Alabama Senate approves measure to ban all abortions


I answered this offline in a document, so there may be things I’ve missed in the thread; none the less:

1 Others have made the point that there’s a difference between a man on death row who’s been duly convicted by a jury of his peers and a baby in the womb which couldn’t have committed a crime. The difference is between innocent life and not innocent. The abortion crowd makes it out to be hypocrisy (when in fact supporting abortion while opposing the death penalty or even the killing of animals is the real hypocrisy) with lawyer-talking points. For myself, I used to support the death penalty, but now I shy away from it because the ultimate Christian goal is to see as many souls saved from damnation as possible (although ultimately, God gives everyone all the chance they need; and He’s glad to do so, because He doesn’t want them to go to hell, either), and life without parole at least gives them that chance. I remember 'Nutjob saying that he opposes the death penalty on the grounds of not being 100% sure of death-worthy guilt in 100% of death penalty cases, and this too deserves to be considered.
2 Now this is hyperbole. But to answer the point and speaking personally, by and large, I don’t blame the women; they’ve been sold a blob-of-tissue bill of goods by the abortion industry and activists.

3 First of all, I oppose it on moral grounds. Kids shouldn’t be taught how to get away with fornication; they should be taught not to do it, and provided with an environment which encourages that. And abstinance-based sex ed has a very good track record; in recent times, as well as the past.
4 I utterly reject the notion that abortion is a constitutional right (“no person shall,” among other things, “be deprived of LIFE, liberty, or property without due process of law,” and death without a criminal conviction doesn’t fit). Just because some U.S.S.C. justices said so in Roe v Wade (the U.S.S.C. also gave us Dread Scott, the Obama(don’t)care fine (by claiming falsely that it wasn’t a fine), and any number of other bad decisions) doesn’t make it so.

5 Maybe if they didn’t have sexual intercourse, they wouldn’t get pregnant…

6 See item 5.
7 Sorry, but this is a childish argument. It is never paramount to buy people stuff to deter them from doing the wrong thing. By doing so, one is letting people hold the government coffers hostage to their behavior. And as a side note, social(ist) programs that make people dependent on the government leads to autocracies which result in a lot more premature deaths than just the unborn.

8 When it comes to keeping the unborn from being murdered, you better believe I’m all for telling people what to do; the same as for murder outside the womb, or rape, robbery, or any other crime.
9 Can’t say that I do, but I’m confident someone’s done a study on it. Anyway, common sense will tell you that it’s a lot easier to leave someone in the lurch with a kid if they’re cohabiting, than if they’re married.
10 Your turn for evidence.
11 Using access to contraception outside of marriage does (goes for the guy as well as the girl).
12 How do the times change morality?

13 No, but there are Democrats in government (including some leadership positions, past and present (including Obama)) who have supported this very thing.
14 Call it what you will; as I said above, there are powerful Dems supporting it, and they’re doing so as part of the abortion mentality.

1 How does one compromise with evil?
2 No child who has been conceived in rape should be forced to DIE. It’s not their fault that their father was a scumbag. And women who abort their rape babies do not feel the better for it; it just compounds the trauma.


He didn’t suggest an additional procedure to kill a self-sustaining live birth. He said in the event that an unwanted/defective fetus survives to birth but requires life support out of the womb; the choice to use life support would be optional(which it already is for any birth). If I have a healthy planned child, and it requires life support to survive - I can elect to decline the life support whether it was aborted or not.

What made little sense to me is that this is the case right now and has always been the case. If my kid requires life support to survive - I can elect to not administer it. This is not just true for vegetables, it’s true for perfectly normal children who suffer an injury like a car accident. If my kid is half-crushed by a car and they need to hook him up to an iron lung for him to continue to live - I can reject it. And then he will die immediately. Now if we’re talking about something along the lines of “triage policy”… I think that’s such a pedantic point as to be irrelevant. Ultimately the parent is still in charge of whether continuous life support is administered.


Several states are nearly simultaneously passing anti- abortion legislation - it seems the “heartbeat” version is the most prevalent. At the 6 week mark - give or take - the heart is developed to the point a detectable heartbeat is possible.

Before I comment, allow me to share my biases with you.

  1. Absent the mother’s life being threatened or medically predictable permanent physical debilitation should she carry to term (relatively rare circumstance), aborting a child’s birth post viability (able to live outside the womb) is nothing short of murder - IMHO.

  2. I’m originally from rural Oklahoma and I was a medical practitioner (cardio surgeon) for over 30 years, mainly in Cal - I can assure you that it is quite common for women to not be aware of their pregnancy even after the noted 6 week “heartbeat” threshold.

  3. It has been my experience that terminating a pregnancy is most often a mentally agonizing/painful
    process for a woman under any circumstance.

For these legislative bodies to not make room for a woman impregnated as the result of rape or incest to terminate the pregnancy in the first trimester is heartless and ignorant.

Folks can “thump the Bible” all they want, quote scripture until the cows come home, but to require a girl/woman who has been so hideously violated to be violated again by dictates of the state is shameful.

As for the legal/political fallout: IMHO - had these state bills spoken to the first trimester or fetal viability as cutoff points in the absence of the mother’s medically evaluated/verifiable life-threatening circumstance, the SCOTUS might have seen fit to measurably alter the current interpretation of Roe V Wade. Unfortunately, these bills will most likely be struck down quickly.

Politically, no mercy for victims of rape and incest renders these pieces of legislation slam dunk losers and harms the cause of those seeking an end to the wholesale slaughter of viable fetuses - IMHO. Such legislation allows the Dems to paint all conservatives/Repubs with an extremist brush. Alabama, the state that brought us Judge Roy Moore, thus handing a safe senate seat to Democrats, has now brought us this piece of caca legislation…


That is an interesting point.

I’m not strongly anti abortion, but I’d definitely prefer it not be legal. It is not a make or break issue to me. Just like legalization of marijuana isn’t.

What I can’t abide is when someone is anti death penalty but pro abortion. That is a clear demonstration of a failure to comprehend morality.


I generally agree with you, Doc, but for one thing. There are THOUSANDS of women out there who are PROUD of the fact that they’ve aborted their babies. Why? Because they’ve been propagandized to believe that they’ve done a “good” thing…either to “protect the environment”, reduced the population, or that they’ve freed themselves to screw their brains out without consequence.


I’ll go to the mat with you on this one. What’s shameful is putting the baby conceived in rape to DEATH for the sake of easing the mother’s emotional trauma; and the latter doesn’t work anyway.

If she doesn’t want the baby, let him/her be adopted, not killed.


I can’t help myself…

What is it about abortion that is wrong?

I mean, let’s stick to a place where we firmly disagree, as the closer a child comes to term, the more we agree. So let’s, for now, stick to the place where we disagree the most.

The woman is raped and a week later learns she is pregnant.

What is it about terminating that pregnancy is wrong in your view?

For me, I’ll answer the question of why I think it’s right to abort if it is what the woman chooses.

Rape is about power, not sex. Impregnating a woman and forcing her to carry the child to term violates her freedom and potentially her health and life. Pregnancies can result in lifelong changes to a woman’s body and that should be her choice, not the choice of a rapist.

Forcing a woman to carry, for 9 months, a child is frankly, one of the most overt examples of force a one person could put on another that I can think of in a “free” society.

Now you know, because we’ve spoken at length about morality. You know I base my beliefs about morality in the idea of suffering.

Does aborting a fetus of 1-4 weeks cause suffering to the fetus? I don’t think there is any evidence that’s the case.

How about the mother? Will she suffer? In the case of having to carry a constant reminder of being raped, I’d say yes, without a doubt though you don’t seem to value her experience, or at the very least you seem to be weighing the death of a potential child against her potential suffering and saying that giving the child life Trumps any suffering or harm she might experience.

Therefore, I have no compunction whatsoever of ending the potential life of that fetus to guard the mother’s health, happiness, and potentially even her life and to deny the rapist the opportunity to continue to exert power over his victim as long as the result of that rape, the child, lives.

But getting back to where I asked, what is it about abortion that’s wrong?

You might answer that it results in the death of a baby.

Thus, you might call it murder? Am I correct?

How do you define murder?

Is murder ever justified?

From here I point out that god murders or command humans to murder and then begins the mental gymnastics of parsing though when god does it or commands others to do it, it’s not murder, setting aside the fact that no one can prove that a god even exists, let alone that he has killed or commanded people to kill in his name.

I mean, seems that if you existed in the 1st century and you wanted to commit genocide, all you had to do to hide your crime was to convince others that god commanded it.

So with respect, I just flat out disagree. If a woman is raped and she believes that abortion is murder and chooses to carry the pregnancy to term, that is her choice, but I don’t believe that you have the right to force another woman to do so or support allowing others to force her to do so.

If you’re right and there is a god and killing a fetus is murder, then god will judge those who took part in it.

If you believe that fetus’ have souls then you also believe that the fetus is an innocent and will gain all of the benefits of heaven and gods love and what could possibly be better than that from your perspective. The fetus gets a shortcut right to heaven. If heaven is what you claim, then it seems you should be jealous.

I’m curious, let’s say the mother is forced to carry the baby to term, does she have any responsibility in caring for it in your opinion. What about the rapist?

One other thought…

Here’ let’s do a little thought experiment…

Let’s say you are forced against your will to get in a van and are given a sedative

When you wake up you find that your blood is being taken from you via a tube and fed into another person and another tube is coming back out that returns their blood to your body. If you disconnect the tubes it will result in the death of that person.

Do you have the right to kill them by disconnecting them?


First off, there’s nothing “potential” about the life of a fetus. It’s virtually the very DEFINITION of human life. That said, I too have a problem with requiring a woman to carry the product of a rape. Maybe someday we’ll have artificial wombs where that baby can be place and allowed to come to term. After all, it’s not the BABY’S fault that it came into existence any more than it’s the woman’s. Until that day comes (and I believe it eventually WILL) I must support abortions in those cases in which the pregnancy is PROVABLY the result of a rape.


In fairness, I really shouldn’t quibble about what a fetus is, so let me just say it like this. I have no problem choosing between the rights of the mother over those of an unborn child if the decision is made early enough in the pregnancy, especially when the pregnancy was against the will of the mother.

No, you don’t have to “support abortion” at all. You just can’t command people not to have them because of what you think your god says.

If you want to argue this on a secular basis, fine, but I don’t respect opinions driven entirely on what people beleive their god tells them. There are lots of claims that people make with respect to lots of gods and I’d rather look at questions like these from a pragmatic secular viewpoint.


As always, abortion seems to fire up everyone on both sides of the issue. And, it will continue to long after we’re all gone. I would much rather err on the side of life rather than death to the unborn human baby because of a rape. Unfortunately, many women today are raped. It is a horrific crime, to be sure. But I still cannot see the justice in putting to death an innocent unborn human baby because of it. There was an article some years back about a nun who was raped and became pregnant from it. When her superiors found out that she was pregnant, they expelled her from the order. She refused to get an abortion. She gave birth to a bi-racial baby who had physical and mental handicaps. She said that he was “the joy of her life”, despite the hardships she encountered raising him. He lived until he was about 35 and then died. She took care of him all those years despite the horrible circumstances of his conception and being rejected by her own community. That’s love. Pure love.


Speaking for myself, I do believe I have done a fair job of arguing this in secular terms, even though my faith drives me and sets the foundation for me.

I’ll get back to your long post when I get a chance offline.


I find forcing a woman to carry a child to term that resulted from a rape to be totally reprehensible. It’s obvious that those who push the extreme view on this subject don’t care about the wellbeing of crime victim or her family at all. All that matters them is the fetus.

How about the use of the “morning after pill?” Is that also unacceptable? If it is, your view is even more reprehensible and totally unacceptable.

If you people keep this up, you will have abortions on demand paid for by the government because all of the more moderate people will have been driven from office and only the AOCs will remain. I have no use at all for the politicians on both of the extreme ends of this issue. I would never vote for the far left position, and if a right wing candidate pushes for no abortions at all that result from rape or incest, I will leave the ballot blank.

Winning the 2020 presidential election is going to be hard enough without having this layer of religious extremism added to the mix. There are many other people’s lives who are involved in this. Fetuses do not rule the issue in all cases, nor should they rule when the support for this position comes from a minority of people with extreme religious views.


I’m sorry you feel that way, Sendgop. I don’t believe that my view on abortion to be extreme. It is logical. If an abortion kills an unborn human baby, then however it was conceived has no bearing on it’s humanness. Women who are raped are given something to cause the fertilization of one of her eggs to fail. I’m not sure what that is, but it is given in part of the rape tests that are done. I don’t consider myself an extreme religious person. I consider myself a practicing Catholic and that means that I believe in and support all of the teachings of the Catholic Church. That includes life issues, especially abortion and euthanasia.


Notice how Send avoid calling the baby what it is…a BABY. Use the term “fetus”, and you can go all clinical and refuse the humanity of this human child.


My use of the word “fetus” was not intentional. If you want to substitute “baby” in place of “fetus” in my post, go ahead. It does not change the cruelty of the extreme position which forces a woman to bear a child against her will and forces he family to endure the situation.

My position is no different from religious conservative icon, Pat Robertson. He too is troubled by the fact that the Alabama law made not exception for rape and incest.


1 I find killing a totally innocent baby for the sins of the father to be totally reprehensible.
2 Just because we prioritize the LIFE of the baby doesn’t mean we have no compassion for the mother. Such a claim is contemptible hogwash.
3 It terminates the unborn baby which is distinctly human from the moment of conception. I do indeed oppose it.
4 Again, hogwash. The child’s life isn’t disposable in the cause of the woman’s experience (false cause, I’ll argue; the abortion doesn’t make the woman feel any better about having been raped).
5 Too bad; I stand on my position.

6 You assume that the radical left isn’t driving them away. AOC can’t get elected outside of a moonbat district. The youth of this country- even on the left- are becoming much more pro-life, and the left leadership is panicking and blundering. But it’s still not the central issue.
7 That’s your decision and right.
8 There’s nothing “extreme” about what people- religious or otherwise- have known for centuries.

9 It does, however, highlight the cruelty of killing the totally innocent for “guilt” by association.
10 Pat Robertson isn’t much of a religious icon. I’ve rarely even heard his name mentioned in passing on Christian radio, to which I’ve been listening to regularly for almost a decade. He’s taken a number of positions which make orthodox Christians cringe and make him seem like a rubber balloon that’s been released without knotting the end, flying around rapidly and aimlessly, making a noise like flatulence, until it falls ridiculously to the ground looking like a dead pancreas.


CSB, I’m still working on my response to your post; I’m about half done.


No, it’s not hogwash. I have yet to see any compassion from you concerning the mother at all. You don’t care about her. You don’t care about her husband, if she has one, and you don’t care about the other children in the family if she is a mother. You don’t care if this breaks up the family. All you care about it is your extreme, far right position.

Frankly I hope that you are the exception and not the rule in the conservative movement.


Sendgop, I don’t know where you’re getting the idea that FC or I don’t have compassion for the mother–a victim to be sure. If anything, pro-lifers are more concerned for the mother’s well-being than pro-aborts. Planned parenthood does not offer counseling after an abortion in which many, many women suffer emotionally for years and years after having killed their unborn babies. There are thousands of pro-life organizations around the country which help pregnant women who have considered abortion. These organizations provide counseling, baby items, money, and other things to help the mother while she is pregnant and after the baby is born. Most of these organizations are run by volunteers–I used to be one of them. So, please don’t presume that because you view someone’s opinion as “reprehensible” that automatically includes negative additions to that mindset.


The fact remains that you butting into a situation that is none of your business, ClassicalTeacher. If a woman cannot bear to give birth to child who was conceived as a result of rape or incest, that is her decision, not yours, to make. Your position is cruel and unreasonable, and I totally oppose it.