House passes 20-week abortion ban

House passes 20-week abortion ban

There are 426 comments on the Feministing story from Jun 19, 2013, titled House passes 20-week abortion ban. In it, Feministing reports that:

Yesterday evening the House of Representatives passed the "Pain-Capable Unborn Child Protection Act," a ban on legal abortions 20 weeks or more after fertilization based on dubious evidence that fetuses can feel pain during the second trimester.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at Feministing.

I see

Mount Hope, WV

#349 Jul 14, 2013
Oh, and still waiting for those facts. Got them? Didnt think so.
1 post removed

Morgana 9

“And the Horse You Rode in On”

Since: Sep 08

Minneapolis

#351 Jul 14, 2013
I see wrote:
<quoted text> I see you cannot provide the answers to my question, so you turn it around. Moron.
I see that YOU cannot provide ANY answers to the above mentioned circumstances and yet you would like to have a say....which you don't. Deal with it. A womans private set of circumstances is simply none of your business, not yours, not governments, and certainly not religion who deems them nothing more than subservient, submissive twits. End of story azzhat.

Morgana 9

“And the Horse You Rode in On”

Since: Sep 08

Minneapolis

#352 Jul 14, 2013
I see wrote:
Oh, and still waiting for those facts. Got them? Didnt think so.
I don't know every womans circumstances and neither do you. Just because you wish to lump them all into a group and dismiss them as irrelevant is not my problem, it is YOUR problem.

Must be tough knowing that NOBODY cares what you think or believe involving a woman/girls private circumstances. Keep pushing for your invasive right wing religious government that rides the back of women....it will come back to bite you in your enormous backside.

“ABORTION KILLS A HUMAN BEING”

Since: Jul 10

Location hidden

#353 Jul 14, 2013
I see wrote:
<quoted text> I see you cannot provide the answers to my question, so you turn it around. Moron.
It's what proaborts do best...
Broseph

New Castle, DE

#354 Jul 14, 2013
Morgana 9 wrote:
<quoted text>
Problem is, Dan does not care if women are raped, abused, too young, poor, addicted to drugs, or health issues he sees them as breeders and their only worth. Sad but true.
I don't think Dan is that sort of guy. I just don't think he sees it from the woman's perspective enough. That's the problem. Many abortion discussions ignore the woman.
Deborah

Minneapolis, MN

#355 Jul 14, 2013
Bitner wrote:
<quoted text>
Your cut and paste did not address my point. It usually does not. You're a troll, no more.
Can you spell "gutless," children?

Pro-aborts deal only in broad, unsupported generalizations and 40-year-old cliches. They're still living in the old days when they could get away with "blob of tissue" lies. They're inarticulate when they're presented with medical facts and research. They do even worse when they're presented with pictures of unborn babies.

Honest pro-choicers like Kirsten Powers of the Daily Beast know the difference between pro-choicers (like herself) and pro-aborts, like the Bitners and Morganas and Oceans of the world.

"... Speaking as a liberal who endorses more government regulation of practically everything—banks, water, air, food, oil drilling, animal safety—I am eternally perplexed by the fury the abortion rights contingent displays at the suggestion that the government might have a serious role to play in the issue of abortion, especially later-term abortion. More and more, the abortion rights community has become the NRA of the left: unleashing their armies of supporters and lobbyists in opposition to regulations or restrictions that the majority of Americans support. In the same way the NRA believes background checks will lead to the government busting down your door to confiscate your guns, the abortion rights movement conjures a straight line from parental consent to a complete ban on abortion.

"But medical advances since Roe v. Wade have made it clear to me that late-term abortion is not a moral gray area, and we need to stop pretending it is. No six-months-pregnant woman is picking out names for her “fetus.” It’s a baby. Let’s stop playing Orwellian word games. We are talking about human beings here."
Broseph

New Castle, DE

#356 Jul 14, 2013
Deborah wrote:
<quoted text>
Can you spell "gutless," children?
Pro-aborts deal only in broad, unsupported generalizations and 40-year-old cliches. They're still living in the old days when they could get away with "blob of tissue" lies. They're inarticulate when they're presented with medical facts and research. They do even worse when they're presented with pictures of unborn babies.
Honest pro-choicers like Kirsten Powers of the Daily Beast know the difference between pro-choicers (like herself) and pro-aborts, like the Bitners and Morganas and Oceans of the world.
"... Speaking as a liberal who endorses more government regulation of practically everything—banks, water, air, food, oil drilling, animal safety—I am eternally perplexed by the fury the abortion rights contingent displays at the suggestion that the government might have a serious role to play in the issue of abortion, especially later-term abortion. More and more, the abortion rights community has become the NRA of the left: unleashing their armies of supporters and lobbyists in opposition to regulations or restrictions that the majority of Americans support. In the same way the NRA believes background checks will lead to the government busting down your door to confiscate your guns, the abortion rights movement conjures a straight line from parental consent to a complete ban on abortion.
"But medical advances since Roe v. Wade have made it clear to me that late-term abortion is not a moral gray area, and we need to stop pretending it is. No six-months-pregnant woman is picking out names for her “fetus.” It’s a baby. Let’s stop playing Orwellian word games. We are talking about human beings here."

That's just one person's opinion. Just because it sides more along what you think doesn't make it gospel.
Deborah

Minneapolis, MN

#357 Jul 14, 2013
TrueAtheist wrote:
<quoted text>
Here's the thing, abortions after 20 weeks are usually performed for medical reasons. Either because there is a posed health risk to the mother or because of a problem with the fetus.
Your anecdote notwithstanding, no they're not. For decades, the vast majority of late-term abortions have not been performed for dire medical-complication reasons.

Unlike many of the abortion acolytes on this forum who specialize in providing only their own bloviating opinions, I'll provide citations from abortion-favoring sources:

** In 1987, the Alan Guttmacher Institute (AGI), an affiliate of the Planned Parenthood Federation of America (PPFA), collected questionnaires from 1,900 women who were at abortion clinics procuring abortions. Of the 1,900, "420 had been pregnant for 16 or more weeks." These 420 women were asked to choose among a menu of reasons why they had not obtained the abortions earlier in their pregnancies. Only two percent (2%) said "a fetal problem was diagnosed late in pregnancy," compared to 71% who responded "did not recognize that she was pregnant or misjudged gestation," 48% who said "found it hard to make arrangements," and 33% who said "was afraid to tell her partner or parents." The report did not indicate that any of the 420 late abortions were performed because of maternal health problems.["Why Do Women Have Abortions?," Family Planning Perspectives, July/August 1988.]

** From a 1993 internal memo by Barbara Radford, then the executive director of the National Abortion Federation, a "trade association" for abortion clinics: "There are many reasons why women have late abortions: life endangerment, fetal indications, lack of money or health insurance, social-psychological crises, lack of knowledge about human reproduction, etc."

** A June 12, 1995, National Abortion Federation letter to members of the House of Representatives noted that late abortions are sought by, among others, "very young teenagers...who have not recognized the signs of their pregnancies until too late," and by "women in poverty, who have tried desperately to act responsibly and to end an unplanned pregnancy in the early stages, only to face insurmountable financial barriers."

** According to Peggy Jarman, spokeswoman for Dr. George Tiller, who specializes in late-term abortions in Wichita, Kansas: "About three-fourths of Tiller's late-term patients, Jarman said, are teen-agers who have denied to themselves or their families they were pregnant until it was too late to hide it." [Kansas City Star]
Deborah

Minneapolis, MN

#358 Jul 14, 2013
Broseph wrote:
<quoted text>
That's just one person's opinion. Just because it sides more along what you think doesn't make it gospel.
Welcome to the 27 percent. Or maybe the 14 percent.

Here's what the nation thinks, according to Gallup's most recent poll on late-term abortion (December 2012):

** During second three months of pregnancy: 27 percent "Should be legal," 64 percent "Should be illegal"

** Last three months of pregnancy: 14 percent "Should be legal," 80 percent "Should be illegal"

“Blessed Be”

Since: Jun 07

Location hidden

#359 Jul 14, 2013
Deborah wrote:
<quoted text>
Can you spell "gutless," children?
Pro-aborts deal only in broad, unsupported generalizations and 40-year-old cliches. They're still living in the old days when they could get away with "blob of tissue" lies. They're inarticulate when they're presented with medical facts and research. They do even worse when they're presented with pictures of unborn babies.
Honest pro-choicers like Kirsten Powers of the Daily Beast know the difference between pro-choicers (like herself) and pro-aborts, like the Bitners and Morganas and Oceans of the world.
"... Speaking as a liberal who endorses more government regulation of practically everything—banks, water, air, food, oil drilling, animal safety—I am eternally perplexed by the fury the abortion rights contingent displays at the suggestion that the government might have a serious role to play in the issue of abortion, especially later-term abortion. More and more, the abortion rights community has become the NRA of the left: unleashing their armies of supporters and lobbyists in opposition to regulations or restrictions that the majority of Americans support. In the same way the NRA believes background checks will lead to the government busting down your door to confiscate your guns, the abortion rights movement conjures a straight line from parental consent to a complete ban on abortion.
"But medical advances since Roe v. Wade have made it clear to me that late-term abortion is not a moral gray area, and we need to stop pretending it is. No six-months-pregnant woman is picking out names for her “fetus.” It’s a baby. Let’s stop playing Orwellian word games. We are talking about human beings here."
LOL, nonsense. I am neither liberal, nor a pro-abort. And my arguments do NOT deal in "generalities", but are very precise and specific. YOU are dealing in melodrama, and most of the time it has nothing to do with the point of the post you are responding to.

Not my problem. And your non sequiturs are not my responsibility.
Broseph

New Castle, DE

#360 Jul 14, 2013
Deborah wrote:
<quoted text>
Welcome to the 27 percent. Or maybe the 14 percent.
Here's what the nation thinks, according to Gallup's most recent poll on late-term abortion (December 2012):
** During second three months of pregnancy: 27 percent "Should be legal," 64 percent "Should be illegal"
** Last three months of pregnancy: 14 percent "Should be legal," 80 percent "Should be illegal"
Just because my stance is in the minority doesn't make it the wrong stance. It used to be that 95% of Americans were against interracial marriage, right after Loving v Virginia was decided.
Deborah

Minneapolis, MN

#361 Jul 14, 2013
Broseph wrote:
<quoted text>
Just because my stance is in the minority doesn't make it the wrong stance. It used to be that 95% of Americans were against interracial marriage, right after Loving v Virginia was decided.
Really? You're trying to draw a moral equivalency between the *marriage* of two living people (after which neither one will have to die) versus the *killing* of 20-week-old unborn babies like this one: http://www.babycenter.com/fetal-development-i... ? And these ones: http://www.bing.com/images/search... ?
Cat74

United States

#362 Jul 14, 2013
What does inner marriage have to do with murder? Maybe we can begin looking at Post birth abortion like Gosnell did at his clinic. Planned Parenthood petitioned a state legislature for permission to kill an already birthed baby, because the medication worked too fast for them to keep the child from being born into a toilet. That is how uncivilized these bastards have become. Maybe that is what they mean by evolution.
Deborah

Minneapolis, MN

#363 Jul 14, 2013
Bitner wrote:
<quoted text>
LOL, nonsense. I am neither liberal, nor a pro-abort. And my arguments do NOT deal in "generalities", but are very precise and specific. YOU are dealing in melodrama, and most of the time it has nothing to do with the point of the post you are responding to.
Not my problem. And your non sequiturs are not my responsibility.
OK, we'll give you a chance to be specific and prove you're not a pro-abort. Tell us the constraints, if any, that you would place on abortion: reasons for getting an abortion, gestational age of the baby, taxpayer funding for abortions or abortion providers... any constraints.

Be aware that the High Priestess of the Church of the Perpetual Abortion, Planned Parenthood's Cecile Richards, has not ever revealed that there's a single abortion at any time or for any reason or on any healthy baby that she and her organization wouldn't enthusiastically countenance.

http://www.lifenews.com/2013/07/11/cecile-ric...

“Blessed Be”

Since: Jun 07

Location hidden

#364 Jul 14, 2013
Deborah wrote:
<quoted text>
OK, we'll give you a chance to be specific and prove you're not a pro-abort. Tell us the constraints, if any, that you would place on abortion: reasons for getting an abortion, gestational age of the baby, taxpayer funding for abortions or abortion providers... any constraints.
Be aware that the High Priestess of the Church of the Perpetual Abortion, Planned Parenthood's Cecile Richards, has not ever revealed that there's a single abortion at any time or for any reason or on any healthy baby that she and her organization wouldn't enthusiastically countenance.
http://www.lifenews.com/2013/07/11/cecile-ric...
A pro-abort would be someone who wants every pregnancy to end in abortion.

As for me....
I have never had an abortion.
I have never performed an abortion.
I have never paid for an abortion.
I have never driven anyone to have an abortion.
I have never suggested anyone have an abortion.
I have never reminded even one pregnant woman that abortion is an option.

I DID choose to carry all three of my pregnancies to term, INCLUDING the one that was unplanned, and where I had family and friends trying to talk me into having an abortion.

I DO work with pregnant and laboring women.

I DO volunteer with an organization which provides goods, services and education to pregnant and mothering teens.

I DO contribute the charities which help women and children.

I HAVE given temporary shelter to several teens who needed it, INCLUDING one who was pregnant, whose crackhead mother abandoned the family when she was 14, whose father had disappeared long before that, and whose stepfather kicked her out when she became pregnant (good Catholic....not). To this day she calls me Mom, and her children consider me their grandmother.

"Pro-abort" is simply not a label that can be attached to me. Sorry to ruin your fantasies.

Be aware that I couldn't care less about anyone else's opinions on the subject. Richards is nothing to me.
Broseph

New Castle, DE

#365 Jul 14, 2013
Deborah wrote:
<quoted text>
Really? You're trying to draw a moral equivalency between the *marriage* of two living people (after which neither one will have to die) versus the *killing* of 20-week-old unborn babies like this one: http://www.babycenter.com/fetal-development-i... ? And these ones: http://www.bing.com/images/search... ?

I was showing your argument to be false. Numbers don't make a stance a strong one. Also, I don't agree with a fetus or zygote being a baby. Abortion is a tough issue. It should be left to the mother.

Morgana 9

“And the Horse You Rode in On”

Since: Sep 08

Minneapolis

#366 Jul 14, 2013
Cat74 wrote:
What does inner marriage have to do with murder? Maybe we can begin looking at Post birth abortion like Gosnell did at his clinic. Planned Parenthood petitioned a state legislature for permission to kill an already birthed baby, because the medication worked too fast for them to keep the child from being born into a toilet. That is how uncivilized these bastards have become. Maybe that is what they mean by evolution.
can you provide a link or two for what you claim other than the lying anti choice sites like LifeNews or ACLJ??

Got any?

Morgana 9

“And the Horse You Rode in On”

Since: Sep 08

Minneapolis

#367 Jul 14, 2013
Deborah wrote:
<quoted text>
OK, we'll give you a chance to be specific and prove you're not a pro-abort. Tell us the constraints, if any, that you would place on abortion: reasons for getting an abortion, gestational age of the baby, taxpayer funding for abortions or abortion providers... any constraints.
Be aware that the High Priestess of the Church of the Perpetual Abortion, Planned Parenthood's Cecile Richards, has not ever revealed that there's a single abortion at any time or for any reason or on any healthy baby that she and her organization wouldn't enthusiastically countenance.
http://www.lifenews.com/2013/07/11/cecile-ric...
Roe v Wade is the law. It draws the lines. Read it sometime.

Reasons for getting an abortion? Where do YOU draw the line??

This should be fun.
Deborah

Minneapolis, MN

#368 Jul 14, 2013
Broseph wrote:
<quoted text>
I was showing your argument to be false. Numbers don't make a stance a strong one. Also, I don't agree with a fetus or zygote being a baby. Abortion is a tough issue. It should be left to the mother.
You didn't answer the question. Are you drawing a moral equivalency between a kind of marriage (where no one dies) versus a kind of killing (where a 20-week or older baby dies)?

I have a hard time believing "95 percent" of the American people opposed interracial marriage. I have a hard time believing 95 percent of the American people oppose anything except maybe higher taxes.

Please answer my original question about moral equivalents and provide a link to that "95 percent" assertion.
Deborah

Minneapolis, MN

#369 Jul 14, 2013
Bitner wrote:
<quoted text>
A pro-abort would be someone who wants every pregnancy to end in abortion.
As for me....
I have never had an abortion.
I have never performed an abortion.
I have never paid for an abortion.
I have never driven anyone to have an abortion.
I have never suggested anyone have an abortion.
I have never reminded even one pregnant woman that abortion is an option.
I DID choose to carry all three of my pregnancies to term, INCLUDING the one that was unplanned, and where I had family and friends trying to talk me into having an abortion.
I DO work with pregnant and laboring women.
I DO volunteer with an organization which provides goods, services and education to pregnant and mothering teens.
I DO contribute the charities which help women and children.
I HAVE given temporary shelter to several teens who needed it, INCLUDING one who was pregnant, whose crackhead mother abandoned the family when she was 14, whose father had disappeared long before that, and whose stepfather kicked her out when she became pregnant (good Catholic....not). To this day she calls me Mom, and her children consider me their grandmother.
"Pro-abort" is simply not a label that can be attached to me. Sorry to ruin your fantasies.
Be aware that I couldn't care less about anyone else's opinions on the subject. Richards is nothing to me.
There's a distinction to be drawn between private actions and public advocacy ... or inaction. Picture, for example, a German citizen who says, "I never persecuted a Jew or sent one to a concentration camp" but who never spoke out against Nazi barbarities or tried to restrain them.

A pro-abort is someone who advocates to ensure that women could for any reason, at any time get an abortion and that any unborn baby could at any time (including heading down the birth canal on the way to birth and even after she's been born, if the abortionist botches the job) and for any reason be aborted.

Cecile Richards, who never met an unborn baby her organization wouldn't abort, is the national face of pro-abortism. All unequivocal, unapologetic defenders of the nation's largest abortionist, Planned Parenthood, are favoring pro-abortism.

Now ... good for you in your personal, private interactions. I'm glad you never personally "suggested anyone have an abortion." Does that include your public statements on Topix? Have you denounced abortions of healthy babies who are viable outside the womb? Have you denounced post-birth abortion (as Obama and Richards and Planned Parenthood refuse to do), and have you advocated for saving babies born alive after botched abortions (as the entire U. S. Senate and House did in voice votes for the Born Alive Infants Protection Act)?

Standing publicly against those barbaric acts would be a good and humane place for anyone to start who isn't a pro-abort, as you claim not to be.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

US Politics Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Once slow-moving threat, global warming speeds ... (Dec '08) 3 min An NFL Fan 60,150
News Barack Obama, our next President (Nov '08) 3 min Grey Ghostmoron 1,396,008
News Columbus veteran, ousted for sexual orientation... 4 min Rainbow Kid 8
News Dueling groups to rally at Confederate landmark 5 min southern at heart 2,107
News BARACK OBAMA BIRTH CERTIFICATE: Suit contesting... (Jan '09) 5 min Dr Guru 216,960
News 'Free Kim Davis': This is just what gay rights ... (Sep '15) 7 min Brian_G 13,150
News Evolution vs. Creation (Jul '11) 12 min Chimney1 199,451
News The President has failed us (Jun '12) 14 min katrina 88 388,343
News Trump Isn't Bluffing, He'll Deport 11 Million P... 22 min Memo From Turner 3,540
News News 28 Mins Ago 'Not the America we want': Oba... 1 hr southern at heart 364
More from around the web