Ohio leg. passes 6-week abortion ban - VETOED by Kasich; 20-week bill signed

[publicunofficial]

Stupid and unnecessary and it will be shot down quickly enough.

Yep.  The vast majority of people are sympathetic to limiting late-term abortions with the well-being of the fetus being their motivating factor ... but this is a ridiculous bill.  Even your standard Republican who opposes Roe v. Wade seems to be fine with an exception for rape, incest or AT LEAST life of the mother.

The article does not explicitly say whether a life exception is included or not. Obviously a life exception is a precondition to getting my support for this (As I said, I would veto this for strategic reasons regardless).

Rape and incest aren't good enough excuses for you, huh?

[publicunofficial]

Stupid and unnecessary and it will be shot down quickly enough.

Yep.  The vast majority of people are sympathetic to limiting late-term abortions with the well-being of the fetus being their motivating factor ... but this is a ridiculous bill.  Even your standard Republican who opposes Roe v. Wade seems to be fine with an exception for rape, incest or AT LEAST life of the mother.

The article does not explicitly say whether a life exception is included or not. Obviously a life exception is a precondition to getting my support for this (As I said, I would veto this for strategic reasons regardless).

Rape and incest aren't good enough excuses for you, huh?

I would sign a bill with such exceptions, but I would not have them in my ideal bill. I haven't really heard a good justification why rape or incest justifies abortion, if we take the premise that abortion is a morally wrong action. What I've heard is 1) increased risk of severe fetal abnormalities - which I think is probably best dealt with on a case-by-case basis rather than a blanket exception (this is a very small number of abortions, so it's not impractical at all) (if the life is truly worthless, then I could see myself agreeing to an exception), and 2) it wasn't their fault they got pregnant - in which case I point to the adoption industry (and as for the problems with adoption, I believe if we stopped spending money to fund planned murderhood and government-funded birth control (I believe birth control should be covered like any standard prescription with a reasonable co-pay), we could gradually eliminate the problems with the adoption industry).

Yeah there's really no good arguments. I mean, women freak the hell out when you tell them they need to carry their rapist's baby in their body for 9 months, but that's really just a minor inconvenience. You know how hysterical women get.

And you're right, abolishing abortion will totally help fix our broken foster care system. I mean, Republicans LOVE sending money to social programs and they TOTALLY would if it wasn't for Planned Parenthood taking all the funding.

[publicunofficial]

Not sure if your first point is serious, but if not, women screaming does not justify murder, sorry.

Is that what you characterize my argument as? "Women screaming"?

You're a real piece of work.

EDIT: Can you clarify, by the way, whether the women's screams you are indifferent towards are they screams they make when you make them deliver the baby of their rapist, or the screams during the rape? Or are you indifferent to both, good Christian that you are.

[publicunofficial]

Some Republicans are resisting the GOP's transformation into a European-style right-wing party!

We won't stop fighting this issue until abortion is 100% illegal in all cases nationwide.

Nice to know you would rather kill the mother than let an abortion happen.

Don't try to shame ER for his beliefs when yours aren't much better.

[publicunofficial]

Well, to break down your argument, I should support a rape exception because 1) republicans won't fund adoption - which I believe may change once society is no longer given the option of abortion, and thus aggressively push congress to more aggressively fund adoption, and 2) because not doing so is unpopular with women - which might work if I was a politician trying to win an election, but as a private citizen the popularity or lack thereof of my positions is not something I even think about.

On point #1, you are insanely naive if you think criminalizing abortion will make people rise up and demand a better foster care system. Or if you think Congress would care. On point #2, holy crap you are a robot. It's not "unpopular" with women. It's not a f**king new tax or policy initiative. There are a lot of women who would kill themselves  rather then spend 9 months carrying around the child of a rapist. It's not something you should oppose because "oh no people might not like me", it's something you should oppose because you are a human being with a functioning sense of empathy to realize how pathologically cruel it is to force that on a woman.

[publicunofficial]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Source for that? I literally looked it up and the only thing that mentions abortion in the first couple pages is this: http://liveactionnews.org/raped-women-who-had-their-babies-defy-pro-choice-stereotypes/, which actually argues the opposite.

...Have you talked to a woman that isn't your mother or one of the ladies at your church? Like, ever?

[publicunofficial]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Source for that? I literally looked it up and the only thing that mentions abortion in the first couple pages is this: http://liveactionnews.org/raped-women-who-had-their-babies-defy-pro-choice-stereotypes/, which actually argues the opposite.

...Have you talked to a woman that isn't your mother or one of the ladies at your church? Like, ever?

Obviously yes. I don't live in some cave and only come out for Church, or whatever stupid theory you cooked up.

I was giving you the benefit of the doubt. I was thinking "Surely, the only way this guy could be so cold and unsympathetic to rape victims is if he is completely ignorant of what a woman is." Now you don't have that excuse.