- Dec 1, 2011
- 22,760
- 18,678
- Country
- United States
- Gender
- Male
- Faith
- Atheist
- Marital Status
- Private
- Politics
- US-Others
Upvote
0
Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
That’s where the pregnancy tracking comes into play.There will be no advertising and abortion. I went on vacation; they have no proof an abortion happened.
I don't see that as very likely. Even if the Court Overturned R v W , which is doubtful, abortion would not be outlawed in the places where the majority of people favored it being legal. Most likely it would not have much effect on abortion availability except for a very few states where it being unavailable might be popular.
Your point is well taken and in reality, is quite true. Nevertheless, I still think that enough suburban women might be upset enough to cost the GOP at the polls, despite the fact that most of them would not have to worry about access to an abortion.
The most interesting outcome of a post Roe US would be seeing how the chips fall with “but abortion!” taken off the table as something to hold unlikely political alliances together. I see a lot of them collapsing but I think those who benefit from them will double and triple down on punishment for abortion in an attempt to hold them together.That's true. Overturning Roe v Wade does not mean abortion is banned, it only means the matter reverts to the states.
Prolife Democrats used to be a thing. Aren’t they extinct? Can you name any in Congress?Good Day,
Great question... it may give some traction to the "prolife democrat's" to have impact the GPO by increasing their voting base.
In Him,
Bill
That's true. Overturning Roe v Wade does not mean abortion is banned, it only means the matter reverts to the states.
What will be more interesting, and already troubling in Texas, would be states taking measures to make it a crime to go to another state for the procedure. Laws like that would have wide-ranging problems far beyond abortion.
Proliferate Democrats used to be a thing. Aren’t they extinct? Can you name any in Congress?
Most of us were pushed out. I have respect for the few who battled on, but they are few. And if you count Joe Manchin and ? not many in Congress.Democrats are not defined just by the politicians that the party allows to be elected. There are still a few pro-life rank and file democrats out there.
Prolife Democrats used to be a thing. Aren’t they extinct? Can you name any in Congress?
Corrected. Autocorrect had trouble with the word ‘prolife’ and snuck in ‘proliferate’ instead. Sorry.
I know of the existence of the DFLA. That they continue to exist is wonderful. But the Party hates them. How long can they hold out?Good Day,
Not sure about the representation in Congress, but to use that to conclude they do not exits is unfair. IMHO
DFLA - Pro-Life for the Whole Life - Democrats For Life of America
in Him,
Bill
Most experts now expect Republicans to retake the House next year and possibly the Senate as well. However, a huge uproar over the abortion issue could cause a shift in the odds and keep both chambers under Democratic control. What think ye?
I don't see that as very likely. Even if the Court Overturned R v W , which is doubtful, abortion would not be outlawed in the places where the majority of people favored it being legal. Most likely it would not have much effect on abortion availability except for a very few states where it being unavailable might be popular.
Why is it a step in the right direction? If we take the pro-life perspective that a fetus has personhood and a fundamental right to life, then wouldn't that be something that you would not want individual states to make different decisions on?AFAIK, all overturning Roe v. Wade would do is return to decision to the states, which I consider to be a step in the right direction, at the very least.
If the right direction is making abortion unavailable it will have little impact on that front aa it would remain legal for the majority of the population and available to all others who can go out of state for a day or two.AFAIK, all overturning Roe v. Wade would do is return to decision to the states, which I consider to be a step in the right direction, at the very least.
Why is it a step in the right direction? If we take the pro-life perspective that a fetus has personhood and a fundamental right to life, then wouldn't that be something that you would not want individual states to make different decisions on?
Well, dead silence about my examination of some Men, in addition, the Catholic church and other Christian as well as secular organizations want eventually to criminalize artificial birth control methods calling some of them " abortifacient' as for Catholics they disapprove of barriers methods like Condoms that are not so called ' abortifacients'. So in effect it's complete control of the heterosexual acts blaming Women for unplanned pregnancies, never the desires nor actions of MEN!Why is the discussion so much about preventing abortions rather than reducing unwanted pregnancies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?