[Abortion Thread] (YET ANOTHER POLL!) Taking measure.

[Katganistan]

It wasn't children laughing, it was children crying and screaming 'DON'T KILL ME!' among other psychotic bullshit.

Which we're not allowed to call torture or abuse because there's no physical force involved.

Not to mention the abusive shit he proposed whatever woman was unfortunate enough to call him husband would be put through.

[The New California Republic]

Which we're not allowed to call torture or abuse because there's no physical force involved.

Not to mention the abusive shit he proposed whatever woman was unfortunate enough to call him husband would be put through.

Oh yeah I forgot about that shit regarding what he'd do to his poor wife. I think I must have blocked it out.

[Gormwood]

It wasn't children laughing, it was children crying and screaming 'DON'T KILL ME!' among other psychotic bullshit.

Which we're not allowed to call torture or abuse because there's no physical force involved.

Get it right, it's "Enhanced Persuasion".

[Katganistan]

Not to mention the abusive shit he proposed whatever woman was unfortunate enough to call him husband would be put through.

Oh yeah I forgot about that shit regarding what he'd do to his poor wife. I think I must have blocked it out.

I am cursed with a good memory -- regarding things I would rather forget.

[Galloism]

Oh yeah I forgot about that shit regarding what he'd do to his poor wife. I think I must have blocked it out.

I am cursed with a good memory -- regarding things I would rather forget.

I understand.

[Genivaria]

So I saw this on my Facebook feed and thought it sounded too absurd to be real...

So I looked into it and holy shit this is real.
An Ohio lawmaker admitted he hadn't researched ectopic pregnancies before proposing an abortion restriction bill

Fucking anti-choice politicians are morons.

A proposal for an Ohio abortion restriction introduced to the state's legislature in November prompted backlash for its suggestion that doctors could re-implant ectopic pregnancies – which experts say is impossible.

[Wallenburg]

So I saw this on my Facebook feed and thought it sounded too absurd to be real...

(Image)

So I looked into it and holy shit this is real.
An Ohio lawmaker admitted he hadn't researched ectopic pregnancies before proposing an abortion restriction bill

Fucking anti-choice politicians are morons.

A proposal for an Ohio abortion restriction introduced to the state's legislature in November prompted backlash for its suggestion that doctors could re-implant ectopic pregnancies – which experts say is impossible.

I mean, the guy is a moron, but not for the reason you've laid out here. It's not moronic not to research medical conditions relevant to your bill when your end goal is just to make women suffer, it's just cruel and evil.

[The New California Republic]

So I saw this on my Facebook feed and thought it sounded too absurd to be real...

(Image)

So I looked into it and holy shit this is real.
An Ohio lawmaker admitted he hadn't researched ectopic pregnancies before proposing an abortion restriction bill

Fucking anti-choice politicians are morons.

A proposal for an Ohio abortion restriction introduced to the state's legislature in November prompted backlash for its suggestion that doctors could re-implant ectopic pregnancies – which experts say is impossible.

What a fucking idiot. If you make laws that specifically covers something then it's plainly obvious to everyone that some in-depth research into said thing is required. Also:

the Enquirer reports that Becker didn't consult with doctors before proposing the new abortion restriction

I mean come on man, this is either intentional incompetence or negligent incompetence.

[Gormwood]

So I saw this on my Facebook feed and thought it sounded too absurd to be real...

(Image)

So I looked into it and holy shit this is real.
An Ohio lawmaker admitted he hadn't researched ectopic pregnancies before proposing an abortion restriction bill

Fucking anti-choice politicians are morons.

A proposal for an Ohio abortion restriction introduced to the state's legislature in November prompted backlash for its suggestion that doctors could re-implant ectopic pregnancies – which experts say is impossible.

The fact that he did no actual study just goes to show it's not about preserving life but restricting the rights of women. The sort of moron who wishes The Handmaid's Tale was real.

[Nuroblav]

So I saw this on my Facebook feed and thought it sounded too absurd to be real...

(Image)

So I looked into it and holy shit this is real.
An Ohio lawmaker admitted he hadn't researched ectopic pregnancies before proposing an abortion restriction bill

Fucking anti-choice politicians are morons.

A proposal for an Ohio abortion restriction introduced to the state's legislature in November prompted backlash for its suggestion that doctors could re-implant ectopic pregnancies – which experts say is impossible.

I don't know whether to laugh or facepalm so I guess I'll do both. This just goes to show the incompetence of these pro-life arguments.

[The Alma Mater]

So I saw this on my Facebook feed and thought it sounded too absurd to be real...

(Image)

So I looked into it and holy shit this is real.
An Ohio lawmaker admitted he hadn't researched ectopic pregnancies before proposing an abortion restriction bill

Fucking anti-choice politicians are morons.

What a fucking idiot. If you make laws that specifically covers something then it's plainly obvious to everyone that some in-depth research into said thing is required. Also:

the Enquirer reports that Becker didn't consult with doctors before proposing the new abortion restriction

I mean come on man, this is either intentional incompetence or negligent incompetence.

So, are there any consequences for him ?

[The New California Republic]

What a fucking idiot. If you make laws that specifically covers something then it's plainly obvious to everyone that some in-depth research into said thing is required. Also:


I mean come on man, this is either intentional incompetence or negligent incompetence.

So, are there any consequences for him ?

Aside from being laughed at? Probably not.

[Oubliettica]

that won't be an issue for women deciding between killing their unborn child or putting it up for adoption.

Jeeez, I thought the thread was dead and it springs back with the pro-misery
side continuing to regurgitate their sick emotional fallacies again.

Sorry, Crockof>>>>, by using the adoption canard you blithely ignore the female's rights, and SHE is the only HUMAN BEING who has skin in the game. You may get your warm and fuzzies by throwing women who don't want to go to term (for any reason) under a bus and we know your side wants to punish and control women and we watch in disgust as sick fks are now doing just that using sham laws that let them stick their noses up women's wombs and decide FOR the women (and doctors) what's best (for the cult.)

Your continued use of the LIE ("unborn child") is just shameless emotional hyperbole and propaganda, something the GOP is almost as good at as was Goebbels and Stalin. An unborn child is a term of endearment for those PARENTS who want a child as the end result of a pregnancy and are willing to risk the woman's life to achieve; but it is NOT a real medical or science term, sport. The correct term is fetus, and no fetus has a written guarantee of reaching viability and survivability outside the womb. ONLY the female has a right to determine whether the fetus should develop. PERIOD Not ignorant self-righteous oppressive sky fairy grovelers who hijack legislatures to promote their cults' sick agendas.

[Jebslund]

Jeeez, I thought the thread was dead and it springs back with the pro-misery
side continuing to regurgitate their sick emotional fallacies again.

Sorry, Crockof>>>>, by using the adoption canard you blithely ignore the female's rights, and SHE is the only HUMAN BEING who has skin in the game. You may get your warm and fuzzies by throwing women who don't want to go to term (for any reason) under a bus and we know your side wants to punish and control women and we watch in disgust as sick fks are now doing just that using sham laws that let them stick their noses up women's wombs and decide FOR the women (and doctors) what's best (for the cult.)

Your continued use of the LIE ("unborn child") is just shameless emotional hyperbole and propaganda, something the GOP is almost as good at as was Goebbels and Stalin. An unborn child is a term of endearment for those PARENTS who want a child as the end result of a pregnancy and are willing to risk the woman's life to achieve; but it is NOT a real medical or science term, sport. The correct term is fetus, and no fetus has a written guarantee of reaching viability and survivability outside the womb. ONLY the female has a right to determine whether the fetus should develop. PERIOD Not ignorant self-righteous oppressive sky fairy grovelers who hijack legislatures to promote their cults' sick agendas.

As a pro-choice Christian (pro-choice for multiple reasons, some purely practical, some conscience-based, some theological), I'll thank you not to refer to Christianity as a cult, or to lump all Christians in with someone who seems intent on beating people's heads in with the Bible rather than showing them God's love and letting them come of their own volition or not at all.

[Oubliettica]

Yeah, you're a good little pro-MISERY soldier, Crockof>>> "Hopefully ... it will be banned" means you want to move the goal posts from a reasonable 24-25 weeks right up into a woman's Fallopian Tubes. Your cult has made this quite clear and the courts and the court of public opinion have thrown YOUR opinion right back in your face (except, of course, when a court or a legislature has been hijacked by godgroveling Luddites, e.g. Kentucky.)

[Oubliettica]

As a pro-choice Christian (pro-choice for multiple reasons, some purely practical, some conscience-based, some theological), I'll thank you not to refer to Christianity as a cult, or to lump all Christians in with someone who seems intent on beating people's heads in with the Bible rather than showing them God's love and letting them come of their own volition or not at all.[/quote]

Jebslund, it's the most sincerest and honest description I can think of to describe the extreme rightwing cult of oppressive intellectually dishonest godgrovelers who want to turn women into involuntary incubators for their cult. There are some in the GOP who put reality and compassion for women ahead of the cult's agenda, just as there are some in the Dem party who side with the oppressive godgrovelers despite claims they're not "religious." (though those dems use the very same emotional hype-filled canards the right wing extremists do, but that's probably just a coincidence. HAH) If you're a xtian who sides with pro-CHOICE and VOTES AGAINST the oppressive medieval zealots, then you won't be tarnished by the accusation because your actions would show you're being honest and not just an inculcated zealot!

You can believe in a god (there are 1000's of man-invented entities from which to choose, NONE with any evidence of actual existence) because at least the US is supposed to be a free country. You can even spew flowery tripe about you "god's love" (ignoring the real world's massive amount of natural disasters, plagues, poxes, MISERY, etc.) and I'm content to just roll my eyes. BUT, when godgrovelers hijack a political party, stuff a court and stack a legislature with like-minded misogynists for the express purpose of running roughshod over personal decisions, the bile rises in my throat just as much as when PC traitor types stuff courts and stack legislatures to turn a nation into a 3rd world cesspool for their own brand of fuzzy feelgood. I am an atheist and part of the 40% of the eligible electorate that won't vote for either side of evil, right or left. This is my only voice, my words. Would you censor my freedom of speech or would you just nitpick my word choice to pander to easily bruised thin-skinned radicals on either side of the aisle who don't have an intellectually honest bone in their body?

[Farnhamia]

As a pro-choice Christian (pro-choice for multiple reasons, some purely practical, some conscience-based, some theological), I'll thank you not to refer to Christianity as a cult, or to lump all Christians in with someone who seems intent on beating people's heads in with the Bible rather than showing them God's love and letting them come of their own volition or not at all.

Jebslund, it's the most sincerest and honest description I can think of to describe the extreme rightwing cult of oppressive intellectually dishonest godgrovelers who want to turn women into involuntary incubators for their cult. There are some in the GOP who put reality and compassion for women ahead of the cult's agenda, just as there are some in the Dem party who side with the oppressive godgrovelers despite claims they're not "religious." (though those dems use the very same emotional hype-filled canards the right wing extremists do, but that's probably just a coincidence. HAH) If you're a xtian who sides with pro-CHOICE and VOTES AGAINST the oppressive medieval zealots, then you won't be tarnished by the accusation because your actions would show you're being honest and not just an inculcated zealot!

You can believe in a god (there are 1000's of man-invented entities from which to choose, NONE with any evidence of actual existence) because at least the US is supposed to be a free country. You can even spew flowery tripe about you "god's love" (ignoring the real world's massive amount of natural disasters, plagues, poxes, MISERY, etc.) and I'm content to just roll my eyes. BUT, when godgrovelers hijack a political party, stuff a court and stack a legislature with like-minded misogynists for the express purpose of running roughshod over personal decisions, the bile rises in my throat just as much as when PC traitor types stuff courts and stack legislatures to turn a nation into a 3rd world cesspool for their own brand of fuzzy feelgood. I am an atheist and part of the 40% of the eligible electorate that won't vote for either side of evil, right or left. This is my only voice, my words. Would you censor my freedom of speech or would you just nitpick my word choice to pander to easily bruised thin-skinned radicals on either side of the aisle who don't have an intellectually honest bone in their body?

The only part of this post I am going to respond to is the fact that you've misnested the quote. You may wish to have another look. As to the rest, have a blessed day is all I will say.

[Godular]

Jebslund, it's the most sincerest and honest description I can think of to describe the extreme rightwing cult of oppressive intellectually dishonest godgrovelers who want to turn women into involuntary incubators for their cult. There are some in the GOP who put reality and compassion for women ahead of the cult's agenda, just as there are some in the Dem party who side with the oppressive godgrovelers despite claims they're not "religious." (though those dems use the very same emotional hype-filled canards the right wing extremists do, but that's probably just a coincidence. HAH) If you're a xtian who sides with pro-CHOICE and VOTES AGAINST the oppressive medieval zealots, then you won't be tarnished by the accusation because your actions would show you're being honest and not just an inculcated zealot!

You can believe in a god (there are 1000's of man-invented entities from which to choose, NONE with any evidence of actual existence) because at least the US is supposed to be a free country. You can even spew flowery tripe about you "god's love" (ignoring the real world's massive amount of natural disasters, plagues, poxes, MISERY, etc.) and I'm content to just roll my eyes. BUT, when godgrovelers hijack a political party, stuff a court and stack a legislature with like-minded misogynists for the express purpose of running roughshod over personal decisions, the bile rises in my throat just as much as when PC traitor types stuff courts and stack legislatures to turn a nation into a 3rd world cesspool for their own brand of fuzzy feelgood. I am an atheist and part of the 40% of the eligible electorate that won't vote for either side of evil, right or left. This is my only voice, my words. Would you censor my freedom of speech or would you just nitpick my word choice to pander to easily bruised thin-skinned radicals on either side of the aisle who don't have an intellectually honest bone in their body?

The only part of this post I am going to respond to is the fact that you've misnested the quote. You may wish to have another look. As to the rest, have a blessed day is all I will say.

And now the thread is broke.

Just remember kids, don't mix spoilers and quotes. Down that path lies naught but madness.

[Oubliettica]

My apologies if I broked it, Godular. Sometimes my powers amaze me.

Jebslund - Not seeing how I "misnested" the part of your specious quote I wanted to highlight, but then I don't spend much time on forums with this weird layout so it wouldn't surprise me if I do make mistakes of that nature. I think you got the drift. I haven't created a list of Who's on Which team in this tempest in a teapot.

Since you're self-professed as pro-CHOICE, lemme ask ya -

Do you object to the pro-MISERY cult members use of blatant smears the way you chose to distance yourself from my choice of "godgroveler" when calling out the extreme rightwing? I'm referring not just to the lies they tell, but to specious insulting smearage by certain forum posters (I'll leave a certain moronic tweeter's unbelievably insulting and factually incorrect posts for another thread), such as accusing pro-CHOICE advocates of being "murderers" of "unborn children" - when terminating a fetus is NOT at all equivalent to "murder" since "unborn child" refers to a FUTURE only maybe baby that hasn't fully gestated and - statistically - cannot even survive outside the womb before the 23 week, or to valid stats that point to countless failed embryos and nascent fetuses?

NOBODY can legitimately be prosecuted for a future possible "crime" (except in fictional films such as Minority Report) because it's unreasonable, unethical and just plain WRONG, as are the cult's most recent lame grasps at straws - fetal pain and fetal heartbeat - both canards have been debunked. Cultists don't let facts stand in the way of fallacy and hyperbole.
They've been spewing these sick weasel-worded games (emotional hyperbole, repetitive lying) early and often for the past 40 years despite repeated rebuke and rebuttal. Yet, still today, they smugly think they're smearing us with their fallacious hyperbole. (see Crockof's posts for examples galore, as he frequently regurgitates excerpts from the Handbook of Conservative Zealot Canards.)

The fundies (or whatever cult nickname you might ascribe to them) are an obscenely vocal minority spewing falsehoods and hyperbole on a daily basis. That includes all the sick fk politicians pandering to said cult (or would you maybe prefer I call them "taliban lite"?), including the sickos who create a gauntlet of phony "counselors" outside clinics to harass and verbally abuse already traumatized women who simply want to exercise THEIR right to reset the clock in a safe and legal manner without dealing with the pseudoscience charlatans who claim human personhood starts at conception. Seriously, a) do you raise a point of order and object to those sleazy actions? and b)
do you vote for the oppressive misogynist political party that panders to that oppressive minority cult?
If your answered YES to the first, and NO to the second then you qualify as a moderate. Kudos! We need more moderates in a third centrist party to quash egregious malignant extremist agendas.

There's a big difference between simply "believing" in fantasy entities and trying to force medieval, oppressive, man-invented constructs down everyone's throats. Be it xtian/catholic/muslim or PC extremism, when it waddles and quacks and wields a cudgel (from bullying/intimidation to firebombing to real murder of doctors and women to hijacking political parties while demanding tax exempt status) it's a cult.

To reiterate, you are free to "believe" in your man-invented deities. Heck, you can build gaudy temples to your particular form of idolotry and even wear your belief on your sleeve or lapel for all I care (though I don't tolerate "in your face" thumping/yelling proselytizers after I stop LOL at them.) Look in the mirror and tell me if you might be part of the problem or not. Are you by your actions defending intellectual honesty and freedom, calling out the liars on both sides or are you partly culpable for increasing the level of vitriol and polarization by voting FOR either the party that seeks the devolution of our nation by watering down immigration quotas and LAW or the party that persecutes women - and atheists, btw, though I don't grouse about the latter assault much and certainly not with the crocodile tears used by hypocrite cultists when they whinge about how their historically brutal religions are being "threatened" by science and atheists?

I've no objection to liberals espousing their fuzzy feel good kumbaya WISHES and DREAMS about a fanciful homogenization of citizens (honestly, it was always a slowly-congealing stew where fat bastyrds rise to the top and smother the other 99%) nor even to a well-controlled but limited influx of LEGAL immigrants and a well-monitored/enforced guest worker policy. What we have now is a porous broken MESS, from the lawbreaking employers looking for cheap labor, to the ILLEGAL invaders to even the visa overstayers - and neither side has the gonads to do what's right for CITIZENS.

What I have always objected to about sick fk liberals is how they forced the great society scam down our throats (50 years later and our culture's rotting away while the hands out crowd still clamors for more more more) - never satisfied nor willing to own their dirty laundry. Now, they and their ACLU lackeys double down by gaming immigration laws to tear open the gates so tens of MILLIONS of ILLEGAL unwashed have-not invaders can stream in, overwhelm our nation and demographics, rape/kill citizens and benefit from a porous revolving door so they can invade again and again, and strain our infrastructure to the breaking point and bleed our taxpayers dry, destabilizing our already fractious culture. The liberal extremists seek to tear down OUR wall/fence/line in the sand, blithely ignoring the consequences of the past 50 years of rot and blight. Too busy patting themselves on their hunched backs, I guess.

See? Equal air time to deride both sides of the aisle for being corrupt to the core.

The EU is waking up too late - that Merkel's ideas were seriously STUPID and bad policy for their nations. The US is poised to make the very same mistake because our corrupt politicians can't agree on much of anything that would be good FOR THE NATION. A third of the eligible electorate kowtow to the liberal MAL-agenda on immigration and a third kowtow to the GOP/xtians who want to trample pro-CHOICE and worse, inculcate kids in public schools to the fanciful existence of sky fairies.
My math = roughly 30% voting GOP, 30% voting DEM, 40% NOT VOTING for either corrupt side. Fact is, neither party has a mandate to strut around claiming an honest victory or majority on anything, much less claim a right to wag the dog (the other 70% of the citizenry.) A president does NOT get to "do anything he wants" in a fair and democratic country. No mandate, no super-majority, and if the unethical GOP had had their way, not even a Congressional Office of ETHICS.

During the impeachment hearings, the GOP weasels claimed repeatedly that the dems sought to nullify the wishes of "63 million voters." HAH What about the approx 65 MILLION who voted for the sleazy Clinton party? Funny, no mention of the impact of gerrymandering was heard. What about our supposedly revered Constitution? The GOP wants to tear that up and turn their hero into a molester/dictator and have 1 mythical religion rule all! (there's a LOTR meme in there somewhere)

What about the people who actually embrace intellectual honesty and ethics, not propaganda and misdirection? Heck, I may be too generous to ascribe either party as representing 30% of eligible voters! According to WIKI's references, in 2016 out of 250,056,000 (estimated) only 136,754,000 (estimated) voted = 54.7% (estimated)

The TRUE majority are the NO voters (roughly 113 MILLION non-voters if my fingers counted correctly), but of course the GOP, DEM and their biased and deceitful news orgs IGNORE that last bloc - probably because they're sweating bullets that a tsunami of angry nonvoting citizens will eventually come to some sort of consensus and purge both sides. Can't come too soon, likely will come too late.

As for smearing, the libs do it as much as the GOP, every time they knee-jerk yell racist or abuse semantics as badly as the GOP does. Michele Obama proffered a snarky, perverse claim that whites "fled" (referring to white flight) when in reality, it was an instinctive and smart strategic retreat from government-sponsored BLIGHT. Now, the liberals repeat the lie with ILLEGALS (the hyperbole of a kid who died in custody, or a few invaders found dead in a desert) while totally ignoring serious major injustices in this country to our own - the MILLIONS in Appalachia and on native reservations, with even the elderly under assault by a zealot party that wholesale throws people under the bus to pander to the 1%. Both sides are responsible, neither accepts blame, they prefer fingerpointing and childish insulting tweets.

With the whole world now in a roil, there's no place left for us to strategically retreat unless Atlantis magically re-emerges. Our only option is to stand our ground and speak freely and bluntly - calling liberals what they are (traitors), calling out the wannabe all hat no cattle despot emperor in the oval office (and his swamp comrades and his dictator pals) for having no clothes, and calling out cult members by debunking the lies and fallacies they cavalierly, incessantly spew day after day in a disingenuous attempt to sway the gullible and uninformed and muddy the waters while hoping to oppress women, destroy science and disrupt civil society.... and to get a leg up on the other side with their paltry 63 million votes vs nearly 66 million Dem votes. The 113 MILLION who don't want either party's sick platform to hold sway but weren't given an honest choice but to silently say "none of the above," representing honest peaceful resistance. That silence has become deafening.

It's sad beyond pathetic that two corrupt sides are making such a concerted effort to social re-engineer all of us into ruin. It won't end well, though Uncle Sam will likely limp along on life support until long after I'm dead before he's flushed down into either a 3rd world cesspool or an oppressive medieval autocratic - monarchical - dystopic kleptocracy. History repeats itself because people are, in toto, stupid and gullible, and always forget the mistakes of the past when distracted by a pocketful of vacuous promises and mumble lint.

[Farnhamia]

Jeeez, I thought the thread was dead and it springs back with the pro-misery
side continuing to regurgitate their sick emotional fallacies again.

Sorry, Crockof>>>>, by using the adoption canard you blithely ignore the female's rights, and SHE is the only HUMAN BEING who has skin in the game. You may get your warm and fuzzies by throwing women who don't want to go to term (for any reason) under a bus and we know your side wants to punish and control women and we watch in disgust as sick fks are now doing just that using sham laws that let them stick their noses up women's wombs and decide FOR the women (and doctors) what's best (for the cult.)

Your continued use of the LIE ("unborn child") is just shameless emotional hyperbole and propaganda, something the GOP is almost as good at as was Goebbels and Stalin. An unborn child is a term of endearment for those PARENTS who want a child as the end result of a pregnancy and are willing to risk the woman's life to achieve; but it is NOT a real medical or science term, sport. The correct term is fetus, and no fetus has a written guarantee of reaching viability and survivability outside the womb. ONLY the female has a right to determine whether the fetus should develop. PERIOD Not ignorant self-righteous oppressive sky fairy grovelers who hijack legislatures to promote their cults' sick agendas.

*** Warned for flaming ***

[Katganistan]

Jeeez, I thought the thread was dead and it springs back with the pro-misery
side continuing to regurgitate their sick emotional fallacies again.

Sorry, Crockof>>>>, by using the adoption canard you blithely ignore the female's rights, and SHE is the only HUMAN BEING who has skin in the game. You may get your warm and fuzzies by throwing women who don't want to go to term (for any reason) under a bus and we know your side wants to punish and control women and we watch in disgust as sick fks are now doing just that using sham laws that let them stick their noses up women's wombs and decide FOR the women (and doctors) what's best (for the cult.)

Your continued use of the LIE ("unborn child") is just shameless emotional hyperbole and propaganda, something the GOP is almost as good at as was Goebbels and Stalin. An unborn child is a term of endearment for those PARENTS who want a child as the end result of a pregnancy and are willing to risk the woman's life to achieve; but it is NOT a real medical or science term, sport. The correct term is fetus, and no fetus has a written guarantee of reaching viability and survivability outside the womb. ONLY the female has a right to determine whether the fetus should develop. PERIOD Not ignorant self-righteous oppressive sky fairy grovelers who hijack legislatures to promote their cults' sick agendas.

As a pro-choice Christian (pro-choice for multiple reasons, some purely practical, some conscience-based, some theological), I'll thank you not to refer to Christianity as a cult, or to lump all Christians in with someone who seems intent on beating people's heads in with the Bible rather than showing them God's love and letting them come of their own volition or not at all.

I would second this request.

[The Black Forrest]

As a pro-choice Christian (pro-choice for multiple reasons, some purely practical, some conscience-based, some theological), I'll thank you not to refer to Christianity as a cult, or to lump all Christians in with someone who seems intent on beating people's heads in with the Bible rather than showing them God's love and letting them come of their own volition or not at all.

I would second this request.

The problem is all the “normal” ones tend to be quiet over contentious issues. If the loud mouths are all people see and hear; people assume.

Maybe it’s time to no longer sit out and simply dismiss the bad ones as not being “real” Christians?

[Galloism]

I would second this request.

The problem is all the “normal” ones tend to be quiet over contentious issues. If the loud mouths are all people see and hear; people assume.

Maybe it’s time to no longer sit out and simply dismiss the bad ones as not being “real” Christians?

I laughed entirely too much at this post.

[The Black Forrest]

The problem is all the “normal” ones tend to be quiet over contentious issues. If the loud mouths are all people see and hear; people assume.

Maybe it’s time to no longer sit out and simply dismiss the bad ones as not being “real” Christians?

I laughed entirely too much at this post.

You’re welcome.

[Greed and Death]

So during the Covid-19 thread a current Texas Executive Order has restricted all elective surgeries including abortion was discussed, though I feel not fully dissected. It is worth noting that women can get the abortion pill though many times that deadline is missed in the states, also Ohio and Alabama have issued similar rules.

The purpose of the rule is to free up resources for the treatment of Corona-virus. Most importantly would be Personal Protective equipment that it is becoming clear the entire world is short of. For those wondering about the case's current procedural status. The Texas case was subject to a temporary injunction by the district court but the 5th Circuit has stayed the injunction pending a full brief Friday.

Now for my opinion of the matter. I believe no right is absolute and abortion is not an exception to this. The right to assemble has been restricted as has the right to free exercise of religion. This also fits within prior abortion case law because prior case law dealt with a woman's right vs the states power to protect a future life. The current case deals with a woman's right vs the state's power to limited resources during an emergency to save lives. Now if the state of emergency continues for a significant period of time say 6 months or a year then obviously provisions must be made to allow elective abortions again as the supply problems should be resolvable by then. I also believe the purpose of the right to an abortion is to treat abortions like all other medical procedures. Well right now all other elective procedures are also banned this is treating abortion just like any other medical procedure.

Well NSG I leave the discussion up to you.