If Roe v. Wade gets overturned, it wouldn’t ban abortion

[GiveEmElle 1,559]

1 minute ago, NolaAuTiger said:

Answer my question, for once.

Answer mine. 

[NolaAuTiger 3,294]

5 minutes ago, homersapien said:

Medicare for all.

Holy crap. If that’s how you sum it up, I feel sorry for you. 

Its evident you don’t grasp how comprehensive things like this are, nor do you understand implementation. 

Youll have to provide more than that. 

[homersapien 11,337]

1 minute ago, NolaAuTiger said:

What efforts have I opposed? You’ve provided nothing. Write a healthcare plan and let me read it.

All of them, as far as I can tell. You've most certainly ruled out anything that involves the government, even when presented that option as the only one.  (That's that hypothetical think again)

And stop evading.  "Write me a healthcare plan" is evasion.

[NolaAuTiger 3,294]

1 minute ago, GiveEmElle said:

Answer mine. 

So you’re not going to answer my question? Figured.

[NolaAuTiger 3,294]

Just now, homersapien said:

All of them, as far as I can tell. You've most certainly ruled out anything that involves the government, even when presented that option as the only one.  (That's that hypothetical think again)

And stop evading.  "Write me a healthcare plan" is evasion.

No it’s not. You’re essentially arguing that any health care plan should be force down my throat.

Why do you think kids deserve healthcare if they don’t even deserve nor possess a right to life???

[Auburn85 432]

7 minutes ago, NolaAuTiger said:

No it’s not. You’re essentially arguing that any health care plan should be force down my throat.

Why do you think kids deserve healthcare if they don’t even deserve nor possess a right to life???

I happen to like the healthcare plans that allow birth control for adult woman to be free of charge while children who have asthma to be charged for inhalers. And you should too. Otherwise you don't care about women or children.

[homersapien 11,337]

18 minutes ago, NolaAuTiger said:

Its amusing that you insist on discussing healthcare. Let’s switch roles.  Why can’t we talk about opposing abortion on the basis of murder? If you truly cared about children, you would oppose aborting them in the womb. Hypocrite. You can’t say you care about the lives of children when you don’t think those lives are worth defending in the womb. Hypocrite hypocrite hypocrite. 

No, I truly do care about children, but in the case of most abortions - if not necessarily all - I simply  give priority to the woman.

I often call that an arbitrary position, and perhaps it is, but its similar to one's supporting a given military action conducted by our country knowing that innocent's will be killed.  Much of what this country has done militarily was murder. Call it murder if you want. Tough luck.  Luck of the draw.  Collateral damage. Necessary sacrifice.

But if you claim to be "pro-life" you should oppose murder in all its forms, and you certainly need to support providing healthcare for the survivors even if it's the government who has to deliver it. And especially if that healthcare prevents abortions. 

If not, then you are a hypocrite.  (Can I assume that just one will suffice or do you really need the repetition?)

Life is tough kiddo.  Deal with it. Honestly

[homersapien 11,337]

25 minutes ago, NolaAuTiger said:

It’s a stupid hypothetical that literally could not happen. Think about what you’re asking. Are you trying to ask if I think abortion is ever ok? The guise of the hypothetical in relation to the opinion you seek was poorly chosen. Try again.

Once again, the immensely mature old washed up 68 years olds projects his thoughts on 20-something year old’s career choice.....

You are starting to lose your cool. 

[NolaAuTiger 3,294]

2 minutes ago, homersapien said:

No, I truly do care about children, but in the case of most abortions - if not necessarily all - I simply  give priority to the woman.

I often call that an arbitrary position, and perhaps it is, but its similar to one's supporting a given military action conducted by our country knowing that innocent's will be killed.  Much of what this country has done militarily was murder. Call it murder if you want. Tough luck.  Luck of the draw.  Collateral damage. Necessary sacrifice.

But if you claim to be "pro-life" you should oppose murder in all its forms, and you certainly need to support providing healthcare for the survivors even if it's the government who has to deliver it. And especially if that healthcare prevents abortions. 

If not, then you are a hypocrite.  (Can I assume that just one will suffice or do you really need the repetition?)

Life is tough kiddo.  Deal with it. Honestly

Again, I don’t have to support any ol government run healthcare program simply becuase I am pro life, though. Why that befuddles you or makes me a hypocrite is truly astounding. Seriously, you’re smarter than this Homer. C’mon.

Your projection is ridiculous, old man. 

[homersapien 11,337]

46 minutes ago, NolaAuTiger said:

The parents make the call, in that situation. Who else would? 

But this isn’t a question about whether abortion should be legal or not. 

Hypotheticals can really present a challenge can't they?    For example, in this one - in case it wasn't clear the first time - YOU have to make the decision.  Mother or child.  What's your call?

And the legality of abortion is irrelevant for this hypothetical.

[NolaAuTiger 3,294]

3 minutes ago, homersapien said:

You are starting to lose your cool. 

You’ve lost your mind. You’re seriously trying to argue that all anti-abortionist should support government run universal healthcare, by default, irrespective of the specific tenants of said program. And if they don’t, they’re somehow hypocrites.

[homersapien 11,337]

42 minutes ago, NolaAuTiger said:

No it’s not. You’re essentially arguing that any health care plan should be force down my throat.

Why do you think kids deserve healthcare if they don’t even deserve nor possess a right to life???

I am beginning to think you really don't understand what a hypothetical question is.  Are you sure you are a law student?  Law studies must be a lot easier than I assumed.

And I never said "kids don't deserve or possess a right to life".  That's just another one of your disingenuous constructions (aka lies).

[GiveEmElle 1,559]

19 minutes ago, NolaAuTiger said:

So you’re not going to answer my question? Figured.

Isn’t that a legal right, counsel? You are posing question in attempt to railroad me into something so you can have an “Ah-Ha Gotcha” moment. I’ve told you repeatedly I don’t want a woman to feel like abortion is her only option but I understand why some choose this. And currently abortion is legal, you’ve stated it won’t be overturned so I guess the law answers your question now, doesn’t it? 

[Auburn85 432]

Medicare currently doesn't provide free inhalers for people with asthma. Why do people support denying women access to free inhalers. Awesome logic and argument. Checkmate. Then, when someone makes the same argument, just uses different words- it's a terrible argument. And no, I'm not even a hypocrite for making this statement.

[GiveEmElle 1,559]

3 minutes ago, NolaAuTiger said:

You’ve lost your mind. You’re seriously trying to argue that all anti-abortionist should support government run universal healthcare, by default, irrespective of the specific tenants of said program. And if they don’t, they’re somehow hypocrites.

See now you’re getting somewhere. Unless you support programs that promote life, don’t call yourself pro life. Call yourself anti abortion.

[homersapien 11,337]

25 minutes ago, NolaAuTiger said:

Holy crap. If that’s how you sum it up, I feel sorry for you. 

Its evident you don’t grasp how comprehensive things like this are, nor do you understand implementation. 

Youll have to provide more than that. 

That's not really an answer.

(First, to be fair, I did add a detail - a cost control systems such as is used in Denmark.)

And stop with the condescension, it's very unbecoming to a "20 something".  (Not to mention it's the main reason I give you such a hard time. )

[NolaAuTiger 3,294]

3 minutes ago, homersapien said:

Hypotheticals can really present a dilemma can't they?  For example, in this one - in case it wasn't clear the first time - YOU have to make the decision.  Mother or child.  What's your call?

The legality of abortion is irrelevant for this hypothetical.

I answered.

Sticking on topic can really present a dilemma can’t it? We’re not discussing rare medical emergencies where both the woman and the baby’s life is in danger. Such scenario has never been dictated by Roe v Wade, nor would it be should states regulate abortion again. The basis of opposing abortion “as murder” doesn’t extend to this hypothetical. It doesn’t move the needle. Such thoughts on a medical emergency has no bearing on one’s position of the active and deliberate killing of baby inside the woman. 

[NolaAuTiger 3,294]

5 minutes ago, homersapien said:

I am beginning to think you really don't understand what a hypothetical question is.  Are you sure you are a law student?

And I never said kids don't deserve or possess a right to life.  That's just another one of your disingenuous constructions.

I understand and entertain competent hypotheticals that are actually meaningful. Yours, sadly, are not. Yes I am a law student, that’s why I expect more from you. Maybe I hold you to too high a standard.

[NolaAuTiger 3,294]

5 minutes ago, GiveEmElle said:

See now you’re getting somewhere. Unless you support programs that promote life, don’t call yourself pro life. Call yourself anti abortion.

Do unborn babies have a natural right to life?

[Auburn85 432]

Here's a hypothetical, What if Trump pardoned Kermit Gosnell?

 

This discussion must have him spinning in his prison cell.

[NolaAuTiger 3,294]

8 minutes ago, GiveEmElle said:

Isn’t that a legal right, counsel? You are posing question in attempt to railroad me into something so you can have an “Ah-Ha Gotcha” moment. I’ve told you repeatedly I don’t want a woman to feel like abortion is her only option but I understand why some choose this. And currently abortion is legal, you’ve stated it won’t be overturned so I guess the law answers your question now, doesn’t it? 

Still not answering the question, I see. Do the unborn have a natural right to life?

[homersapien 11,337]

13 minutes ago, NolaAuTiger said:

You’ve lost your mind. You’re seriously trying to argue that all anti-abortionist should support government run universal healthcare, by default, irrespective of the specific tenants of said program. And if they don’t, they’re somehow hypocrites.

No that's not what I have argued at all.   That's a (typical) self-serving misrepresentation.

You don't seem to have the ability to read complex prose for precise meaning.  Again I find that extremely hard to believe coming from a law student, at least from one with even a chance of being successful.

I've clarified this several times already.  Do I really need to go to the trouble of repeating myself - even if by simple cut and pasting? 

I don't think so.

[NolaAuTiger 3,294]

1 minute ago, homersapien said:

No that's not what I have been arguing at all. 

You don't seem to have the ability to read complex prose for precise meaning.  Again I find that extremely hard to believe coming from a law student, at least from one with even a chance of being successful.

I've clarified this several times already.  Do I really need to go to the trouble of repeating myself - even if by simple cut and pasting? 

I don't think so.

I’m telling you how absurd your projections of hypocrisy are. Higher education isn’t a prerequisite to see that.

Law students are trained to encounter and address competent arguments. You’ve provided none. 

[homersapien 11,337]

16 minutes ago, NolaAuTiger said:

Again, I don’t have to support any ol government run healthcare program simply becuase I am pro life, though. Why that befuddles you or makes me a hypocrite is truly astounding. Seriously, you’re smarter than this Homer. C’mon.

Your projection is ridiculous, old man. 

More misrepresentation. 

I just cannot accept the apparent lack of detailed comprehension coming from a would be law student.   I've gone out of my way to carefully point out the nuances of your misunderstanding what I am saying.

Good luck with your studies.  Sooner or later, some professor is going to cut you a new one.

[NolaAuTiger 3,294]

7 minutes ago, homersapien said:

You don't seem to have the ability to read complex prose for precise meaning.  Again I find that extremely hard to believe coming from a law student, at least from one with even a chance of being successful.

And don’t give me this bull****. You would base “success of a law student” on whether or not they agree with you. You fool no one lol. After all, you were the old fart who lived your whole life not knowing corporations were citizens until I provided you with the federal law. Hahahahaha

But I’m sure you experienced “great success” in life.