Kamala Harris says abortions are a constitutional right

Currently your statement is incorrect, very few states have measures in place to ban abortion after viability (which you refuse to define). Most states it is way before this point or way after.

It must be nice to be a right winger on PF.com where you can hurl insults with zero repercussions they don’t have the cognitive ability to formulate a logical or factual point.

Discussing the theft of bodily autonomy on discussion form is hardly “whining”. If it is then you are whining about people whining. Pathetic bro

 

Most people have enough nuance to comprehend when a fetus becomes viable and has its own rights — once that happens the fetus should be removed from the mother if she no longer wants it.

No one should be forced by the state to lose their bodily autonomy

 

Until the extremist court was installed by the federalist society there wasn’t a reason to make it a federal law as it was settled SCOTUS precedent. We will see what happens when they hold a majority.

As for us having a split government for “years” — depending how you quantify that you might be sorely disappointed looking at polls.

 

Can you define viable?

If a mother needs help giving birth is she viable? If a two year old can't feed themselves, are they viable? What about the old people that can't care for themselves?

Viability as a standard of who we can abort is a slippery slope. The kids body starts when egg and sperm combine. Like you say, "no body should loose their bodily autonomy".

 

It is generally agreed that the word viable when referring to a fetus ability of it to survive outside the uterus. There is also medical viability which means the fetus could survive with medical assistance.

Most likely

Yes — their body can support their existence without using another body. They require aid not a host.

Yes — their body can support their existence without using another body. They require aid not a host.

No — it isn’t. It has a medically defined definition that is measurable.

Ok, would you agree instead of allowing abortion they simply remove the unwanted “body” and provide it medical care? Best case scenario for preserving the bodily autonomy of all — wouldn’t you agree?

 

Look at you, ignorant of the fact that....
...13 states ban abortion after viability - including rightwing strongholds like CA CT IL HI RI and NY
...15 states ban abortion at 20+ weeks, which is the generally accepted range for viability.
https://www.guttmacher.org/state-policy/explore/overview-abortion-laws

Nothing here changes the fact you're whining about it, but admit you're not doing anything about it.
Real effective, bro.

 

And under that precedent, the states could remove a woman's "bodily autonomy"
Why is it again yo support Roe?

 

I'm more worried about the ones that are breathing right now, not the ones that may or may not be at some indeterminate time in the future.

 

They are ramming through legislation that is so poorly conceived and written that it is literally freezing doctors from being able to do their jobs. No one wants to take the risk of losing their license and getting fined, sued, or jailed because of some asshat legislation that is vague at best. Repubs prepared poorly for the day they turned RvW, but now they will be reminded of it at the polls. I think this one issue alone will finally break the GOP.

 

RvW told the states that they can't take away a woman's right to abortion, the SC just now said that the states CAN take away a woman's right to abortion.

 

And yet, under Roe, 43 states had a ban on post-viability abortion.
Because Roe allowed them to do so.

 

And?

 

Yes, as a sop to the Anti-Choice crowd...because SANE people KNOW that mentally healthy women do not go through 8-9 months of the "joy" of pregnancy just for the "fun" of an abortion.
IF there is danger to the life or health of the woman and/or fetus ABORTION IS ALLOWED

 

Clearly you can't comprehend what an example that disproves your perspective is.

Should it be legal to kill a baby just before natural birth? Yes or no?

 

I am entitled to an opinion regardless of degree. also, you don't need a degree to read the constitution and see nowhere in it abortion is mentioned.

 

because he doesn't see something you can't point out?

 

That's not a yes or no question. If the mother's life is in danger, or if the child is not viable due to an unforseen birth defect ... it isn't for you or me to decide.

Still no proof of your gruesome decapitation claim. Please put up or shut up.

 

Government should not dictate killing unborn children.

 

Just allow the woman to make that decision.

 

Gruesome?


You do know how abortions are performed, right? The act you support and defend? Maybe you should research and understand the methods of that.

 

When does that happen?

 

Your statement...
RvW told the states that they can't take away a woman's right to abortion...
...is demonstrably false.

 

Your excuses do not change the fact that, under Roe, the right to an abortion is limited, and the state can take away a woman's right to choose.
Indeed, 43 states did just that.

 

Yes, the states could limit it...so ? big deal...how many mentally healthy women want an abortion at 8-9 months? None....so the law didn't hinder abortions..

NOW QUIT DUCKING, "is it OK with you if someone forces you to give them your heart or kidney or blood to sustain their life?"

 

So...
The statement I responded to...
RvW told the states that they can't take away a woman's right to abortion.
...is false.
And you agree.