U.S Supreme Court Ruling Rescinds Roe v. Wade (6-24-2022)

[Happy]

Originally Posted by crystalworks

Congrats! Realize, I don't know your circumstances but I hope congratulations are in order.


Agree! Wish it were possible.



My BiL and his wife have been going through the adoption process now for about 3 years. It's a mess. They've lost 3 kids so far (after having them in the home in 2 cases)... They are stronger than I ever could be to even adopt, let alone keep at it after so much heart break.



^Because of stories like that and failures of CPS to protect children is why I support abortion rights. Unwanted babies aren't good for the baby, the parents, or our society. The majority of the offenders might be "hoe bags," "cumdumpsters," or shitty men who produce those children, but the sad fact remains, it's the child who pays the price in a majority of cases.

Thanks Brotha! Yes, congrats all day! I am super stoked! I lost my 4th child 3 years ago, so it’s all good!

Yesss.. The process I’ve heard is extremely strenuous. I hope all works out for your family.

Yeah the awful stories I hear of child abuse are sickening! I hold men and women accountable for irresponsible fertilizations. I can’t say I support termination, but I do understand your position. I would hope no one would want to see harm to a child. But unfortunately there are evil doers throughout the earth.

[bcredliner]

Originally Posted by Happy

This thread is actually very crude.

The post is just short of out right stating that Christians, and republicans should cease to exist. And that somehow, this is the solution to a particular parties problems.

The sex joke insinuates that, canceling a generation of republican’s children, will also somehow solve this parties problems as well.

Christians have existed for thousands of years, long before the democratic party was founded. And we will continue to Live long past its dissolution.

It very obvious that the op has zero biblical knowledge. Because if he or she had any, they would know how many parties have tried and failed to destroy us.

This infantile country is like a toddler throwing a tantrum when it doesn’t get its way. The unfortunate thing is, there are parties that will continue the tantrums until she’s out breath. No breath, no life.

Many empires have fallen over the past 6 thousand years of human history. But, none of this is new to a true Christian. We’re still here, hated, but alive. The amazing thing though, we’re taught that Our Lord And Savior, The Christ Yeshua was hated first, therefore there is no need to carry that burden. So as the kids say, “haters are going to always hate”!

The Christ himself said, “Give to Cesar what is Cesar’s”. There is no religious or political party for a True Christian.

I get the notion from this post, and the recent public grumbling, that soon there will be a push to cancel the Christians.

It is definitely not the first attempt, there have in fact been many attempts. The fact that even just one Christian exists, proves that Yeshua’s presence is very real! There are billions of Christians today, and it seems the more they try to destroy the body, the larger the body becomes. Simply amazing!

Religion is a farce, The Christ is a Force, not a religion! The Father, Son, and Spirit cannot be canceled. There will be attacks on the body, but this is nothing new.

Sorry if you are offended. I didn't read it as crude at all. I read it as-- if republican women withheld sex from their republican partners republican men would quickly do some extensive objective thinking about the rights of women to choose to have an abortion. I don't believe the remark had any intent to even imply a generation of republicans children would be lost. No comment about religion.

[Maruzo]

A pragmatist would find common ground and strive to provide solution to what is largely a woman’s health decision.

We are man, why pretend to understand or try to dictate how they should care for their own body?

[EODguy]

Originally Posted by Maruzo

We are man, why pretend to understand or try to dictate how they should care for their own body?

Probably because....

1. It ends the life of a person who has completely different DNA.

2. Men who are 50% of the childs DNA should have a say, unless you think abortion is fine for a birth control method and then the man should be able to have a woman either abort a child he doesn't want (like women do to men) or make her have the child and take custody upon birth with the woman (who doesn't want the baby) paying him child support until adulthood.

Sent from my SM-A528B using Tapatalk

[bcredliner]

Originally Posted by Maruzo

A pragmatist would find common ground and strive to provide solution to what is largely a woman’s health decision.

We are man, why pretend to understand or try to dictate how they should care for their own body?

[Maruzo]

Originally Posted by EODguy

Probably because....

1. It ends the life of a person who has completely different DNA.

2. Men who are 50% of the childs DNA should have a say, unless you think abortion is fine for a birth control method and then the man should be able to have a woman either abort a child he doesn't want (like women do to men) or make her have the child and take custody upon birth with the woman (who doesn't want the baby) paying him child support until adulthood.

Sent from my SM-A528B using Tapatalk

I think a man's say ended when he ejaculates inside of her without having a consensus with the partner about what to do when she eventually becomes pregnant with his baby.

This is going to sound like very familiar conversation with a lot of us: honey I want to come inside of you and I hate wearing a condom. But i'll get pregnant. Are you going to be responsible? err.... sure why not. or, of course honey, you know i'll be there for you no matter what!

We all know what the boy in us will say to that poor, love-stricken girl.

All kiddings aside, we know what our responsibilities are: be there to support our loved ones, and respect her wishes.

And honor the coversation that we had with her before we foolishly did the deed without much thinking.

Think about it, we make the decision everytime we decide to have unprotected sex with our partner.

The girl always ask you what your intentions are if she becomes pregnant because of you.

Many of us follows through with our vows, but many of us also doesn't follow through.

It's very rare that a girl decides against the wish of her man to forgo having the baby. That's NOT the norm.

You're justifying the overturn based on the possible wishes of a very small minority.

[bcredliner]

I think abortion should be legal and be a decision made by the woman. I don't think there can be a caveat stating it is illegal after X numbers of months.

[Maruzo]

Originally Posted by bcredliner

I think abortion should be legal and be a decision made by the woman. I don't think there can be a caveat stating it is illegal after X numbers of months.

I think it should be a woman's decision too. How does one get to have a say on something that happens on another person's body?

It's their body, their autonomy. Any guidelines a government makes should only be about the health of the woman and her baby.

Politics never should've had a place on this issue.

[bcredliner]

Originally Posted by Maruzo

I think it should be a woman's decision too. How does one get to have a say on something that happens on another person's body?

It's their body, their autonomy. Any guidelines a government makes should only be about the health of the woman and her baby.

Politics never should've had a place on this issue.

I think it is impossible that a bill can be passed with any guidelines. There never will be enough agreement to pass a bill with any days/weeks/months limitations and if and what are the exceptions to any limitations.

[Maruzo]

Originally Posted by bcredliner

I think it is impossible that a bill can be passed with any guidelines. There never will be enough agreement to pass a bill with any days/weeks/months limitations and if and what are the exceptions to any limitations.

It maybe impossible due to the current political climate, but it's still something that we should look into in the future, especially now with the Roe overturn.

Women chooses to have an abortion for multitudes of reasons. A lot of them health related, many of them financially related.

For the health related cases, maybe the hospital can provide a guideline for the doctors so they have a list that they can go over to provide better care for the woman and her pregnancy.

For instance, if a couple has been trying to have a kid for the longest time but the wife keeps suffering from miscarriage due to whatever health reasons, then there should be a guideline that provides for fast track on her procedure so the fetus that no longer has a heartbeat can be safely and quickly removed from the mother.

Right now due to the Roe vs Wade overturn, many abortion clinics are scared of performing such a procedure even if the mother's health depends on it. Many tests are required to determine the exact status of the fetus which unnecessarily prolongs the suffering of the mother and increases the chances of her having septic shock due to having to carry the dead fetus much longer than necessary.

Here's a link to the case I'm referring to: https://people.com/health/beauty-you...n-on-abortion/

As for financial reasons, you live with the decision you make whether you are ok with it later on down the road, or regrets it years later.

Either way it's her body, her life, and ultimately her decision.