ADVERTISEMENT

roe v wade, will it move the needle in the flyover states?

rmdelta1

Heisman Candidate
Gold Member
Dec 10, 2003
7,493
2,590
113
asking for a friend. not sure this will cause the great unwashed to rally around pedo joe. it could increase the voter turnout in cali, illinoise, jerzy, and ny, but the gop wasn't gonna carry any of those commucrat states. what do you think? how long will this story have legs? when will people get bored/mad about inflation, immigration, crime, bla bla bla.

telling us to look over here at abortion being overturned? eventually we will have to buy food or gas and the abortion issue will be fading in the rear view mirror.

thanks ruth bader g'berg. your ego cost the dem's the supreme court. and you dem's could have codified roe anytime for the last 50 yrs, but you didn't. nice job dumbasses.
 
asking for a friend. not sure this will cause the great unwashed to rally around pedo joe. it could increase the voter turnout in cali, illinoise, jerzy, and ny, but the gop wasn't gonna carry any of those commucrat states. what do you think? how long will this story have legs? when will people get bored/mad about inflation, immigration, crime, bla bla bla.

telling us to look over here at abortion being overturned? eventually we will have to buy food or gas and the abortion issue will be fading in the rear view mirror.

thanks ruth bader g'berg. your ego cost the dem's the supreme court. and you dem's could have codified roe anytime for the last 50 yrs, but you didn't. nice job dumbasses.
If my wife and daughter are any indication I would say yes, it might.
 
It's complicated. Both are vehemently anti-abortion but neither want the government interfering in personal decisions. I suspect there are a lot of people that feel the same way.
Just ask them two questions: At what point does a fetus gain the "right" to live? If you are radical lib, the answer is "once the cord is cut". If you are staunch Christian, your answer is "at conception". Or like many of us, your answer is in between. The second question to ask: From that point, do you believe the government should protect that fetus/child? Its not about Women's (aka birthing people) rights. Its about at what point the child/fetus deserves reasonable protection by the state.
 
It's complicated. Both are vehemently anti-abortion but neither want the government interfering in personal decisions. I suspect there are a lot of people that feel the same way.
On what grounds are they anti-abortion? Because it destroys a human life? If that is the case, then they are both as philosophically empty as my_2baizuos. If you think the mother should have the right to kill the unborn child, then you clearly don’t consider that child to be human.
 
On what grounds are they anti-abortion? Because it destroys a human life? If that is the case, then they are both as philosophically empty as my_2baizuos. If you think the mother should have the right to kill the unborn child, then you clearly don’t consider that child to be human.
If you think I’m going to get into a philosophical debate with the two women most important in my life you’re batty!
 
It's complicated. Both are vehemently anti-abortion but neither want the government interfering in personal decisions. I suspect there are a lot of people that feel the same way.
So how do they feel about gun control?
 
If you think I’m going to get into a philosophical debate with the two women most important in my life you’re batty!
I wasn't asking for you to debate them. I just recommended that you rephrase the question from the perspective of the child/fetus and make them answer it for themselves.
 
  • Like
Reactions: CoastGuardCowboy
asking for a friend. not sure this will cause the great unwashed to rally around pedo joe. it could increase the voter turnout in cali, illinoise, jerzy, and ny, but the gop wasn't gonna carry any of those commucrat states. what do you think? how long will this story have legs? when will people get bored/mad about inflation, immigration, crime, bla bla bla.

telling us to look over here at abortion being overturned? eventually we will have to buy food or gas and the abortion issue will be fading in the rear view mirror.

thanks ruth bader g'berg. your ego cost the dem's the supreme court. and you dem's could have codified roe anytime for the last 50 yrs, but you didn't. nice job dumbasses.
I don't. These are the same individuals who elected the state representatives and governors in those various states that are enacting the strict abortion laws.

Edit: Reading about the various protests and such planned, it could actually even backfire on Dems. If those protests turn violent (would you be surprised?) you could turn off a large number of the political middle that doesn't really have a dog in that hunt.
 
Last edited:
I wasn't asking for you to debate them. I just recommended that you rephrase the question from the perspective of the child/fetus and make them answer it for themselves.

I appreciate the advice, but I’m staying as far away from them as I can get regarding this subject. I’m just saying I think there are more people than you might suspect that feel the same way as they do.
 
I appreciate the advice, but I’m staying as far away from them as I can get regarding this subject. I’m just saying I think there are more people than you might suspect that feel the same way as they do.
Interesting. My wife believes like your family does that the government shouldn't be involved, and so I asked her those questions. It wasn't about her answer (which for the record was sometime after the first trimester) but just the consideration of the other side. Rights always have 2 sides to them and it just ensures that individuals think of the issue from both lenses.
 
Interesting. My wife believes like your family does that the government shouldn't be involved, and so I asked her those questions. It wasn't about her answer (which for the record was sometime after the first trimester) but just the consideration of the other side. Rights always have 2 sides to them and it just ensures that individuals think of the issue from both lenses.
I have long maintained that the two subjects most likely to embroil the country in civil war are abortion and gun rights. This has been an interesting day.
 
Interesting. My wife believes like your family does that the government shouldn't be involved, and so I asked her those questions. It wasn't about her answer (which for the record was sometime after the first trimester) but just the consideration of the other side. Rights always have 2 sides to them and it just ensures that individuals think of the issue from both lenses.
Sorry if I’m misreading, but it sounds like her position is grounded in emotion rather than science or reason. The unborn baby isn’t really a baby until they have their cute little baby bump, and they can have their registry, showers, gender reveal parties, etc. Basically, life begins when they can start posting stuff on Facebook and instagram. 🙄
 
Sorry if I’m misreading, but it sounds like her position is grounded in emotion rather than science or reason. The unborn baby isn’t really a baby until they have their cute little baby bump, and they can have their registry, showers, gender reveal parties, etc. Basically, life begins when they can start posting stuff on Facebook and instagram. 🙄
Nice try, but wrong. Like me, she sees the 15-20 weeks as the viability marker. As well as at that point, its unlikely that you don't know you are pregnant. And she does raise an interesting counter point. While she understands the premise that the baby is a life, what right does the government have to force a woman to carry it to term. And if they can force a woman to do so, why can't they force you to take a shot or donate an organ or do any other thing with your body?
 
  • Like
Reactions: davidallen
Nice try, but wrong. Like me, she sees the 15-20 weeks as the viability marker. As well as at that point, its unlikely that you don't know you are pregnant. And she does raise an interesting counter point. While she understands the premise that the baby is a life, what right does the government have to force a woman to carry it to term. And if they can force a woman to do so, why can't they force you to take a shot or donate an organ or do any other thing with your body?
Because life starts at some point, and the COTUS does not define it, therefore it is left to the states.

Your post kind of makes my point - it’s not really a baby until they “feel pregnant”.

The conception argument, when we have a unique DNA structure, is much more grounded in science and reason.
 
The fact science has shown that a unborn baby can feel pain at 12 weeks should make even the most self entitled woman think twice. Would you want to be ripped apart limb by limb feeling the excruciating pain the entire time?

 
Because life starts at some point, and the COTUS does not define it, therefore it is left to the states.

Your post kind of makes my point - it’s not really a baby until they “feel pregnant”.

The conception argument, when we have a unique DNA structure, is much more grounded in science and reason.
Even though its a life, does the government have the right to force a woman to carry a non-viable baby to term?
 
Shhh. Don't tell the triggered bunch this. I remember the days before Roe vs. Wade. People were getting abortions.
 
  • Like
Reactions: iasooner2000
Hell yes!!!!!! If he’s a life, then he’s a person, and the government can ban the mother or anyone else from killing him.

Sooooo…the inevitable psychological trauma, along with potential physiological trauma, of carrying a stillborn to birth is not enough to dissuade your thinking on this???


Carry on
 
One fun thing we have to look forward to is in a month or two when large numbers of Americans realize that abortion is still legal and stop caring about the narrative being squealed on TV. 🤣
 
***still doesn’t understand the concept of nonviability***
Irrelevant. A friend of mine has a 21 year old daughter that was “non viable.” Your own viability at middle-age is questionable given your parental dependence.

You think you scored a “gotcha”, but the only gotcha is around here is Trump still gotcha by the pussy.

Carry on, pedoscott.
 
Irrelevant. A friend of mine has a 21 year old daughter that was “non viable.” Your own viability at middle-age is questionable given your parental dependence.

You think you scored a “gotcha”, but the only gotcha is around here is Trump still gotcha by the pussy.

Carry on, pedoscott.

What parental dependence???
 
One fun thing we have to look forward to is in a month or two when large numbers of Americans realize that abortion is still legal and stop caring about the narrative being squealed on TV. 🤣
Are you planning to help fund after-deadline Oklahoma rape victims’ travel expenses for them???
 
Are you planning to help fund after-deadline Oklahoma rape victims’ travel expenses for them???
Why would I need to? Seems like an absurdly out of the normal outlier situation that has little to do with Roe V Wade 😂.
 
Sooooo…the inevitable psychological trauma, along with potential physiological trauma, of carrying a stillborn to birth is not enough to dissuade your thinking on this???


Carry on
My daughter had to carry both. Specialist performed a surgery on her twins in order to save the healthy twin and cut the blood supply off to the unviable twin. This was between 20 to 22 weeks. She had to carry and deliver both. So don’t give me that BS about carrying a still born. You leftist are a bunch of pussies.
 
  • Like
Reactions: CoastGuardCowboy
ADVERTISEMENT

Latest posts

ADVERTISEMENT