required them to develop.
I don’t think you can categorically claim it doesn’t happen. Reliable stats appear to be kept only by trimester rather than gestational month. About 1% of abortions occur in the third trimester. If we assume American women have about 900,000 abortions a year, that would be a lot of viable babies getting aborted.
But I think opponents make the ninth month abortion support an issue because many abortion proponents seem unwilling to plainly say it would be wrong. It’s used by opponents as shorthand to demonstrate abortion support extremism. The video of Walz above is a good example. It shows him running from the question of whether a ninth month abortion is wrong.
Then you can't claim ninth-month abortions "categorically" happen with the frequency at which maga-republican, Christian-Nationalists claim they happen, especially when your claim is based on you ASSUMING women have 900,000 abortions per year...and....that ANY of them are categorically "WRONG" if they need them.
shareIf it didn’t happen why did not Walz just say he wouldn’t support an abortion in the ninth month without restriction when he was asked? You are just making stuff up.
shareSpeaking of "just making stuff up", if your argument was actually valid as a strictly political issue, you wouldn't have to be including terms like "wrong" and "evil".
That you ARE including those terms clearly illustrates that your argument isn't based on politics, but religion, which is ALSO "made up stuff".
You don’t have to be religious to view things as evil.
shareBut we're not talking about those who AREN'T religious viewing things as "evil" or not, we're talking about religious people using terms like "wrong" and "evil".
Regardless, the overall anti-abortion LEGISLATIVE "argument" IS religious, and the fact that said "argument" has to rely on such rare and extreme examples to make it's "case" doesn't necessarily speak well of religions that have to rely on such fear-based extremes.
https://www.youtube.com/shorts/2IlTO-6uNus
Being against abortion is predicated upon the belief in a soul, something not substantiated by any evidence whatsoever. A fetus is not conscious. It has no idea it's even alive.
share23 “‘The priest is to write these curses on a scroll and then wash them off into the bitter water. 24 He shall make the woman drink the bitter water that brings a curse, and this water that brings a curse and causes bitter suffering will enter her. 25 The priest is to take from her hands the grain offering for jealousy, wave it before the Lord and bring it to the altar. 26 The priest is then to take a handful of the grain offering as a memorial[e] offering and burn it on the altar; after that, he is to have the woman drink the water. 27 If she has made herself impure and been unfaithful to her husband, this will be the result: When she is made to drink the water that brings a curse and causes bitter suffering, it will enter her, her abdomen will swell and her womb will miscarry, and she will become a curse. 28 If, however, the woman has not made herself impure, but is clean, she will be cleared of guilt and will be able to have children.
shareI'm not sure how you think providing an example of a religious priest imposing his beliefs (which we're asked to view as a "curse") on a woman (which entails "bitter suffering" for her) suspected of unfaithfulness is in no way
evil".
Why the NINTH month?
I'm interested in this topic because out of many convos I've had with pro lifers and pro choicers, not many of them can decide on a time between conception and birth, both times I disagree with.