The Dobbs Decision

[Lloyd]

No one is denying anyone of any opinion on the subject. Heck, I can have any opinion I want on your faith. However, I can't restrict you from your choices. Why should men (or for that matter, anyone) determine what a woman can or can't do to protect her health?

Typos courtesy of Samsung Auto-Incorrect™

Because we can be the voice of the unheard.

It seems like you're including the mother as an unheard, too.

Typos courtesy of Samsung Auto-Incorrect™

[TSherbs]

It doesn't appear that anyone wants to address the specific issues being raised about the dangers to the health and welfare of women that pregnancies actually pose.



Sent from my moto g power using Tapatalk

[TSherbs]

I’m always going to side with those that have no choice in the matter.

In some states, this may be teenaged women raped and impregnated by male adult household members. They will have "no choice" about whether to continue that pregnancy or not of the state enacts an extreme law outlawing all abortions.

Yeah, "no choice."

I'm proud of my governor (Maine) stating publicly and enacting provisions to protect women from "any county" and "any state" if they come to Maine seeking treatment or an abortion. For now, women can still govern their own health and bodies in Maine. Not so much in several other states.


Sent from my moto g power using Tapatalk

[Bold2013]

It doesn't appear that anyone wants to address the specific issues being raised about the dangers to the health and welfare of women that pregnancies actually pose.



Sent from my moto g power using Tapatalk

Maybe but a lot of lives will be saved.

[Chuck Naill]

I’m always going to side with those that have no choice in the matter.

In some states, this may be teenaged women raped and impregnated by male adult household members. They will have "no choice" about whether to continue that pregnancy or not of the state enacts an extreme law outlawing all abortions.

Yeah, "no choice."

I'm proud of my governor (Maine) stating publicly and enacting provisions to protect women from "any county" and "any state" if they come to Maine seeking treatment or an abortion. For now, women can still govern their own health and bodies in Maine. Not so much in several other states.


Sent from my moto g power using Tapatalk

Those are so rare when considering the majority of abortions. The proponents of abortion always use these events, which have always, even prior to RVW been available. Perhaps this resource will be helpful.

https://www.guttmacher.org/united-states/abortion

[TSherbs]

Here is a short piece in The Atlantic, which I agree with:

"The Misogyny Is the Point
Roe was always about power."

By Molly Jong-Fast
JULY 06, 2022

https://newsletters.theatlantic.com/...bortion-bills/

I can't tell if it is behind a pay wall or not (I am not a subscriber, but I had to deke around to get a full view of the article)



Sent from my moto g power using Tapatalk

[Chuck Naill]

It just supports what you want to think, Ted. Which is fine!!

When the female said the male had no place in the decision, you didn't respond. Perhaps its because that's what you think. Fact is, if it takes two, both are invested.

[TSherbs]

I’m always going to side with those that have no choice in the matter.

In some states, this may be teenaged women raped and impregnated by male adult household members. They will have "no choice" about whether to continue that pregnancy or not of the state enacts an extreme law outlawing all abortions.

Yeah, "no choice."

I'm proud of my governor (Maine) stating publicly and enacting provisions to protect women from "any county" and "any state" if they come to Maine seeking treatment or an abortion. For now, women can still govern their own health and bodies in Maine. Not so much in several other states.


Sent from my moto g power using Tapatalk

Those are so rare when considering the majority of abortions. The proponents of abortion always use these events, which have always, even prior to RVW been available. Perhaps this resource will be helpful.

https://www.guttmacher.org/united-states/abortion

Who cares how "rare" it is? Is that really your answer?

What isn't "rare" is how many pregnancies will have no effect on male bodies. The answer to that one is.... billions.

Sent from my moto g power using Tapatalk

[Chuck Naill]

I’m always going to side with those that have no choice in the matter.

In some states, this may be teenaged women raped and impregnated by male adult household members. They will have "no choice" about whether to continue that pregnancy or not of the state enacts an extreme law outlawing all abortions.

Yeah, "no choice."

I'm proud of my governor (Maine) stating publicly and enacting provisions to protect women from "any county" and "any state" if they come to Maine seeking treatment or an abortion. For now, women can still govern their own health and bodies in Maine. Not so much in several other states.


Sent from my moto g power using Tapatalk

Those are so rare when considering the majority of abortions. The proponents of abortion always use these events, which have always, even prior to RVW been available. Perhaps this resource will be helpful.

https://www.guttmacher.org/united-states/abortion

Who cares how "rare" it is? Is that really your answer?

What isn't "rare" is how many pregnancies will have no effect on male bodies. The answer to that one is.... billions.

Sent from my moto g power using Tapatalk

You should care!! If you're going to be an advocate for killing 15 week old fetuses, you should know what you are supporting. I gifted you a NYT article of young female pro life advocates. I didn't expect you would read.

[TSherbs]

When the female said the male had no place in the decision, you didn't respond.

That would be TFarnon.

My purpose here is to advocate for reproductive and abortion choice for all women for any reason with no stipulations or regulations up to (at least) 20 weeks of gestation. I have said this repeatedly. Any one who posts things generally in support of my position or pointing in that direction generally dont get comment from me beyond a "well put" or something like that or a "like". Any one who posts to the contrary gets more comment from me. That's kind of the way it works.

And again, as I said before, no one is yet willing to address the issues brought up of the dangers and burdens of pregnancies that are direct threats to the livelihood and welfare and life of women. There is a thousands of years old reason women want the full and final say over their pregnancies. To ignore this is to be a misogynist. To place more value on a pea-sized embryo (at 6 weeks) in her womb than on her own choice for her body and its future and her mental health is to practice a kind of misogyny that women know and recognize all too well. They have long been seen and expected to conform to the idea of being primarily and exclusively the vessel of male seed and then of their children. It is patriarchal primacy in its clearest shape.

So, how can we find a way in law to compromise and find balance and not ignore the need to grant women independent equal to their male counterparts?



Sent from my moto g power using Tapatalk

[Chuck Naill]

When the female said the male had no place in the decision, you didn't respond.

That would be TFarnon.

My purpose here is to advocate for reproductive and abortion choice for all women for any reason with no stipulations or regulations up to (at least) 20 weeks of gestation. I have said this repeatedly. Any one who posts things generally in support of my position or pointing in that direction generally dont get comment from me beyond a "well put" or something like that or a "like". Any one who posts to the contrary gets more comment from me. That's kind of the way it works.

And again, as I said before, no one is yet willing to address the issues brought up of the dangers and burdens of pregnancies that are direct threats to the livelihood and welfare and life of women. There is a thousands of years old reason women want the full and final say over their pregnancies. To ignore this is to be a misogynist. To place more value on a pea-sized embryo (at 6 weeks) in her womb than on her own choice for her body and it's future and her mental health is to practice a kind of misogyny that women know and recognize all to well. They have long been seen and expected to confirm to the idea of being primarily and exclusively the vessel of male seed and then of their children. It is patriarchal primacy in it's clearest shape.

So, how can we find a way in law to compromise and find balance and not ignore the need to grant women independent equal to their male counterparts?

The way is to provide free contraception as I've been saying for some time.



Sent from my moto g power using Tapatalk

We now know each others purpose, and they differ. I wish that you had been so honest prior to posting, Ted.

The compromise is free contraception. In the case of incest and rape, castrate the SOB using DNA. In the case of mother's health, do all you can, but preserve the mother. It is what she would want.

[TSherbs]

When the female said the male had no place in the decision, you didn't respond.

That would be TFarnon.

My purpose here is to advocate for reproductive and abortion choice for all women for any reason with no stipulations or regulations up to (at least) 20 weeks of gestation. I have said this repeatedly. Any one who posts things generally in support of my position or pointing in that direction generally dont get comment from me beyond a "well put" or something like that or a "like". Any one who posts to the contrary gets more comment from me. That's kind of the way it works.

And again, as I said before, no one is yet willing to address the issues brought up of the dangers and burdens of pregnancies that are direct threats to the livelihood and welfare and life of women. There is a thousands of years old reason women want the full and final say over their pregnancies. To ignore this is to be a misogynist. To place more value on a pea-sized embryo (at 6 weeks) in her womb than on her own choice for her body and it's future and her mental health is to practice a kind of misogyny that women know and recognize all to well. They have long been seen and expected to confirm to the idea of being primarily and exclusively the vessel of male seed and then of their children. It is patriarchal primacy in it's clearest shape.

So, how can we find a way in law to compromise and find balance and not ignore the need to grant women independent equal to their male counterparts?



Sent from my moto g power using Tapatalk

We now know each others purpose, and they differ. I wish that you had been so honest prior to posting, Ted.

Whaaaat?

I have said the SAME THING about 5 times here and in other threads. I don't think you're paying attention.

Don't question my "honesty" on this topic, Chuck. That is the wrong route to take. I will not be "civil" if you persist with that kind of character remark.

Sent from my moto g power using Tapatalk

[Chuck Naill]

When the female said the male had no place in the decision, you didn't respond.

That would be TFarnon.

My purpose here is to advocate for reproductive and abortion choice for all women for any reason with no stipulations or regulations up to (at least) 20 weeks of gestation. I have said this repeatedly. Any one who posts things generally in support of my position or pointing in that direction generally dont get comment from me beyond a "well put" or something like that or a "like". Any one who posts to the contrary gets more comment from me. That's kind of the way it works.

And again, as I said before, no one is yet willing to address the issues brought up of the dangers and burdens of pregnancies that are direct threats to the livelihood and welfare and life of women. There is a thousands of years old reason women want the full and final say over their pregnancies. To ignore this is to be a misogynist. To place more value on a pea-sized embryo (at 6 weeks) in her womb than on her own choice for her body and it's future and her mental health is to practice a kind of misogyny that women know and recognize all to well. They have long been seen and expected to confirm to the idea of being primarily and exclusively the vessel of male seed and then of their children. It is patriarchal primacy in it's clearest shape.

So, how can we find a way in law to compromise and find balance and not ignore the need to grant women independent equal to their male counterparts?



Sent from my moto g power using Tapatalk

We now know each others purpose, and they differ. I wish that you had been so honest prior to posting, Ted.

Whaaaat?

I have said the SAME THING about 5 times here and in other threads. I don't think you're paying attention.

Don't question my "honesty" on this topic, Chuck. That is the wrong route to take. I will not be "civil" if you persist with that kind of character remark.

Sent from my moto g power using Tapatalk

Oh no, a threat. I read your posts and respond to what you wrote, and now I am being dishonest. Go ahead and drop one of your famous "f bombs". I can take it.

[Lloyd]

When the female said the male had no place in the decision, you didn't respond.

That would be TFarnon.

My purpose here is to advocate for reproductive and abortion choice for all women for any reason with no stipulations or regulations up to (at least) 20 weeks of gestation. I have said this repeatedly. Any one who posts things generally in support of my position or pointing in that direction generally dont get comment from me beyond a "well put" or something like that or a "like". Any one who posts to the contrary gets more comment from me. That's kind of the way it works.

And again, as I said before, no one is yet willing to address the issues brought up of the dangers and burdens of pregnancies that are direct threats to the livelihood and welfare and life of women. There is a thousands of years old reason women want the full and final say over their pregnancies. To ignore this is to be a misogynist. To place more value on a pea-sized embryo (at 6 weeks) in her womb than on her own choice for her body and it's future and her mental health is to practice a kind of misogyny that women know and recognize all to well. They have long been seen and expected to confirm to the idea of being primarily and exclusively the vessel of male seed and then of their children. It is patriarchal primacy in it's clearest shape.

So, how can we find a way in law to compromise and find balance and not ignore the need to grant women independent equal to their male counterparts?

The way is to provide free contraception as I've been saying for some time.



Sent from my moto g power using Tapatalk

We now know each others purpose, and they differ. I wish that you had been so honest prior to posting, Ted.

The compromise is free contraception. In the case of incest and rape, castrate the SOB using DNA. In the case of mother's health, do all you can, but preserve the mother. It is what she would want.

Give the pregnant woman free contraception? Castrate the man after he's impregnated the woman? I think the laws of time/space imply that these approaches won't help the situation.

Typos courtesy of Samsung Auto-Incorrect™

[Lloyd]

I think the mother, not just any woman, should decide. I don't think the father should have any more say than to discuss the situation with his partner.

Typos courtesy of Samsung Auto-Incorrect™

[TSherbs]

When the female said the male had no place in the decision, you didn't respond.

That would be TFarnon.

My purpose here is to advocate for reproductive and abortion choice for all women for any reason with no stipulations or regulations up to (at least) 20 weeks of gestation. I have said this repeatedly. Any one who posts things generally in support of my position or pointing in that direction generally dont get comment from me beyond a "well put" or something like that or a "like". Any one who posts to the contrary gets more comment from me. That's kind of the way it works.

And again, as I said before, no one is yet willing to address the issues brought up of the dangers and burdens of pregnancies that are direct threats to the livelihood and welfare and life of women. There is a thousands of years old reason women want the full and final say over their pregnancies. To ignore this is to be a misogynist. To place more value on a pea-sized embryo (at 6 weeks) in her womb than on her own choice for her body and it's future and her mental health is to practice a kind of misogyny that women know and recognize all to well. They have long been seen and expected to confirm to the idea of being primarily and exclusively the vessel of male seed and then of their children. It is patriarchal primacy in it's clearest shape.

So, how can we find a way in law to compromise and find balance and not ignore the need to grant women independent equal to their male counterparts?



Sent from my moto g power using Tapatalk

We now know each others purpose, and they differ. I wish that you had been so honest prior to posting, Ted.

Whaaaat?

I have said the SAME THING about 5 times here and in other threads. I don't think you're paying attention.

Don't question my "honesty" on this topic, Chuck. That is the wrong route to take. I will not be "civil" if you persist with that kind of character remark.

Sent from my moto g power using Tapatalk

Oh no, a threat. I read your posts and respond to what you wrote, and now I am being dishonest. Go ahead and drop one of your famous "f bombs". I can take it.

I didn't call you "dishonest"! What could you be possibly talking about???

I have REPEATEDLY said what my position is here (elective abortion up to 20 weeks).

How have you overlooked this, leading you to suggest that I should have been more "honest" and said so earlier?

I even stated my position, and then asked for yours more than once before you answered directly (that you didn't know).

Sent from my moto g power using Tapatalk

[TSherbs]

I think the mother, not just any woman, should decide. I don't think the father should have any more say than to discuss the situation with his partner.

Typos courtesy of Samsung Auto-Incorrect

agreed

but she doesn't even have to tell him if she doesn't want

Sent from my moto g power using Tapatalk

[Lloyd]

I think the mother, not just any woman, should decide. I don't think the father should have any more say than to discuss the situation with his partner.

Typos courtesy of Samsung Auto-Incorrect

agreed

but she doesn't even have to tell him if she doesn't want

Sent from my moto g power using Tapatalk

Have to? It would be case dependent for me. For me, she should have to at his request but only if her own self-chosen social-support is present.

Typos courtesy of Samsung Auto-Incorrect™

[TSherbs]

I think the mother, not just any woman, should decide. I don't think the father should have any more say than to discuss the situation with his partner.

Typos courtesy of Samsung Auto-Incorrect

agreed

but she doesn't even have to tell him if she doesn't want

Sent from my moto g power using Tapatalk

Have to? It would be case dependent for me. For me, she should have to at his request but only if her own self-chosen social-support is present.

Typos courtesy of Samsung Auto-Incorrect

I am talking law/legal requirement for abortion. I am saying that I support abortion on demand; the pregnant woman need not speak to anyone but a doctor.

How couples (or simply the biological parents) actually conduct themselves prior to the procedure is up to them and can proceed in many different ways.

Sent from my moto g power using Tapatalk

[Lloyd]

I think the mother, not just any woman, should decide. I don't think the father should have any more say than to discuss the situation with his partner.

Typos courtesy of Samsung Auto-Incorrect

agreed

but she doesn't even have to tell him if she doesn't want

Sent from my moto g power using Tapatalk

Have to? It would be case dependent for me. For me, she should have to at his request but only if her own self-chosen social-support is present.

Typos courtesy of Samsung Auto-Incorrect

I am talking law/legal requirement for abortion. I am saying that I support abortion on demand; the pregnant woman need not speak to anyone but a doctor.

How couples (or simply the biological parents) actually conduct themselves prior to the procedure is up to them and can proceed in many different ways.

Sent from my moto g power using Tapatalk

I don't fully agree. As an example, of the woman gets overly depressed and a "good" partner doesn't want her to act too impulsively and do something she'd regret, he should have the right to try to support her as long as she has an added support mechanism in his presence.

Typos courtesy of Samsung Auto-Incorrect™