Draconian Oklahoma Abortion Bill Goes Too Far

After how long?

 

HAHAHAHAHAHAHA....did you actually write the drivel above with a straight face?

 

Ah, got it.

 

Enforce? What are you talking about?

 

Yep, FORCE.

 

When anyone who even sneezed got a PCR test in British Columbia (before Omicron), they clearly established vaccines were quite effective preventing Delta infections. I've posted proof on this forum previously.


http://www.bccdc.ca/Health-Info-Site/Documents/Vaccine_Effectiveness_2Doses.pdf

That's the goal now because the vaccines aren't particularly effective at preventing Omicron infections. They do keep many people out of the hospital.

This from British Columbia...




http://www.bccdc.ca/health-info/diseases-conditions/covid-19/covid-19-vaccine/measuring-vaccination-impact-coverage

Long covid alone presents a greater risk than the vaccine.

 

http://www.bccdc.ca/health-info/diseases-conditions/covid-19/covid-19-vaccine/measuring-vaccination-impact-coverage

You're going to claim they're making it up? Maybe that you know more than they do?

 

LOL.. The woman only gets paid by the law because she damands it. Why do you continue to only half address an issue that you know to be inequitable? The law cannot force you to pay for a decision that you did not consent to. It's that whole due process thing. And the ONLY way the law would ever find out is when the woman decides that she wants the man to support her. I would question the constitutionality of the law that would force a financial responsibility on anyone absent their consent. Just because you are the child bearing vessel doesn't give you or provide you with any extra legal benefits, nor should it.

If you believe that absent the father's sign off on the abortion, and a woman can terminate the pregnancy absent that consent with no financial harm or legal attachment, the law has to also reflect that an illegal financial burden cannot be born by someone who otherwise did not consent to the birth.

This isn't the 1800s anymore. Women have opportunity, if they want to be a single mom, then let them be single. Personally, I don't want folks getting abortions. I think if you spread your legs, you're making a choice, a consensual one. And if you aren't ready, or you can't provide, perhaps then you should be personally responsible that for that moment of sex future lives aren't harmed so maybe use protection, or don't have sex in the fist place, and we won't have to have these conversations.

I'll give you another scenario. Courts have viewed contracts enjoined only by the husband, are his burden, and not equally transferrable to the wife. Happens all the time. The law cannot create a different standard if the woman does the same thing.

You want children born to parents who will value and nurture them. Not rely on the state to make everyone's lives miserable and most importantly that of the child.

 

Dude - There is no risk of harm given in your link .. nothing that supports your claim in any way. You link gives no data related to your claim .. and is useless data in general. Near everyone gets covid .. and those that don't has nothing to do with the vax .. so when you see "90%" effective .. effective against what .. given all of the vaxed will get covid .. the vax not preventing transmission..

Regardless .. ZERO here in relation to your nonsense claim that you are just blurting out .. having no idea whether you are right or wrong.

Risk of harm from the vax .. vs risk of harm from Covid .... numbers mate .. like I have done a bunch of times for you. Are folks even getting long covid from Omicron at high rates? and what is the percentage of vaxed who get long covid .. vs those unvaxed.

back up your claim.

 

Hmm Lots of the Biden administration have certainly found out how ineffective the viral inhibitor was... And no, it isn't a vaccine. Regardless of how the CDC changed their definition. Which is why, it seems that Omicron, and subsequent variations aren't being handled by the boosters. Hmm.. You spent an awful lot of time creating this post, and virtually no research into actual effectiveness or prevention.

Even the Biden folks don't believe in your BS. Kamel Two was out in public, unmasked while inside the isolation protocol window. Jen was a stricken with it from the podium, or more likely because she only wears one for show on TV. When Pfizer had to hire like 600 folks to work on their legal defense team for future harms from the shots, what does that tell you?

 

I'm a nonbeliever, not an atheist.

I think Believers should be careful about pushing dogma. In return, I hope nonbelievers defend your right to worship as you find fulfilling.

My grandfather was a Methodist minister, mother the church librarian and communion steward, and my wife's family were all devout. My grandfather was a bitter bigot (he blamed "Papists") after he lost his church during the Great Depression, but my mother and in-laws were good people and all uplifted by their belief. Me? My wife? We just can't bring ourselves to think the personal god makes sense.

 

I'm not interested in your mug's game.

I gave you the source so you can go for a data dive if you're interested.

 

Not a vaccine?

I provided the website so you can go further than the conclusions.

http://www.bccdc.ca/health-info/diseases-conditions/covid-19/data

I remember last Spring when Joe said covid was all but finished. "Dumber than a sack of hammers!" comes to mind.

 

.


No, the law dEmands it.

So if abortion is banned and woman has to gestate, a decision that she did not consent to then she pays NOTHING in doctor/hospital bills and the taxpayers pay for raising her kid? OK!!

It doesn't...

Take it to court...

LOL, another Anti-Choicer living an alternate universe where humans "shoud" just give up sex.. back to the 1800's (this isn't the 1800s anymore )

You're not making sense there and this is the Abortion Forum.

YUPPERS! That's why abortion should stay legal !!!


FoxHastings said: ↑
So if the father says , "abort", the woman has to?? UNANSWERED

 

So will women, and all the religious fanatics. It won't stop the Roman Catholics from trying to prohibit ALL forms of birth control along with forcing little girls impregnated by their fathers to risk DYING by carrying papa's baby to term. Isn't Faith wonderful?

 

What part of .. none of your data says anything about long covid - do you not understand. and why are you making things up and attributing to me.

You have no clue what you are talking about .. no clue what the numbers you post represent ..

You claimed risk of harm from long covid "Far Greater" than the vax .. across all demographics - posting data on vaccine effentiveness against hospitalization - does ZERO to support your claim. What part of this do you not understand ?

You made a claim .. posted link that has nothing to do with your claim .. do you understand this ?

 

You are the one playing the "Mug's game" You claimed that risk of harm from long covid was far greater than the risk of harm from the vax. Your Source - had nothing to do with your claim - sending me on a wild goose chase.. where there was no goose.

Then you accuse me of playing a mug's game .. in a fit of projection and denial -- you made a claim .. I asked you to back it up - you posted a link that had nothing to do with your claim never mind support it - and I am the one playing the mug's game.

What is it about this issue that has so many people go into mind bending denial of reality and self deception. You know your link says absolutely nothing about long covid .. nothing about risk of harm from the vax .. who is playing the "Mugs" game here ?

 

You still haven't explained how it's force when she chooses to continue to live while pregnant.

 

Is a woman being forced to be a mother by not being allowed to kill their one year old?

 

A human life should not be forfeited based on the circumstances in which it was conceived.

Here's a good video:

 

Nope, the 1yr old is not living inside the woman's womb, something you guys never understand.

 

You don’t understand how you wanting to stop women from having an option when it comes to their own body is force? If you can’t understand that then no amount of explaining will help you.

 

Its STILL very simple, if the woman doesn't want it inhabiting her body she has every right to have it removed even if this results in its death

 

Are you saying women have no option but to become pregnant?