MovieChat Forums > Amy Coney Barrett Discussion > Safe Haven Law

Safe Haven Law

posted 3 years ago by Rorikon (18391)
36 replies | jump to latest

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FFnGPgIX0BEMd4K?format=jpg&name=orig

'Question for Amy Coney Barrett.

There are currently 117,000 children in American still waiting to be adopted.

If Roe vs Wade was totally overturned, this figure could be over 3 MILLION by 2025 (abortion rate data).

If the system doesn't work for 117K how will it work for 3M...?'

Hmm...

https://adoptionnetwork.com/adoption-myths-facts/domestic-us-statistics/

So around 140k get adopted each year with already 1.3m abortions and 4% going towards adoption. Already 400k+ kids in foster care waiting to be adopted...

[–] MovieChatUser497 (18943) 3 years ago

Considering the left’s solution is to just kill the babies I don’t think they have a lot of moral authority in this case. We are looking at two situations, one just sucks (so many kids needing to be adopted) the other is evil (abortion).

[–] Rorikon (18391) 3 years ago

The other side of the moral argument is forcing a woman to term (having to gestate them for 9 months), possible complications of birth including possibility of death to the mother, having to live through giving up your child, emotional trauma, one of the highest maternal and infant mortality rates of all developed nations etc. etc.

I dunno man, two sides of the story I see here with one having long lasting implications.

[–] MovieChatUser497 (18943) 3 years ago

Not every woman who wants an abortion wants one because of health complications, could possibly, die, etc. The truth is the vast majority of abortions are because she simply doesn’t want a child which is not a moral solution to overcrowded orphanages. I am fairly certain that most opposed to abortion would be in favor of exemptions in extreme circumstances. You are not being particularly honest here.

[–] Rorikon (18391) 3 years ago

Honest about what? I just named the ones off the top of my head hence the etc. at the end. Of course not every woman who wants an abortion wants one because of health complications. Where is this truth you speak of? Where are the statistics or polls? You know how women think? It's true many don't want a child because they don't want it but it's also true there are various reasons for not wanting one be it the cost of raising a child, having to put them into overcrowded orphanages as you said, etc. etc. There is no one defined reason.

Like I said before, I believe in the abortion system but up to a fair amount of time given to the woman to decide. I'm fine with the Mississippi timeframe but not with the Texas one.

[–] MovieChatUser497 (18943) 3 years ago

You are implying that the vast majority of women who want to have abortions are because of health reasons, there is little to no evidence to support that. I also never claimed to know what women think so I don't appreciate your strawman. As I said I am sure that those opposed to abortion would be in favor of special exemptions in the case of extreme circumstances so therefore your point about health complications is pointless.

[–] Rorikon (18391) 3 years ago

I'm implying they have abortions through a number of reasons, I never mentioned one more over the other. You're the one claiming VAST MAJORITY, not me. As for the so-called 'extreme circumstances', I would think that would be in a the grey/gray area of too little too late if such complications arise during birth.

[–] MovieChatUser497 (18943) 3 years ago

As I said, when you show me evidence that there is a movement to deny women abortions in cases of health complications then we will talk. As of now the only situations that are even being debated are the mother just doesn’t want a baby or it’s too emotionally draining for her to have a baby so they’ll just kill it.

[–] Rorikon (18391) 3 years ago

And where is the evidence to say the mother just doesn't want a baby just for the sake of just not wanting it or emotionally draining? What sort of deranged mother thinks like that other than possibly the dipsy lower educated ho's?

Okay, this argument/debate we're having is pointless since I think we're in agreement that there is a stop off point for abortions, correct? Or are you the type to think there should be no abortions allowed, period (excluding the one's you've already mentioned you were open to be it rape/incest/extreme case health complication). ARE YOU FINE WITH THE 15 WEEK BAN? Is what I am asking. If not, then please go on.

[–] MovieChatUser497 (18943) 3 years ago

I’m not in favor of abortions however I do recognize there may be circumstances that require an exemption. Simply not wanting to have a baby isn’t a legitimate reason in my book. Tell you what, anyone out there who thinks that women should be denied an abortion in situations where the birth would endanger the mothers life is wrong in my opinion.

[–] MovieChatUser497 (18943) 3 years ago

Tell you what, the day that you have evidence that anyone wants to deny women abortions in situations of health complications then we'll talk, until then your premise doesn't have a leg to stand on.

[–] nte1igentwon (963) 3 years ago

It doesn't matter what the woman's motivation for terminating the pregnancy is everyone has the right to bodily autonomy and ending a pregnancy is not the same thing as killing a baby. I personally am not in favor of aborting viable fetuses but I'm also not the one who would be fundamentally physically changed by carrying a pregnancy to term. The unborn don't have more rights than the rest of us. The pro-birth faction is so disingenuous with their faux moralizing.

[–] MovieChatUser497 (18943) 3 years ago

It’s not a matter of a woman’s right to her body because it’s someone else’s body, it’s the child’s body. Also if the left gave a damn about “my body my choice” then they wouldn’t have tried to force vaccine mandates on us. The truth of the matter is actions have consequences, if you choose to have sex that is your choice but you are responsible for whatever happens as a result.

“The unborn don’t have more rights than the rest of us”

No one is saying they do, we are saying they should have equal rights to the rest of us as in the right to live. Funny how you seem to attribute the right to live as some kind of special treatment, you really seem like a sick, demented person and if anyone is being disingenuous it is yourself.

EDIT: Also whether or not you or I would be impacted by a woman going through with her pregnancy is not only irrelevant but it’s also a non sequitur, I alluded to this in a previous post that line of thinking is just like saying: “You’re not the one who is impacted by riots in Seattle so therefore you don’t get to have an opinion on riots in Seattle”, it’s ludicrous. I can have an opinion on anything I want and the fact that I can’t physically carry a baby is irrelevant, not to mention that line of thinking is sexist.

[–] nte1igentwon (963) 3 years ago

"No one is saying they do, we are saying they should have equal rights to the rest of us as in the right to live. Funny how you seem to attribute the right to live as some kind of special treatment, you really seem like a sick, demented person and if anyone is being disingenuous it is yourself."

Do you or I have the right to use someone's body without their consent? Does any living human being have that right? After answering those questions try to continue saying that the pro-birth movement isn't advocating for the granting of SPECIAL rights to the unborn.

Your vax mandate argument fails because no one can force you to get the vaccine. Those that choose not to get it just aren't eligible to participate in certain areas of society. There is still choice there. Banning a medical procedure eliminates that choice for pregnant women. Once again, having sex isn't consenting to giving birth. Operating a motor vehicle can result in injury or even death. That doesn't mean people consent to get into accidents. If the power goes out in a parking garage and you get mugged by someone hiding in the darkness did you consent to that? We know going to dark public places poses a risk. During the mugging are you allowed to fight back and try to mitigate the consequences of your action of entering a darkened garage?

Accusing me of sexism is the height of projection. I find it frightening that you consider bodily autonomy as irrelevant. A fetus has no autonomy nor any rights. The pro-birth extremists are trying to grant the unborn special rights only to give two shits about them once born.

[–] MovieChatUser497 (18943) 3 years ago

The parents allowed the fetus to rest in the mothers stomach when they decided to have sex you idiot. Also are you seriously trying to say that an unborn baby should be grateful that the mother allowed him/her to live inside her stomach. What the hell is wrong with you? No one is doing the unborn a child any kind of favor or giving any kind of special treatment for allowing them to live, that is just basic human decency. That's like me saying that I'm virtuous and righteous by not discriminating against you because of your skin color.

The liberals are attempting to force people to get the vaccine or else they will punish them, my argument doesn't fail because the left seems to think that they can control other people's bodies but then when we switch issues they take a complete 180, so which is it? Is it my body my choice or not? The fact that liberals haven't been successful in their forced vaccine mandates is another non sequitur, the mentality and the hypocrisy is still there.

Consenting to having sex is consenting to accept the consequences of having sex, it's called personal responsibility, you are an entitled snowflake who thinks he doesn't have to be accountable for his own actions, it's pathetic.

"Operating a motor vehicle can result in injury or even death. That doesn't mean people consent to get into accidents."

False equivalence on your part, operating a motor vehicle does not directly result in an accident, in order for that to happen someone else has to be reckless and driving inappropriately, having sex does directly result in getting pregnant. Fail on your part.

You are the very definition of a sexist, you are the very definition of an entitled snowflake, it's never your fault, it's always someone else's responsibility, why don't you grow up and start acting like an adult.

The "pro-life" movement has no responsibility to the child once they are born, that is the PARENTS RESPONSIBILITY!!! Taking a stand against child killing doesn't mean you have to then take care of the child that you didn't create or else you are a hypocrite, the parents should accept the responsibility that they consented to. They engaged in sexual intercourse and if they weren't ready to have a child then they have no one else but themselves to blame.

[–] nte1igentwon (963) 3 years ago

Your lack of understanding of science and what an actual human being is as opposed to a potential one is truly sad. You probably agree with the state laws citing fetal heartbeats several weeks BEFORE an actual heart exists. If you remember way back when we started I mentioned something about viability. Regardless you're too dim to comprehend these points, apparently.

[–] MovieChatUser497 (18943) 3 years ago

Oh really? Please show me that the scientific principle that not only defines a human being but says that while it's inside the mother it's not a human but outside it is. A simple google definition is not proof, you need to provide an objective, testable experiment. I mean you are the one who said this was "science". Maybe next time you will think before you speak so you don't make a complete buffoon out of yourself.

You are not only a sick person you have clearly been brainwashed by the DemoKKKrat cult, I feel sorry for you, but at the same time you need help, like serious help.

EDIT: I also love how you basically ignored all of my post and instead went to throwing out baseless assumptions and pathetic insults, typical libtard snowflake.

[–] Arasaid (202) 3 years ago

Science has proven it's a human being at the moment of conception with its own unique DNA.
Consenting to sex is consenting to pregnancy. That's what having sex does.
Yes, deliberately ending a pregnancy is killing a baby. What do you think pregnancy is?

[–] BillySlater (4285) 3 years ago

"The other side of the moral argument is forcing a woman to term (having to gestate them for 9 months), possible complications of birth including possibility of death to the mother, having to live through giving up your child, emotional trauma, etc. etc."

Lol at "forcing them to term". Imagine not realising your actions have consequences.

"having to live through giving up your child, emotional trauma, etc. etc."

Yeah because I am sure every woman who has ever had an abortion feels absolutely zero guilt/emotional trauma for mutilating their unborn child. lol

[–] MovieChatUser497 (18943) 3 years ago

Seriously, forcing them? No one forced them to have sex (unless it was rape), all that anti-abortion people are for is for requiring people to be responsible for their own actions.

[–] Rorikon (18391) 3 years ago

No argument there. I am all for personal responsibility by one's own actions. By force, if one thinks critically, obviously I was talking about after the ban was in place in which you're 'forced' by law. The strawman argument is saying they were forced to have sex which obviously isn't the case I was making nor would it be prudent to say so.

[–] MovieChatUser497 (18943) 3 years ago

I don’t see it as being “forced” i see it as one just owning up to their own decisions and doing the responsible, decent thing.

[–] BillySlater (4285) 3 years ago

Allowing nature to take its course is not "force". Ripping a fetus, limb by limb out of its mother´s womb on the other hand...

[–] nte1igentwon (963) 3 years ago

Consenting to sex isn't necessarily consenting to be pregnant. Their body, their choice. If you're against abortion then don't have one. Simple.

[–] MovieChatUser497 (18943) 3 years ago

Consenting to sex is very much consenting to whatever may happen as a result. If I choose to rob a house then I am absolutely consenting to possibly being shot by the homeowner because that is a likely consequence of robbing a house, much like getting pregnant is a likely consequence of having sex. If you don’t think you are ready to have a baby then don’t have sex, it’s that simple.

Do you not realize how dumb your last sentence sounds? That’s like saying “if you are against rioting then don’t riot.” Your logic is basically that I can’t have an opinion on anything, but I’m guessing your cult taught you that debate tactic. Liberals are so fucking stupid.

[–] nte1igentwon (963) 3 years ago

So myopic. You know very little about pregnancy if you think having sex likely results in pregnancy. But I'm sexist when you say misogynistic shit like this:

"If you don’t think you are ready to have a baby then don’t have sex, it’s that simple."

I know you probably pray everyday for your fantasy of Gilead to come to fruition and sadly those prayers are on the verge of being answered.

[–] MovieChatUser497 (18943) 3 years ago

Uhhhh yeah having sex does result in pregnancy, if you have sex then the two gametes can combine together to make a zygote, that is literally how babies are made, the fact that sometimes you have sex and don't get pregnant is irrelevant. This is something that everyone understands. Did your parents not have the talk with you or something? It sounds like you are ignorant on the facts of life. Your Mom needs to sit you down and have a little talk with you.

As for your second paragraph it's meaningless to me, I am an atheist, yet you assumed I wasn't. You're just another judgement, ignorant libtard snowflake.

[–] Rorikon (18391) 3 years ago

If that's the logic to go by, then women must protect themselves from men since it takes two to tango. Actions have consequences so men must take the extra step of making sure pregnancy doesn't happen via vasectomy or other. Why is it all beholden to the women if one wants men to have a say in the child as well? If men have a say in it as well then they must take responsibility as well.

Way to paint a broad brush to 'every' woman.

[–] MovieChatUser497 (18943) 3 years ago

Both people need to take responsibility and believe me I have been very tough on men who just abandon their child and the mother. That’s a cowardly thing to do.

[–] Rorikon (18391) 3 years ago

EXACTLY! That's what I am trying to get at. It always seem to be the WOMEN at fault and the MEN get some damn pass for it which is inane. Can't have personal responsibility if both parties aren't at fault since again, takes two to tango.

[–] MovieChatUser497 (18943) 3 years ago

I don’t really see it that way, I don’t know many people who say it’s only the women’s responsibility however I am sure there are people out there like that who exist and they are wrong.

[–] Rorikon (18391) 3 years ago

It's just the way the some right-wing pundits purport it. Always saying women need to be responsible and shit like that is probably why I came to that conclusion since they never mention the men. Maybe you're more of the sane one's but there is restrictive people out there that want a more extreme measure handmade tale-style. Those are the type that I think are backwards.

[–] MovieChatUser497 (18943) 3 years ago

Again I know very few who are suggesting that the man doesn’t bare any responsibility but if they are they are wrong. Nothing however is more insane than leftists who are in favor of zero restrictions on abortion including late term abortion or denying babies who survived unsuccessful abortions legal protection, ie just kill the baby who is now outside the womb.

[–] ultravioletx (10237) 3 years ago

It won't be 3 million. I could see it doubling though.

Abortions will still be conducted because there are multiple ways to do them relatively safely such as citrus pills, not to mention all the doctors who will do it under the table for a higher fee than it is now.

It'll basically be like prohibition.

[–] Jes' Sayin' (6545) 3 years ago

Prohibition. As I recall that turned out really well.

[–] ultravioletx (10237) 3 years ago

Exactly.

[–] Rorikon (18391) 3 years ago

https://www.citruspregnancy.org/abortion-pill

What is the Abortion Pill?
The Abortion Pill, or RU486, is a drug used to terminate a pregnancy in its earliest stage. Before taking it, however, you must confirm your pregnancy with a lab quality pregnancy test, which we can provide for you at no cost.

What is the difference between Plan B (the Morning After Pill) and the Abortion Pill?
Plan B (A.K.A: emergency contraceptive) will not terminate an existing pregnancy, but may prevent pregnancy if taken within three days of intercourse. The Abortion Pill (RU486) will terminate an existing pregnancy. Both have risks, so it is important to learn the facts and confirm whether or not you are pregnant.

Interesting... Never knew this existed (other than Plan B). Thing is these are controlled substances I think and you need to get a pregnancy test by approved specialists to be even given these drugs. They're not even over-the-counter.