JDs Couch
Well-known member
Of course I am. Unlike the party you support, which protects pedophiles at all costs (like all Christian religions as well)
V
VonBonfire
Well-known member
I don't vote, or support any party. Neither do most christian denominations "protect pedophiles". You lack nuance though I'm sure it's intentional.
JDs Couch
Well-known member
I know you don't vote (pathetic abandonment of your hard fought sacred responsibility). But you 100% support Republicans (don't deny it).
And yes, all Christian denominations support and protect pedophiles (actions speak louder than words)...
V
VonBonfire
Well-known member
Sorry, wrong.
Wrong again but comical coming from someone who supports baby killers while simultaneously freaking out about epstein all the time.
JDs Couch
Well-known member
Pure bullshit and lies again from the fake Christian.
JamesTiberiusKirk
Well-known member
Read the parts I highlighted in red above.aka Field Execution of a human weeks or seconds before birth is fine. Harpies cheer.
Hey MASShole, what's stopping you from saying the mother and doctor can "have a conversation" within 48 hrs of birth about extended field execution? You know, in case mom has "buyer's remorse", doesn't like the way the baby looks, considers the baby a hinderance to her blossoming Social Media career, no longer loves dad and wants to punish him, etc? Huh?
*********************
MASShole approves Execution Until Moment of Birth
Democratic Gov. Maura Healey was met with applause and smilesas she signed away Massachusetts' gestational limits on abortion, making the deep-blue state the 10th to permit the procedure up to birth.
Under the Prioritizing Patient Access to Care Act, health care workers will have greater discretion in determining whether to perform an abortion later in pregnancy, without facing legal penalties under the state's previous restrictions.
Healey said the law is intended to ensure families facing medical complications late in pregnancy can abort their babies in Massachusetts rather than having to travel out of state. Those complications can include maternal health complications and fatal diagnoses.
"We believe that health care decisions should be made between women and families and their doctors, not politicians," Healey said. "Abortion will remain safe. It will remain legal, and it will remain accessible here in Massachusetts. That's my commitment to you."
The bill is scheduled to take effect in 90 days. Previously, state law generally prohibited abortions after 24 weeks, with limited exceptions.
Massachusetts now joins Alaska, Colorado, Maryland, Michigan, Minnesota, New Jersey, New Mexico, Oregon and Vermont in removing gestational age limits on abortion, along with the District of Columbia.
Healey said Monday's signing was intended to "stand with women," arguing that those who oppose the legislation do not support women's health.
"The bottom line for people in Massachusetts, if you care about women's health, if you care about making sure that women are able to access the health care that they need in consultation with their doctors, should be clear," she said. "I stand with women. My opponents do not."
Healey also framed the legislation as a "shield" against national efforts under President Donald Trump and Republicans to roll back abortion protections following the Supreme Court's overturning of Roe v. Wade.
"It is up to the states to lead," Healey said. "And as governor, I promise that no matter what Donald Trump or Republicans in Congress or the Supreme Court does, we're going to continue to make sure that women and families have access to the health care that they need, right here in Massachusetts."
SBA Pro-Life America President Marjorie Dannenfelser condemned the signing of the "egregious" law in a statement Monday, arguing that late-term abortions can involve dismemberment of the fetus.
"It should shock the conscience that tens of thousands of unborn Americans are barbarically dismembered limb by limb and torn apart every single year," she said. "Sadly, that number will only increase with Gov. Healey’s approval of the Abortion Up Until Birth Bill. The GOP must abandon the ‘leave it to the states’ position – a stance that permits egregious late-term abortion laws like this one – and advance national protections for unborn children."
Dannenfelser also argued that the U.S. is among a small number of countries that permit abortion throughout pregnancy.
"Without a minimum national standard, the United States remains 1 of only 8 countries worldwide that allows abortion at any point in pregnancy. We must do all we can to turn the page on America’s ugly chapter of late-term abortion."
Tell me why you don't agree. I'm listening.
V
VonBonfire
Well-known member
They constantly reframe it as health care when reality is very few abortions are done in protection of the mother's life. It's all about convenience for the mother and profiteering on body parts for the health care system.
JamesTiberiusKirk
Well-known member
That's not the fault of the law as written (if it ever happens).
Without the law there would be NO protection of the mother's life. Is that what you want? I'm sure your answer is "no".
Would you want your wife or daughter to carry an already dead fetus for months until full term? Me either.
V
VonBonfire
Well-known member
The answer is that the laws aren't written cause they give a shit about the mother's life, the laws are written because baby body parts are extremely profitable. I think you'd agree that the US medical industry is largely profit driven. If the fetus is already dead then it isn't really an abortion, it's just a surgical procedure.
R
Robostyle
Well-known member
I doubt it.
They are losing millions in tax revenue, from high earners moving away.
You keep thinking you know everything though.
JamesTiberiusKirk
Well-known member
I disagree with the first half sentence.
And regarding the second half sentence - under federal law, profiting from the sale of human fetal tissue is strictly prohibited.
You and I know that but
I was wrong about that. I checked and yes, it's viewed as miscarriage management.
JDs Couch
Well-known member
There are still cases where the fetus is alive but non-viable, and puts the mother's life at risk. These anti-abortion freaks would rather see both mother and fetus die than have an abortion performed for safety.
R
Robostyle
Well-known member
How many US elections have you voted in?
V
VonBonfire
Well-known member
Biotech firms profit off of it. There is vested interest in continued harvesting fetal tissues so I do not see that as at all debatable.
R
Robostyle
Well-known member
I am shocked that you think you can even have an opinion about abortion, but then i remembered that you do have a vagina.
JDs Couch
Well-known member
It's a funny point you make in a roundabout and retarded way. It's always weird unfuckable dudes (like you) who want to tell women what they are allowed to do with their bodies.
R
Robostyle
Well-known member
When did i do this? Oh that's right- never.
You're yelling at clouds.
Picasso
Well-known member
Big giant 70’s muff.
V
VonBonfire
Well-known member
Except those are generally first trimester events i.e ectopic pregnancies, not stuff that happens in the last trimester.
It's estimated that 1-3% of all abortions performed are for the safety of the mother. So for every 100 babies aborted, 97 or more of them are strictly killed for the sake of convenience.
Geo
Well-known member
Disgusting
Similar threads
