To 2021 and Beyond .... current politics

[punch it in]

Originally Posted by Giantone

No man should have any say on whether Abortion should be legal.

Was coming in here to point out the comedy of a bunch of dudes deciding what is best for women. I am sure they will be taking all of our advice into consideration. Lol.

[nonniey]

Originally Posted by mooby

……..

The hilarious thing about this argument is I doubt you'd find anyone on this board who thinks a woman should be allowed to get a third trimester abortion for no reason at all. Of course at that stage it should only be if the woman or baby's life is at risk. ………...

And yet about 3000 late term pregnancies get aborted when the woman's life is not at risk and the fetus healthy. I'm counted as part of the majority of Americans as pro-choice but I have a big problem with what is currently legal.

(I wouldn't restrict abortions prior to 18 weeks - the record for a pre-mature birth surviving is 21 weeks)

[mooby]

Originally Posted by nonniey

And yet about 3000 late term pregnancies get aborted when the woman's life is not at risk and the fetus healthy. I'm counted as part of the majority of Americans as pro-choice but I have a big problem with what is currently legal.

(I wouldn't restrict abortions prior to 18 weeks - the record for a pre-mature birth surviving is 21 weeks)

Source?

Just googling I came up with this:

https://www.newyorker.com/news/news-...nd-how-it-wont

But I haven't seen any source that says 3000 late term pregnancies were aborted for no legitimate medical reason. Also what do you define as late term?

[sdskinsfan2001]

Originally Posted by punch it in

Was coming in here to point out the comedy of a bunch of dudes deciding what is best for women. I am sure they will be taking all of our advice into consideration. Lol.

No one is deciding what is best for women. Well except the approximate 50% of abortions that are baby girls.

The debate about abortion is about the baby being given life or death. And whether either parent has the right to kill their baby because it's best for them. Doing what is best for you at the harm to someone else is being selfish.

[mooby]

Originally Posted by sdskinsfan2001

No one is deciding what is best for women. Well except the approximate 50% of abortions that are baby girls.

The debate about abortion is about the baby being given life or death. And whether either parent has the right to kill their baby because it's best for them. Doing what is best for you at the harm to someone else is being selfish.

We're gonna have to agree to disagree on this one, in my uneducated opinion the vast majority of abortions are performed while the fetus is nothing more than a pile of tissue, and the ones done later than that are mostly done for medical reasons. That's good enough for me.

[sdskinsfan2001]

Originally Posted by mooby

We're gonna have to agree to disagree on this one, in my uneducated opinion the vast majority of abortions are performed while the fetus is nothing more than a pile of tissue, and the ones done later than that are mostly done for medical reasons. That's good enough for me.

This whole post = Fair enough

Bolded Section:

This is where the differences of opinion come from. Depending on what you feel about the very early stages of life, will likely be what influences your opinion about abortions that are done for non-medical/rape/incest reasons. It definitely does for mine. I disagree with your stance but that's OK that we disagree.

[punch it in]

Originally Posted by sdskinsfan2001

No one is deciding what is best for women. Well except the approximate 50% of abortions that are baby girls.



The debate about abortion is about the baby being given life or death. And whether either parent has the right to kill their baby because it's best for them. Doing what is best for you at the harm to someone else is being selfish.

Since my last post I still have the same equipment so I will continue to stay out of this discussion.

[nonniey]

Originally Posted by mooby

Source?

Just googling I came up with this:

https://www.newyorker.com/news/news-...nd-how-it-wont

But I haven't seen any source that says 3000 late term pregnancies were aborted for no legitimate medical reason. Also what do you define as late term?

Well this source I attached indicates it may be significantly higher than 3000 but I will continue to look for the source I was looking at yesterday (Which was also referencing CDC data. I also posted the CDC link at the bottom - bit of a slog to work thru. Oh and 20 weeks is how I define it (note premature babies have survived at 21 weeks).


http://www.johnstonsarchive.net/poli...rtion_usa.html

"Abstract: Available data are sufficient to refute some claims regarding late-term abortions in the United States ("late-term" abortions here referring to abortions at >20 weeks' gestation). Here we use official data (from the Centers for Disease Control and state health agencies) to develop estimates of such abortions for 2005 to 2018. For the year 2018, best estimates (and plausible ranges in parentheses) for such abortions are: 11,500 (9,100 to 15,400) at >20 weeks' gestation; 900 (400 to 1,600) at >24 weeks' gestation; and 160 (50 to 260) at >28 weeks' gestation. There were significant changes in the top states for percentages of late abortions in 2005-2018, reflecting relocations of late-term abortion "services". Based on information reported by Arizona, Florida, and Utah, probably 30-80% of late-term abortions are "elective" (non-health related), 20-60% are in cases of fetal health issues, and only 3-10% are in cases of maternal health. These figures are generally consistent with those reported both in Guttmacher Institute surveys and in past testimony by individuals who perform such abortions. Estimated current annual revenue to the abortion industry from late-term abortions is about $20,000,000 ($12,000,000 to $40,000,000). Abortion on demand (i.e. for elective reasons) at any point in pregnancy through birth is currently permitted in 7 states, placing the United States among only four countries in the world with policies this extreme. However, since abortion practice in some countries is inconsistent with their respective laws, actual levels of late-term abortions are comparable between the United States and a number of developed countries. "


CDC abortion surveillance report link.

https://www.cdc.gov/reproductiveheal...s/abortion.htm

[nonniey]

Data showing most late term abortions are elective. This surprised me as l thought most would have been done due to serious health reasons of either the mother or fetus.

--------------------------------------------
Note Guttenmacher is a pro-choice/pro-abortion organization. (They explain why most are elective in this link).

https://www.guttmacher.org/journals/...after-20-weeks.

"….Women aged 20–24 were more likely than those aged 25–34 to have a later abortion (odds ratio, 2.7), and women who discovered their pregnancy before eight weeks’ gestation were less likely than others to do so (0.1). Later abortion recipients experienced logistical delays (e.g., difficulty finding a provider and raising funds for the procedure and travel costs), which compounded other delays in receiving care. Most women seeking later abortion fit at least one of five profiles: They were raising children alone, were depressed or using illicit substances, were in conflict with a male partner or experiencing domestic violence, had trouble deciding and then had access problems, or were young and nulliparous.

CONCLUSION: Bans on abortion after 20 weeks will disproportionately affect young women and women with limited financial resources."

---------------------------------------
Lozier institute

https://lozierinstitute.org/science-...ment.%E2%80%9D

"An op-ed entitled “Late-Term Abortion and Medical Necessity: A Failure of Science” by Dr. James Studnicki published in the peer-reviewed journal Health Services Research and Managerial Epidemiology argues against the necessity of late-term abortion and why abortion data and research are inadequate. In explaining why women electively choose late-term abortions, Studnicki even cites pro-abortion Guttmacher Institute, writing:"

“Most late-term abortions are elective, done on healthy women with healthy fetuses, and for the same reasons given by women experiencing first trimester abortions. The Guttmacher Institute has provided a number of reports over two decades which have identified the reasons why women choose abortion, and they have consistently reported that childbearing would interfere with their education, work, and ability to care for existing dependents; would be a financial burden; and would disrupt partner relationships. A more recent Guttmacher study focused on abortions after 20 weeks of gestation and similarly concluded that women seeking late-term abortions were not doing so for reasons of fetal anomaly or life endangerment.”

[sdskinsfan2001]

Between today and Wednesday, seems like the best time to sneak in a political comment without being caught.

Not going to though.

I don't like AOC, but this one was pretty good:

"This week in Congress: Dems: Passed $1.9T COVID package to deliver stimulus checks (w/ dependents!), cut child poverty in half, extend $300 UI, prevent cuts in state + local services, largest-ever investment in Native communities, etc," Ocasio-Cortez, D-N.Y., tweeted on Thursday. "GOP: Took a week to read The Cat in the Hat."

Pretty damn good AOC, pretty damn good.

[Giantone]

Originally Posted by sdskinsfan2001

No one is deciding what is best for women. Well except the approximate 50% of abortions that are baby girls.

The debate about abortion is about the baby being given life or death. And whether either parent has the right to kill their baby because it's best for them. Doing what is best for you at the harm to someone else is being selfish.

That's BS .

[sdskinsfan2001]

The President of El Salvador made some great points. He was interviewed by Tucker, so I'll assume a lot of the major political posters here will disregard it.

But a major point he made, which I don't think about enough personally, is the negative impact on the country the people are leaving from. The overall people leaving are younger than the average population, and the younger the people leaving the more the workforce is losing ideal candidates. So we're not only promoting illegal immigration, we're hurting the countries the people are coming from, which then promotes more illegal immigration. Rinse, wash, repeat. So the next waive of young people will leave for the same reasons that we helped preputuate.

But they'll always vote majority democrat, so there are no issues with it. My last sentence is not directed towards individual democrat voters, but it's definitely part of the democratic party platform. The party doesn't give a shit about you or this country. Power is all that matters.

And yes the republican party doesn't give a shit about us overall either. The mainstream republican party also promotes illegal immigration. Fuck us and fuck El Salvador, etc.

[SunnySide]

Illegal immigrants cant vote in Federal elections ...

but dont let facts get in the way of a good conspiracy theory.

[sdskinsfan2001]

Originally Posted by SunnySide

Illegal immigrants cant vote in Federal elections ...

but dont let facts get in the way of a good conspiracy theory.

The goal is to eventually have them become U.S. citizens and/or "meet" whatever minimum requirement needed to let them vote.

If you don't agree, that's fine by me.

[sdskinsfan2001]

Accept this as my resignation letter from the political threads.

If I post something political, you can rightfully assume I'm drunk.

I've loved this site since the day I joined, and have only talked about politics the last few years. Going back to my roots here.

I like talking politics sometimes, but I don't agree with a lot of people here, and the gap isn't going to close. Also, I feel like I semi know a lot of people here, but it's just not the same as talking about politics in person.

I've lived in CA my whole life, obviously way more liberal than conservative. But I've rarely ever in my life had more, for lack of a better term, rude discussions about politics than I've had here (outside of my actual friends). And I'm the asshole at least half the time here. It's just harder to have a real conversation about politics if it's not very personal. Not impossible, but definitely way harder.

And I like talking to all of you way more about our team than politics. You can find a political argument anywhere you want one. Can't find a great group of Washington Football Team fans like we have here.

G1, you're not a WFT fan, but you are a solid contributor to this site. So a shout-out to you too. We disagree on 99.99% of everything, but we're flat tax bro's lol.

Can't wait for the draft.

Doesn't matter who is right or wrong, I just don't want to argue anymore (here).