abortion or infanticide?
 

curious to know what the left leaning folks think of this…in Montana, the voters voted against a proposed law that would
require doctors to provide care for any babies that somehow survived abortion and were born alive.

i don’t know how often this happens, but it does happen as i’ve seen interviews with former abortion survivors who often live their entire lives with horrific injuries from the procedure.

but why would anyone oppose this, what does it have to do with abortion or women’s rights at that point? it’s born, it’s alive, it’s outside the womb, and it’s a safe bet it’s screaming for it’s life and badly hurt. we should put in in a bucket, turn the lights off, and walk out of the room?

Police are required by law to give medical care to lunatics who shoot at them and get shot in the process. Innocent Babies don’t deserve as much?

i don’t get it.

It’s odd attempt to apply their morality on others. And it didn’t just apply to abortion

Montana voters rejected a measure that would have required medical workers to provide care to infants born prematurely or in rare instances of surviving an attempted abortion or face penalties,

The measure declared that an embryo or fetus is a legal person with a right to medical care if born prematurely or survives an attempted abortion, among other birth scenarios.

Easy to do at the ballot box you don’t see the anguish of peoples faces while making the hardest choice

So adults can have DNRs children medical decisions are up to their parents. Religious freedom allows parents to with hold treatment
Of their children

Yet an embryo is a legal person with the right to medical care
If this had bill passed who would have gotten the bill?


Seems Common sense prevailed in Montana. And they voted down what Republicans think Americans actually want . But vote after vote it clearly the majority do not .

But they will try again
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

it's not a baby, it's not alive and the heartbeat is manufactured...or something.....

leftists never try to "apply their morality on others" :hihi:

if parents are trying to kill their children we usually try to stop them....

Police are required by law to give medical care to lunatics who shoot at them and get shot in the process. Innocent Babies don’t deserve as much?

i don’t get it.


You’re right you don’t get it

Thanks for another horrible analogy

You actually think doctors in are just letting babies die across the nation?

Guess you never heard of neonatal intensive care unit (NICU).

The First Level III NICU in Montana to Provide 24/7 in-house NICU Providers in 2021

As a Level IIIB NICU, caring for critically ill babies born as small as twelve ounces from across Montana, all of our neonatal providers felt it was important that we provide in-house immediate care around the clock,”

That law you support is just you supporting Government overreach while claiming you want less government
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Ok Scott that’s what going in America. Pull your head out of your arse
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Just saw my sister in the hospital guess what she had a heart beat

I am sure a troll like yourself would throw out she’s alive.

Her husband’s stopped all life support because she was never going to live

But he’s a killer Scott if I use your logic

It’s sad you can’t tell the difference between being alive and living a life
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

you mean in a state that has a R gov., R controlled state legislature and votes overhelming R they allow infanticide?

There must be something more to the referendum.

if the difference escapes you I really can't help you....

weird...right?

if that’s not what happened, please explain it to me. i said i don’t get it? qWhen obama was a state senator in IL, he refused to support a similar law.

what’s the argument against that law Paul?

but but Obama :deadhorse:

i don’t know how often this happens, but it does happen as i’ve seen interviews with former abortion survivors who often live their entire lives with horrific injuries from the procedure.


think about what you said you dont know how often something happen .

but because it may have Happened and you've seen seen interviews with former abortion survivors So have I one was south Korea the 2nd twins one was aborted; one survived… and the 3rd she didn’t find out the truth about being an abortion survivor until she was 14 years old today Melissa is a healthy 34-year-old woman.

https://abortionsurvivors.org/melissas-story/

So lets make a law for something that statically never happens So as Republicans we can make ourselves look and feel good meanwhile

More than 13.1 million children in the United States are food insecure. Additionally, 14.5 million children live in poverty. Those are alarming statistics, especially when you consider the developmental, behavioral, and psychological impacts hunger can have on children.

and what's republicans policies Congress made school meals free for 2 years. Now, Republicans don't want to extend the program

42 House Republicans vote against extending free school lunches over the summer and Rand Paul blocked it But but Abortion

classic republicans they care more about the unborn . Once the babies born then its Good luck

so it’s a character flaw if i admit i don’t know exactly how many babies survive abortion.

whatever you say wayne.

what’s your argument against that law?

Trouble is, data shows that republicans give a little more to charity, than democrats.

Which basically proves your statement false, but you'll keep repeating it like a well trained parrot.

come on scott, that’s so last century…

The argument he made, you don’t legislate for something that happens so rarely it’s nuts; sort of like asking why we can’t do things like we did 50 years ago.

that’s not all he said, he also talked about parents having the right to make sure they die, when abortion is based on the “my body” argument, which doesn’t apply here.

we have laws pertaining to the use of nuclear codes, how many times have those laws come into play.

if it’s rare, then why vote against the law? it not being common, isn’t a reason to vote against the law. i’m guessing plenty of people ( on your side of the aisle obviously) oppose the law, because living babies isn’t what they want. they want some people to be able to choose whether or not these babies get to live.

I didn’t see that you ever specified which conspiracy theory i embrace. So you just made it up? or did i miss it?

he also talked about parents having the right to make sure they die

Wow Jim you twisted that one !

Every parent make the call in their children's medical treatment even if that means taking them of life support

we have laws pertaining to the use of nuclear codes,

No we don’t that’s military procedure
But the call to use them falls solely on the POTUS

if it’s rare, then why vote against the law?

Because it’s a stupid law and government overreach

on your side of the aisle obviously) oppose the law, because living babies isn’t what they want. they want some people to be able to choose whether or not these babies get to live.

You are unhinged Jim
Montana is a red State with a sprinkling of democrats
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Republicans: There is no federal right to an abortion. Let states decide for themselves.

Kansas, Kentucky, Montana, Michigan, California, and Vermont.

Republicans: NO, NO! NOT LIKE THAT!
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

you’re going out of your way to oppose a law which would
require that doctors care for injured babies who by definition, have t done anything to anybody..

if you ever stop foaming at the mouth, take a deep breath and just roll
that around your noodle.

You have never once that i’ve seen, said that the left got anything wrong. Not once. But we, not you, are in the cult.

liberal=good, conservative=bad, even in the idea of trying to help babies born alive. That is some potent Kool Aid you’re chugging.

you’re going out of your way to oppose a law which would
require that doctors care for injured babies who by definition, have t done anything to anybody..


Jim your off the rails Doctors already do All they can to save Adults and children .. only in your twisted fantasy it's not happening




what did the left get wrong JIM? it was Montana citizens who shot it down 49% of that state are republicans

and 440,947 people voted at 53% of the vote and on the same ballot was

Constitutional Amendment 48 asks voters to change the Montana Constitution to explicitly require a warrant before state and local governments access private electronic data and communications.

and guess what it passed wirth 82% of the vote

stop chasing your tail it's not healthy. the vast majority of Americans both dem independent and republicans do not agree with you or the gop on the topic

and that's the headline It wasn’t just “the economy stupid”—it was abortion.

abortion came in a close second to inflation: 31% said inflation was their top issue but 27% said abortion was.

previously you said parents should essentially be able to a t like
they have DNRs on the baby. now you’re saying doctors already do everything they can. you’re flip flopping from one second to the next.

do you believe that doctors should be required to try and help/save these babies, yes or no? it’s a yes or no question.

I think few if any lawmakers, lawyers or judges are qualified to make that decision.
It would likely achieve its intended result, removing choice.
Abortion has decreased for years, if the so called right to lifers spent the amount of energy they spend inventing windmills to attack on actual problems they would accomplish something.
Try things every other developed country in the world has like healthcare, childcare or arms control.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

every single criminal law, removes choice.

tell me why it’s not infanticide when the baby is born, out of the womb, not any part of the mother’s body.

i figured one of you would try to include this with abortion. How does the mothers body factor into this at all? your whole abortion argument is my body, my choice. This has absolutely nothing to do with the mothers body.

The question is and has already been answered you just don’t like the answer

Doctors already are required to render aid. Unless the parents don’t wish not to proceed with life saving methods like feeding tubes or ventilators . And concerns for quality of life



Jim plenty of religious people refuse medical treatment. To save their kids lives . And many laws protect them . Even if it’s as simple as antibiotics


And Jim you keep dodging the Truth Republicans and Democrats shot the law down in a very very Red state

Your on the wrong side of history on this only American Republicans want to ban abortion mean while country’s around the globe are doing. The opposite.. Ireland comes to mind as a recent example

Ireland votes by landslide to legalise abortion and guess what. The Catholic Church (77.8%) the dominant religion
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Poor victim, just keep sky screaming when you could really do something proactive about children in the USA.

Try things every other developed country in the world has like healthcare, childcare or arms control.
But those aren’t as saleable enough to enrage the base.
Have you noticed how crime and the border have disappeared from Right wing media since the election?



Even your new hero DeSanctimoious knew how toxic the issue is and waited until after election to confirm he wanted to expand abortion restrictions.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

The Herschel Walker nomination was so important because it made clear ... everybody important in the GOP- from top elected officials to online and TV talkers - agrees: abortion restrictions are only for YOU, with exemptions of course reserved for themselves and allies.
Repression seasoned with extreme hypocrisy. That's the Walker message - and because so many important Republicans rallied so intensely to Walker, that message stuck to them as well.
There was early talk that post Roe might be followed by a new era of support for women and children: enhanced nutrition aid in pregnancy, child allowances, etc. Improbable, but wd have opened possibilities. Instead: Walker and "laws for our subjects, exemptions for ourselves"

Conservatives: All Preach, No Practice.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

how do you know the proposed law was redundant? you’re an expert on Montana penal law and medical standards?

i don’t form my opinions based on what everyone else thinks, and since you’re a liberal, neither do you. you hold many opinions that are outside the mainstream.

What’s your famous line ! election have consequences

And the Voter of Montana spoke
You may not agree but you should respect their decision
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device