Alabama governor signs nation’s strictest abortion law

Post Reply New Topic

No, these laws are in effect because men have been erroneously led to believe that their opinions on abortion matter.

No Uterus, No Involvement!

Last edited by Fnord on 16 May 2019, 3:37 pm, edited 1 time in total.

You were once a zygote/embryo/fetus though so I reject the premise.

I was also a mistake made by a Roman Catholic girl. She made The Choice, not I.

Besides, if there was no abortion, there would be more paternity suits and child-support payments.

Abortion means never having to hear "You're the father" when you least expect it.

You argue the point of a pro-lifer though. The life of a zygote/embryo/fetus is currently in the hands of their mother. If that mother chooses to snuff it out she currently has the right to do so. A pro-lifer argues that the zygote/embryo/fetus has a right to living.

I was born at 7 and a half months. I find it outrageous that abortion at 8 months should be legal, as by that definition I should have been allowed to be murdered upto 2 weeks after my birth. I draw a line at 20 weeks, because well that's a bit before the normal age of viability and gives a woman plenty of time to find out she's pregnant.

Others draw a line at conception, because that's when the unique genetic material that comprises a human being is formed. Some draw a line at heartbeat detection, presumably because it sounds good. Others draw a line at birth because until then a child is dependent on the mother.

With a metaphysical question there is no right or wrong answer that can be determined by the reason of man. I have my belief and I've explained it.

The idea that abortion is a woman's issue is in my opinion plain wrong. Everyone has an opinion on when life begins, and most people consider extinguishing life a great evil. A woman's opinion on when life begins is no more valid than a man's because she suffers the burden of pregnancy.

No, I argue the point of pro-choice. It just looks like pro-life to a pro-abortionist (and pro-abortion to a pro-lifer).

The only way to bring the Bible Belt into this century is through armed insurrection.

The "Bible Belt" has been with us since the Puritans landed at Plymouth Rock. It just shifted location.

The only way to get rid of it is through forced scientific education. Even then, there is no certain guaranty.

Semantic nonsense. Only a few extreme "we shouldn't bring up children in this world" could be described as pro-abortionist. Pro-choice is the choice by the mother to have an abortion or not.

Again, whether the mother should have this choice depends on the line of where you draw the beginning of human life. Once you have determined human life to have begun the mother no longer has that choice.

Line 1: At conception. Supporting logic is that at conception the complete genetic material for a human being is formed.

Line 2: At heartbeat. Supporting logic is uh it makes good propraganda?

Line 3: At viability. This is my line and the supporting logic is that at viability a fetus can survive outside the womb and should be considered indistinguishable from a baby.

Line 4: At birth. Until then a zygote/embryo/fetus is physically connected to their mother.

Line 5: At self-sufficiency. I don't know anyone who actually argues for this, but a lot of people make the argument that a fetus is dependent on its mother. Taken to its logical conclusion until a child is old enough to fend for itself it is dependent on its guardian adults and those adults should have the right to kill it anytime they want.

The exception language for rape and incest is nonsense with the tricky morality of the life of the mother in danger being a whole separate issue. You either believe a zygote/embryo/fetus is a human life or not, and whether it was born of rape or incest is immaterial.

I cannot say one line is ultimately correct because it is a judgement call with no clear answer, but I can say that I think as a man I can have a valid opinion on where the line should be drawn.

At the very least, I would like the GOP to go back to the times where it was secular, when Barry Goldwater said "someone oughta kick Jerry Falwell in the nuts", rather that courting extreme evangelicals. Unfortunately, the secular Republicans are immediately dismissed as "RINOs" and can't even make it past primaries. Susan Collins would face a worse fate in Alabama than Roy Moore would in California or New York.

These days, with what happened in Alabama (and now Missouri), the question is "what will be banned next?"

I miss William F. Buckley and the intellectual right. I'm certainly not religious and am pretty adamantly against the evangelical right when it comes to things like gay rights. On abortion I do actually see where they say they're coming from, although I suspect the number of pro-lifers who are true believers are lower than the number that say they're pro-life.

Why? If you say because sex is for reproduction, that is bad biology. You can tell the species in which the only function of sex is reproduction by the fact that males know when females are likely to be fertile, either because there is a mating season, or because females advertise their fertility. Neither applies to humans.



True, as Chamblis admitted when asked about fertility clinics:


If this were about the sanctity of life, and life beginning at conception, then discarding an embryo in a fertility clinic should be treated exactly the same as an abortion.

We need abortion clinics, marijuana dispensaries and gay bars on every corner in every town. Otherwise, we're just an extreme right-wing sh*thole.

Men's sperm is responsible for 100% of unwanted pregnancies.

Let's legislate mandatory vasectomies for all males at puberty. Later, if they want to reproduce and can find a willing female, they can have the vasectomy reversed.

What's that I hear? It's not right to make sweeping legislative decisions about men's bodies and reproductive choices?

Yeah, that was the point.

I feel like most people believe the Alabama law is ridiculous.

The Alabama state government, and the governments of the other states that signed these types of legislation, need to be overthrown, not just voted out.