Announcement

Collapse

Message to all users:

https://carm.org/forum-rules

Super Member Subscription
https://carm.org/carm-super-members-banner-ad-signup

As most of you are aware, we had a crash to forums and were down for over two days a while back. We did have to do an upgrade to the vbulletin software to fix the forums and that has created changes, VB no longer provide the hybrid or threaded forums. There are some issues/changes to the forums we are not able to fix or change. Also note the link address change, please let friends and posters know of the changed link to the forums. For now this is the only link available, https://forums.carm.org/vb5/ but if clicking on forum on carm.org homepage it will now send you to this link. (edited to add https: now working.

Again, we are working through some of the posting and viewing issues to learn how to post with the changes, you will have to check and test the different features, icons that have changed. You may also want to go to profile settings,since many of the notifications, information in profile, also to update/edit your avatar by clicking on avatar space, pull down arrow next to login for user settings.

Edit to add "How to read forums, to make it easier."
Pull down arrow next to login name upper right select profile, or user settings when page opens to profile,select link in tab that says Account. Then select/choose options, go down to Conversation Detail Options, Select Display mode Posts, NOT Activity, that selection of Posts will make the pages of discussions go to last post on last page rather than out of order that happens if you choose activity threads. Then be sure to go to bottom and select SAVE Changes in your profile options. You can then follow discussions by going through the pages, to the last page having latest responses. Then click on the other links Privacy, Notifications, to select viewing options,the forums get easier if you open all the tabs or links in your profile, user settings and select options. To join Super Member, pull down arrow next to login name, select User Settings and then click on tab/link at top that says Subscriptions.

Thank you for your patience and God Bless.

Diane S
https://carm.org/forum-rules
See more
See less

Case that Shows Why Roe, Casey, and Abortion Issue Needs Major Overhaul from SOTUS

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #31
    Originally posted by backup View Post

    nope

    Objective fact backed by many examples.
    Hey backup, how many abortions were (or are) performed in "back alleys"?
    "It is said that an argument is what convinces reasonable men and a proof is what it takes to convince even an unreasonable man." - Alex Vilenkin

    Comment


    • #32
      Originally posted by brightmorningstar View Post
      The poster went to all that trouble to provide reasoning and evidence and all you can come up with is baseless contrdiction.
      You seem not to have read my post. I guess I could not read your posts and then claim they are baseless contradictions? Fair is fair.

      Comment


      • #33
        Originally posted by somnia View Post
        First all of this wasn't a big story. It like other cases of its kind, is a footnote story.

        Back in 2006 an 18 year old in Florida learned she was 23 weeks pregnant and she sought an abortion. Pro-choice politics, media would say well it must have been medically necessary, life or death, etc...so nothing to see.
        Except the woman's reasons was she decided she just couldn't support a baby. Didn't have the money or so forth.

        She found someone to do the job. What followed:

        http://www.cnn.com/2009/US/02/06/florida.abortion/



        The doctor later did lose his license in Florida, in 2009.. To my knowledge in the years since he never faced criminal charges. A co-owner did come to face charges, but not murder. It seems no one was ever charged with murder.

        http://www.cnn.com/2009/CRIME/03/03/...on.live.birth/


        A gruesome case...had the circumstances not involved abortion, it may not have remained a footnote story. A minor story.

        Thing is tho...had an abortion occurred, at 23 weeks, that would have been quite legal. Been no story at all then. Not even a little one. Semantics in play while the same baby would be killed and be just as dead.

        I also cannot let the mother off the hook...she indeed did witness the horror of her daughter's murder, but at the same time she herself sought for her baby to be killed, albeit differently.

        Pro-choiceness has long enjoyed, and still enjoys support from the national press. It's protected. But pro-choiceness is not in a good place, it's not in a place on the side of good I'd say.

        A new justice from Trump provides a prime opportunity for a long overdue new look at the issue on the Supreme Court.
        Pro-choice enjoys support from the general public.

        Your side wants to force women to go through with unwanted and problematic pregnancies.

        My side wants to allow women to make the decision whether to continue such pregnancies.

        Young women are on the side of choice, as are men who don't want to be responsible for unwanted pregnancies.

        Go ahead and push this issue, forcing women to go through unwanted pregnancies and see how far it gets you.
        Reality rules, Honor the truth - in memory of Chem1st.

        Comment


        • #34
          Originally posted by somnia View Post

          Guns and cars are more regulated, enforced upon than abortion is.

          And I don't figure abortion would be banned all over...but the matter needs a major overhaul and without the pro-choice camp calling the shots.
          Guns are not more regulated than cars, by a long-shot.
          Reality rules, Honor the truth - in memory of Chem1st.

          Comment


          • #35
            Originally posted by vibise View Post

            What does this particular case mean, going forward?

            This particular woman was not paying attention to her own periodic cycles and it sounds like the clinic was unprepared for what happened when they initiated what they thought would be a routine abortion.

            Are you saying this means that abortion should be banned? That there are no legitimate reasons for abortion?
            How is an abortion at 23 weeks routine? These folks screwed up by not doing an ultrasound prior to starting the abortion...
            ********
            cassie
            ********
            Every saint has a past, every sinner has a future.

            Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that.” - Martin Luther King Jr.

            for today, for this moment... it is well with my soul.

            as long as there is life, there is hope.

            what unites us is stronger than what divides us...

            Comment


            • #36
              Originally posted by vibise View Post

              Guns are not more regulated than cars, by a long-shot.
              The poster didnít say that, by a long-shot.
              ********
              cassie
              ********
              Every saint has a past, every sinner has a future.

              Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that.” - Martin Luther King Jr.

              for today, for this moment... it is well with my soul.

              as long as there is life, there is hope.

              what unites us is stronger than what divides us...

              Comment


              • #37
                Originally posted by cas07 View Post

                Hmmm...an ultrasound prior to initiating the “routine abortion” would likely have made a huge difference in how that played out...but y’all don’t think ultrasounds should be used...
                Ultrasounds have an important place in monitoring the course of a pregnancy. They are often used to encourage additional testing when the scan shows problematic results, but should not be used as a means to discourage abortions, which is what is happening in those taxpayer supported "crisis pregnancy centers".
                Reality rules, Honor the truth - in memory of Chem1st.

                Comment


                • #38
                  Originally posted by vibise View Post

                  Ultrasounds have an important place in monitoring the course of a pregnancy. They are often used to encourage additional testing when the scan shows problematic results, but should not be used as a means to discourage abortions, which is what is happening in those taxpayer supported "crisis pregnancy centers".
                  Doesnít address my comments...is there a reason for that?
                  ********
                  cassie
                  ********
                  Every saint has a past, every sinner has a future.

                  Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that.” - Martin Luther King Jr.

                  for today, for this moment... it is well with my soul.

                  as long as there is life, there is hope.

                  what unites us is stronger than what divides us...

                  Comment


                  • #39
                    Originally posted by vibise View Post

                    Pro-choice enjoys support from the general public.

                    Your side wants to force women to go through with unwanted and problematic pregnancies.

                    My side wants to allow women to make the decision whether to continue such pregnancies.

                    Young women are on the side of choice, as are men who don't want to be responsible for unwanted pregnancies.

                    Go ahead and push this issue, forcing women to go through unwanted pregnancies and see how far it gets you.
                    The public has been conditioned to accept the general idea of pro-choiceness, but tend to support various restrictions the pro-choicers will not make law. But what the public supports or not isn't really relevant as to what it is right or what is constitutional.

                    And yes I'm sure many men out there have appreciated the use of abortion, and made that very clear to women that better be what happens.

                    Via the Supreme Court things can change that can be independent of electoral politics (hopefully).

                    Comment


                    • #40
                      Originally posted by vibise View Post

                      Guns are not more regulated than cars, by a long-shot.
                      I didn't say they were.

                      But they are definitely more regulated than abortion is.

                      Comment


                      • #41
                        Originally posted by vibise View Post

                        Ultrasounds have an important place in monitoring the course of a pregnancy. They are often used to encourage additional testing when the scan shows problematic results, but should not be used as a means to discourage abortions, which is what is happening in those taxpayer supported "crisis pregnancy centers".
                        Requiring an ultrasound discourages abortions then?

                        As I recall, pro-choicers said ultrasounds were rape. Even some abortionists weren't happy with that rhetoric....since after all, a competent one will do one.

                        Comment


                        • #42
                          Originally posted by somnia View Post

                          Requiring an ultrasound discourages abortions then?

                          As I recall, pro-choicers said ultrasounds were rape. Even some abortionists weren't happy with that rhetoric....since after all, a competent one will do one.
                          The old lefty line used to be "informed choice". Clearly, that's not what they're after, since an ultrasound actually gives MORE information than if they don't have an ultrasound.

                          As for why an ultrasound would discourage a woman from getting an abortion, the answer is obvious: Because when they see their unborn child live and moving around, they realize what an abortion would actually do. And they think, "I can't do that."

                          For some odd reason, pro-choicers think this is a bad thing.

                          The only conclusion I can draw from that, then, is that many pro-choicers actually WANT abortions taking place, despite rhetoric to the contrary.
                          "It is said that an argument is what convinces reasonable men and a proof is what it takes to convince even an unreasonable man." - Alex Vilenkin

                          Comment


                          • #43
                            Originally posted by Crazy Ivan View Post

                            The old lefty line used to be "informed choice". Clearly, that's not what they're after, since an ultrasound actually gives MORE information than if they don't have an ultrasound.

                            As for why an ultrasound would discourage a woman from getting an abortion, the answer is obvious: Because when they see their unborn child live and moving around, they realize what an abortion would actually do. And they think, "I can't do that."

                            For some odd reason, pro-choicers think this is a bad thing.

                            The only conclusion I can draw from that, then, is that many pro-choicers actually WANT abortions taking place, despite rhetoric to the contrary.
                            An ultrasound always makes the procedure safer, yeah. With a competent person.

                            Pro-choicers will try to hide behind any additional cost as reason to oppose requiring it...tho they also invoked rape, especially if it's a transvaginal ultrasound that is used by the doctor. But indeed as you say seeing an ultrasound could make a woman decide not to do it...which pro-choice lobby doesn't like.

                            The most important thing to the lobby is abortions happening rather than not happening. That's at least part of the reason the shadiest doc's tend to get away with things and the lobby isn't concerned about them.

                            Comment


                            • #44
                              Originally posted by somnia View Post

                              An ultrasound always makes the procedure safer, yeah. With a competent person.

                              Pro-choicers will try to hide behind any additional cost as reason to oppose requiring it...
                              So they want taxpayer funded abortion, and taxpayer funded information, but suddenly the cost of an ultrasound is too much, even though that actually gives them MORE informed choice? Clearly, logic is not the left's strong suit.

                              Originally posted by somnia View Post
                              tho they also invoked rape, especially if it's a transvaginal ultrasound that is used by the doctor.
                              This is truly an insanely stupid argument.

                              Originally posted by somnia View Post
                              But indeed as you say seeing an ultrasound could make a woman decide not to do it...which pro-choice lobby doesn't like.
                              Exactly.

                              Originally posted by somnia View Post
                              The most important thing to the lobby is abortions happening rather than not happening. That's at least part of the reason the shadiest doc's tend to get away with things and the lobby isn't concerned about them.
                              Abortion is big, big, big business. Make no mistake.

                              And aside from that, just consider the view of people like vibise, who has argued that unwanted children are somehow unworthy of living, that children with birth defects of some kind are unworthy of living. She WANTS abortions to take place in those situations. It's sick.
                              "It is said that an argument is what convinces reasonable men and a proof is what it takes to convince even an unreasonable man." - Alex Vilenkin

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X