SCOTUS to overturn Roe v Wade

  • You are viewing Orangepower as a Guest. To start new threads, reply to posts, or participate in polls or contests - you must register. Registration is free and easy. Click Here to register.

PF5

Deputy
Jan 3, 2014
1,836
475
713
Good for those companies increasing benefits to their employer. Covering travel for necessary health-care should be applauded, but it is odd that the impetus for this expanded coverage is abortion.
well, I suppose it is because our scotus took something (women's rights) that they feel is wrong...why is that odd? most other health-care could be done in any state.
 
Dec 9, 2013
1,964
663
743
52
MAGA is socially conservative, fiscally liberal
MAGA is only socially conservative when it comes to how they believe other people should behave. When it comes to alcohol, tobacco, pot (at least here in OK), gambling, sex outside of marriage, pornography, divorce and ignoring the Sabbath a large majority of MAGA/evangelicals are equal opportunists.
 

PF5

Deputy
Jan 3, 2014
1,836
475
713
The Handmaid's Tale really has become one of the liberal talking points. You're really doing well and should be proud that you're carrying the party line so well.
well thank you...I appreciate your support and acknowledgement...at first I thought you got offended by a meme, then I thought, no, he's surely not that soft/fragile/snowflakey...
 

stonewallpoke

Durable Brigade
A/V Subscriber
Nov 19, 2007
33,422
21,820
1,743
Al Asad Airbase, Iraq
Am I a fraud because I make a strong point that you cannot refute? Or I'm a fraud because I don't roll over and let you scratch my belly? I disagree and believe it's basically genocide conducted by our own nation to abort so many babies over such a long period of time. That's just the horrible truth. I don't blame the women who had them, but our government that not only allowed them, but exported them, cheered them as practicing a "right," and fooled them into thinking that it is their bodies to choose to do with as they want when they have a life growing inside them.

I'm being honest with our history, if you are too blind to see it or refuse because it's too distasteful, that's on you. I still want people to put life first and I want them to be loved and nurtured so that they will. I don't want them jailed or taken before tribunals, I just want us to make the right choices. First don't have sex if you don't want a baby, second don't get an abortion unless you are an extreme case of rape, incest, life of the mother. It's not that hard.
It’s not that hard? Walk into the sea, you absolute plank.
 

StillwaterTownie

Federal Marshal
Jun 18, 2010
17,582
1,925
1,743
Where else but Stillwater
MAGA is only socially conservative when it comes to how they believe other people should behave. When it comes to alcohol, tobacco, pot (at least here in OK), gambling, sex outside of marriage, pornography, divorce and ignoring the Sabbath a large majority of MAGA/evangelicals are equal opportunists.
But the Evangelical part of MAGA wants something like a Christian Theocracy established. They have a lot of work left to do, like getting at least several more iconic Supreme Court decisions overturned.
 

llcoolw

Territorial Marshal
Feb 7, 2005
9,017
3,906
1,743
Sammamish, Washington.Dallas, Texas.Maui, Hawaii
One of the more embarrassing threads in my time at orange power.

A discussion on the morality and legality of abortion almost never goes civil. That’s expected. But this one is for the birds.

So much hatred. For each other. So divided. Not sure embarrassing is the word. Disappointing? Sad? Disconcerting?

Mostly college educated professionals in here and yet, I feel like a dumb ass having read through it all. That’s on me, should’ve known better but it’s hard not to read into this after so many years getting know the online personalities.

I’m frightened for a lot of you and myself and my family. Yup. That’s the word. This thread is extremely frightening. If this is what it’s like in this small community. We are screwed as a nation.
 
Apr 7, 2006
3,167
1,624
1,743
well thank you...I appreciate your support and acknowledgement...at first I thought you got offended by a meme, then I thought, no, he's surely not that soft/fragile/snowflakey...
Oh no definitely not. In fact, I'd love to see all protesters dress up in the Handmaids tale outfit. Not one thing around this discussion has offended me.
 

steross

he/him
A/V Subscriber
Mar 31, 2004
33,232
33,350
1,743
oklahoma city
I'm just wading into this a bit, but when does life begin seems pretty significant to the discussion.
Yep, many feel that way. I don’t. It is used as a weapon in the debate even though we all think about life in many different ways and give certain life far more importance than others. If we really felt “life” was the fundamental question there would never be a kid starving to death on a patch of dusty ground in Africa while we gluttonously overeat and people walk by him taking photos. Nobody disagrees that the African kid is a life. But, him being "life" isn’t the fundamental question, although one side of this debate pretends it is while still not protecting him. If at some point human civilization actually made protecting all life under any circumstances the rule then I would rethink my position. But, as we are and have always been, we have completely different levels of concern for varying levels of "life." And, that includes the creator who extinguishes life at this early stage in massive quantities that are orders of magnitude higher than any other human life stage. Often before any other being even knows it existed it is extinguished. There is nothing else like that in our existence. I've seen too many teens die and seen the deep anguish in the face of the mother. I've seen far, far more embryos and early-stage fetuses die and have seen many sad mothers from that too. I can tell you it simply is not the same. It is not the same for me when I have to tell them. Their reaction is not the same. Life doesn't alway equal life in reality only in fantasy. Trying to equate an embryo to a teenager by exalting the word "life" is simply disingenuous to how we all really live.
 
Apr 7, 2006
3,167
1,624
1,743
Yep, many feel that way. I don’t. It is used as a weapon in the debate even though we all think about life in many different ways and give certain life far more importance than others. If we really felt “life” was the fundamental question there would never be a kid starving to death on a patch of dusty ground in Africa while we gluttonously overeat and people walk by him taking photos. Nobody disagrees that the African kid is a life. But, him being "life" isn’t the fundamental question, although one side of this debate pretends it is while still not protecting him. If at some point human civilization actually made protecting all life under any circumstances the rule then I would rethink my position. But, as we are and have always been, we have completely different levels of concern for varying levels of "life." And, that includes the creator who extinguishes life at this early stage in massive quantities that are orders of magnitude higher than any other human life stage. Often before any other being even knows it existed it is extinguished. There is nothing else like that in our existence. I've seen too many teens die and seen the deep anguish in the face of the mother. I've seen far, far more embryos and early-stage fetuses die and have seen many sad mothers from that too. I can tell you it simply is not the same. It is not the same for me when I have to tell them. Their reaction is not the same. Life doesn't alway equal life in reality only in fantasy. Trying to equate an embryo to a teenager by exalting the word "life" is simply disingenuous to how we all really live.
You're entitled to your opinion that there are classifications of life, but you still didn't say when you believe life begins. When does it begin?
 

PF5

Deputy
Jan 3, 2014
1,836
475
713
You're entitled to your opinion that there are classifications of life, but you still didn't say when you believe life begins. When does it begin?
why does that matter so much to you what they respond? I'll throw my 2 cents, at conception and through many weeks they are a 'potentially a life'.. what bothers me is people who are pro-life only "care" about unborn lives, they don't care about that life after birth, they don't care about immigrant lives, they don't care about starving, abused, molested lives, they only "care" about the unborn!
 

steross

he/him
A/V Subscriber
Mar 31, 2004
33,232
33,350
1,743
oklahoma city
You're entitled to your opinion that there are classifications of life, but you still didn't say when you believe life begins. When does it begin?

“It is commonly said,” the scientists Frances Westall and André Brack wrote in 2018, “that there are as many definitions of life as there are people trying to define it.”
https://www.quantamagazine.org/what-is-life-its-vast-diversity-defies-easy-definition-20210309/

The reason anti-abortion people suddenly care about it is that defining it adds credence to their claims. I have no argument against someone saying that a life begins with the joining of the egg and the sperm because that creates a full set of new DNA. Hey, that is a response and a definition. I have no problem with someone saying that life begins with the move from the penis to the vagina of sperm because life reacts to stimuli and attempts to self-replicate which a sperm trying to find an egg meets. I have no problem with someone defining life as birth because that is the first point that the organism is on its own. All of those are examples of the complex and nearly impossible ways that we define life. I have no problem with some people feeling a virus is a life and others feeling it is not.

People who are against abortion are obviously going to use the first definition because it best fits their needs. You have asked me multiple times. Why would you give a crap what definition some random person on the internet "believes?" I believe it depends on the definition used. I don't waste time trying to think I can define better than others.
 
Apr 7, 2006
3,167
1,624
1,743
why does that matter so much to you what they respond? I'll throw my 2 cents, at conception and through many weeks they are a 'potentially a life'.. what bothers me is people who are pro-life only "care" about unborn lives, they don't care about that life after birth, they don't care about immigrant lives, they don't care about starving, abused, molested lives, they only "care" about the unborn!
If it doesn't matter then why are on on a message board? Is it not the goal of this forum to have discussion?

There have been plenty trying to insult the position, but without answering the question.
 
Apr 7, 2006
3,167
1,624
1,743
“It is commonly said,” the scientists Frances Westall and André Brack wrote in 2018, “that there are as many definitions of life as there are people trying to define it.”
https://www.quantamagazine.org/what-is-life-its-vast-diversity-defies-easy-definition-20210309/

The reason anti-abortion people suddenly care about it is that defining it adds credence to their claims. I have no argument against someone saying that a life begins with the joining of the egg and the sperm because that creates a full set of new DNA. Hey, that is a response and a definition. I have no problem with someone saying that life begins with the move from the penis to the vagina of sperm because life reacts to stimuli and attempts to self-replicate which a sperm trying to find an egg meets. I have no problem with someone defining life as birth because that is the first point that the organism is on its own. All of those are examples of the complex and nearly impossible ways that we define life. I have no problem with some people feeling a virus is a life and others feeling it is not.

People who are against abortion are obviously going to use the first definition because it best fits their needs. You have asked me multiple times. Why would you give a crap what definition some random person on the internet "believes?" I believe it depends on the definition used. I don't waste time trying to think I can define better than others.
We're having a discussion and you're arguing against my points, so I'm not just "randomly" asking you to define it. If the pro-choice position is so fragile that it doesn't withstand a mere definition of when life begins its pretty weak.

To be honest, I can entertain a discussion with those that don't see an issue with abortion early in a pregnancy because it isn't life yet. It's a thought provoking idea. However, once it's a viable human I have real trouble drawing a line between a 40 week old in the womb and 1 day later nursing in the mother's arms. Polling shows that most people feel the same way. There's a reasonable middle ground that can be established at the state level but it requires thoughtful discussion.
 

oks10

Federal Marshal
A/V Subscriber
Sep 9, 2007
11,504
6,984
1,743
Piedmont, OK
There's a reasonable middle ground that can be established at the state level but it requires thoughtful discussion.
A reasonable middle ground like "life begins at conception" and "total ban except if the mother's life is in danger"? Bc that's the "middle ground" we're seeing in many red states. "Thoughtful discussion" doesn't seem to be of any interest to them.
 
Apr 7, 2006
3,167
1,624
1,743
A reasonable middle ground like "life begins at conception" and "total ban except if the mother's life is in danger"? Bc that's the "middle ground" we're seeing in many red states. "Thoughtful discussion" doesn't seem to be of any interest to them.
Polling numbers show most Americans support the right to an abortion in the first term and the support dwindles sharply from there. So I would guess that over time thats where it will trend. Now that this is an issue decided at the state level, I would guess/hope it'll get more serious discussion instead of how it's been for all of my life, but we'll see I guess.
 

steross

he/him
A/V Subscriber
Mar 31, 2004
33,232
33,350
1,743
oklahoma city
We're having a discussion and you're arguing against my points, so I'm not just "randomly" asking you to define it. If the pro-choice position is so fragile that it doesn't withstand a mere definition of when life begins its pretty weak.

To be honest, I can entertain a discussion with those that don't see an issue with abortion early in a pregnancy because it isn't life yet. It's a thought provoking idea. However, once it's a viable human I have real trouble drawing a line between a 40 week old in the womb and 1 day later nursing in the mother's arms. Polling shows that most people feel the same way. There's a reasonable middle ground that can be established at the state level but it requires thoughtful discussion.
And I have been a strong advocate of reasonable middle ground for a long time around here but do not base that on a desire to define life. I think you are putting too much effort into defining.

We should do what seems most reasonable to most people. And, that by the polls is early abortion is allowed and later-term abortion disallowed except for very rare circumstances. This is generally how it is done in the parts of the world with the lowest abortion rates. That should be what we are trying to achieve.
Defining life at conception and using that definition to exclude all abortion is extreme. Defining life at birth and using that definition to allow abortion until birth is extreme.
 

CowboyJD

The Voice of Reason...occasionally......rarely
A/V Subscriber
Dec 10, 2004
20,136
21,181
1,743
Yep, many feel that way. I don’t. It is used as a weapon in the debate even though we all think about life in many different ways and give certain life far more importance than others. If we really felt “life” was the fundamental question there would never be a kid starving to death on a patch of dusty ground in Africa while we gluttonously overeat and people walk by him taking photos. Nobody disagrees that the African kid is a life. But, him being "life" isn’t the fundamental question, although one side of this debate pretends it is while still not protecting him. If at some point human civilization actually made protecting all life under any circumstances the rule then I would rethink my position. But, as we are and have always been, we have completely different levels of concern for varying levels of "life." And, that includes the creator who extinguishes life at this early stage in massive quantities that are orders of magnitude higher than any other human life stage. Often before any other being even knows it existed it is extinguished. There is nothing else like that in our existence. I've seen too many teens die and seen the deep anguish in the face of the mother. I've seen far, far more embryos and early-stage fetuses die and have seen many sad mothers from that too. I can tell you it simply is not the same. It is not the same for me when I have to tell them. Their reaction is not the same. Life doesn't alway equal life in reality only in fantasy. Trying to equate an embryo to a teenager by exalting the word "life" is simply disingenuous to how we all really live.
When “life begins” is mostly a metaphysical philosophical question that is largely irrelevant to the legal question of constitutional rights existing or not.