Re-framing the abortion discussion

Nov 2018
4,894
2,596
Rocky Mountains
DED, once again you have displayed the inelegant and confused response that I have come to expect from conservative arguments.
I will mention once again, there is no "unwritten" or "universally understood" subjective and "unspoken" aspect of any law that "everyone understands" because, since, at least, the Magna Carta the concept of written law has been essential to Western jurisprudence.
 
Mar 2019
2,574
590
Texas
DED, once again you have displayed the inelegant and confused response that I have come to expect from conservative arguments.
I will mention once again, there is no "unwritten" or "universally understood" subjective and "unspoken" aspect of any law that "everyone understands" because, since, at least, the Magna Carta the concept of written law has been essential to Western jurisprudence.
You are a moron!

Stop your bullcrap!

You claimed there is some hidden agenda in making women get ultrasounds before they abort a baby.

You are wrong. Move on.
 
Nov 2018
4,894
2,596
Rocky Mountains
You are a moron!

Stop your bullcrap!

You claimed there is some hidden agenda in making women get ultrasounds before they abort a baby.

You are wrong. Move on.
If it is not in the law, it does not exist as a part of the law.
 
Nov 2005
9,172
3,641
California
It is not a claim and it is not an insult to say that right now you are being a moron.
This is all truth.
There is no hidden agenda in the law that makes women get pics and listen to their fetus before they kill it.
There is not even any valid speculation as to what kind of hidden agenda would be behind that law.
The sad part is the person that posted the non sense is not even arguing the fact that it was wrong when posted.
Put it behind and move forward.
There was much truth in what biff said that many laws have hidden agenda but this is one of the more clear cut laws that go right to the heart of the matter intended and effects not much else.
Move Forward.
This discussion has devolved as:
0) This whole "it's not an insult if it's the truth" crap is absurd. There is no real standard whereby an insult stops being an insult because it is thought to be true.

1) You aren't even talking about what I am saying right now. Look back through my posts and point to where I said anything about "hidden agenda".
You can't. Cause I didn't. You're calling me a moron for a statement I never made.

2) There is a lot of overlap on our positions, but at this stage you are too emotional to admit it.
I've pointed out the overlap to you. You refused to address it.

3) My point of contention is that it is entirely true that the proponents of these laws refuse to acknowledge that the primary purpose of the laws are to try to humanize the fetus.
NOT ONCE have you pointed to any such legislation or to a proponent of these laws acknowledging this.
On the flip side, I have pointed to the proponents of the legislation who claim it is about "informed consent" and "mother's health". I have linked to the laws themselves.
You acknowledge none of this and blindly repeat yourself ad nausieum. Not once have you tried to provide evidence of what you claim exists.
 
Mar 2019
2,574
590
Texas
This discussion has devolved as:
0) This whole "it's not an insult if it's the truth" crap is absurd. There is no real standard whereby an insult stops being an insult because it is thought to be true.

1) You aren't even talking about what I am saying right now. Look back through my posts and point to where I said anything about "hidden agenda".
You can't. Cause I didn't. You're calling me a moron for a statement I never made.

2) There is a lot of overlap on our positions, but at this stage you are too emotional to admit it.
I've pointed out the overlap to you. You refused to address it.

3) My point of contention is that it is entirely true that the proponents of these laws refuse to acknowledge that the primary purpose of the laws are to try to humanize the fetus.
NOT ONCE have you pointed to any such legislation or to a proponent of these laws acknowledging this.
On the flip side, I have pointed to the proponents of the legislation who claim it is about "informed consent" and "mother's health". I have linked to the laws themselves.
You acknowledge none of this and blindly repeat yourself ad nausieum. Not once have you tried to provide evidence of what you claim exists.
The discussion was about someone claiming there is a hidden agenda in the specific law that makes women get ultrasounds before abortions. That was false.

Then you come along and try to twist this into some other discussion.

Only a moron would ask for a link on such.

You are that moron on this issue.
 
Mar 2019
2,574
590
Texas
DED, once, again, I will explain to you the issue. US requirements were not passed to advance the medical care of pregnant patients as
NOPE! Pay Up Sucker!

You can not change the issue after a silly debate is over. it is really not a big deal. You were right that many laws come with hidden agendas and that is a serious problem in our society but you were wrong completely that forcing ultrasounds before abortions has a hidden agenda. There is only one reason for doing that and it is prevention of abortion.

Later days biff.
 
Nov 2005
9,172
3,641
California
The discussion was about someone claiming there is a hidden agenda in the specific law that makes women get ultrasounds before abortions. That was false.
Then you come along and try to twist this into some other discussion.
Only a moron would ask for a link on such.
You are that moron on this issue.
No.
I took exception when YOU CLAIMED: "Every state that has the law has been clear about the reason for the law."
No "twisting" involved. I made it clear repeatedly that this claim of yours was my point of contention.

I also explained, quite clearly, why I felt that was an inaccurate statement. I provided multiple articles and the text of the actual law to demonstrate that the explicit claims of the anti-abortion side revolved around justification claims of "mother's health" and "informed consent".

I asked you for any demonstration that the proponents of these pieces of legislation were explicitly stating the purpose was to humanize the fetus.
Instead of supplying such evidence, you instead have devolved into repeatedly calling people "moron" and other insults.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Biff
Mar 2019
2,574
590
Texas
No.
I took exception when YOU CLAIMED: "Every state that has the law has been clear about the reason for the law."
No "twisting" involved. I made it clear repeatedly that this claim of yours was my point of contention.

I also explained, quite clearly, why I felt that was an inaccurate statement. I provided multiple articles and the text of the actual law to demonstrate that the explicit claims of the anti-abortion side revolved around justification claims of "mother's health" and "informed consent".

I asked you for any demonstration that the proponents of these pieces of legislation were explicitly stating the purpose was to humanize the fetus.
Instead of supplying such evidence, you instead have devolved into repeatedly calling people "moron" and other insults.

Bullshit.

A poster said there is a hidden agenda for that law. There is not and when enacted it was clear and still is why it is enacted.


You come of as a douch asking me to cite where the state gave reasons for the law.

You know damn good and well they said the reason for that law is to hamper abortion and that is posted on nearly every single pro and anti abortion site on the web.

There is no other reason for that law and you make shit up just so you can argue.

Get a grip on your ignorance.

Screw you trying to bring up some bullshit informed consent crap.

Stop being an idiot. If you want to debate something else we can do that but this is cut and dry.

The only valid reason for the law making women get ultrasounds before abortion is to hamper abortion.

The only valid reason for the law making women get ultrasounds before abortion is to hamper abortion.

The only valid reason for the law making women get ultrasounds before abortion is to hamper abortion.