Messageboard - General Columbus Discussion

NOTE: You are viewing an archived version of the Columbus Underground forums/messageboard. As of 05/22/16 they have been closed to new comments and replies, but will remain accessible for archived searches and reference. For more information CLICK HERE

Ohio Abortion Bill

Home Forums General Columbus Discussion Ohio Abortion Bill

Viewing 15 posts - 151 through 165 (of 340 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #431681

    emmow
    Member

    Just an FYI. One of the Republican Representatives that is a sponsor of HB 125 and who gave a pretty anti-woman speech on the House floor was recently arrested for OVI with a stripper in his car.
    http://www.plunderbund.com/2011/06/30/state-rep-mecklenborg-likely-arrested-with-a-stripper/

    #431682

    SusanB
    Participant

    Just an FYI. One of the Republican Representatives that is a sponsor of HB 125 and who gave a pretty anti-woman speech on the House floor was recently arrested for OVI with a stripper in his car.
    http://www.plunderbund.com/2011/06/30/state-rep-mecklenborg-likely-arrested-with-a-stripper/

    Of course.

    #431683
    rus
    rus
    Participant

    SusanB wrote >>

    Just an FYI. One of the Republican Representatives that is a sponsor of HB 125 and who gave a pretty anti-woman speech on the House floor was recently arrested for OVI with a stripper in his car.
    http://www.plunderbund.com/2011/06/30/state-rep-mecklenborg-likely-arrested-with-a-stripper/

    Of course.

    So, he was supporting a single mom…

    #431684

    SusanB
    Participant

    No mention of condoms in the car, just Viagra in his system. I wonder how he’d feel about paying child support for a stripper mom. Classic. What a slimball.

    #431685

    SusanB
    Participant
    #431686

    myliftkk
    Participant

    rus wrote >>

    SusanB wrote >>

    Just an FYI. One of the Republican Representatives that is a sponsor of HB 125 and who gave a pretty anti-woman speech on the House floor was recently arrested for OVI with a stripper in his car.
    http://www.plunderbund.com/2011/06/30/state-rep-mecklenborg-likely-arrested-with-a-stripper/

    Of course.

    So, he was supporting a single mom…

    In Indiana no less… so much for supporting jobs here in Ohio.

    Republicans’ penchant for outsourcing apparently knows no bounds.

    #431687
    Walker Evans
    Walker Evans
    Keymaster

    berdawn wrote >>
    Abortion is only a small part of what Planned Parenthood offers. It’s kind of a disservice to their work to throw them into this discussion.

    I figured it was semi-relevant and not worth starting a new thread about. Didn’t mean it as a disservice.

    Guess I should have posted it in the Parks & Rec thread. :P

    #431688

    Tenzo
    Participant

    I guess the resurgence of this thread explains the people across the street showing me pictures of aborted baby parts while I attempt to eat my lunch at Potbellies.

    #431689

    sirlancelot
    Participant

    If the “Heartbeat” bill isn’t state-sponsored enforced religious doctrine, I don’t know what is. Morally and legally, almost everyone agrees that human life begins at or near birth. We do not all agree it begins at conception, anymore than we agree about a soul or when one gets it. Why not have the legislature pass a law that, in order to keep people from Hell, they must be “saved.”

    This leads to another point. Given that Ohio has a strong state interest in moral/religious issues such as same-sex marriage and abortion, we will have to decide whether to punish non-conformist religious groups by denying them tax exemptions or incorporation as non-profits. In the 1970’s, Ohio refused to recognise gay rights organisations because they went against state policy. How long will it be till Ohio conservatives try to revoke the tax exemptions of the Episcopal Church, liberal clergy or Reform Jewish congregations?

    Un-constitutional? You bet, but this is a “Christian” country and God inspired the Constitution. Given the numerous historical gaffes and historical revisions by Republican presidental candidates, even Jesus isn’t safe.

    #431690

    gramarye
    Participant

    sirlancelot wrote >>
    Morally and legally, almost everyone agrees that human life begins at or near birth.

    Cite for this? That’s a pretty bold claim, and I think strongly counterintuitive, given the way the votes have gone (not just the votes in the legislature, but the votes of the public to choose who goes to the legislature).

    #431691

    myliftkk
    Participant

    gramarye wrote >>

    sirlancelot wrote >>
    Morally and legally, almost everyone agrees that human life begins at or near birth.

    Cite for this? That’s a pretty bold claim, and I think strongly counterintuitive, given the way the votes have gone (not just the votes in the legislature, but the votes of the public to choose who goes to the legislature).

    You’re reading a mandate on abortion legislation based on the election of Republican legislators who spent the entirety of their campaigns preaching tea party economics, while strangely silent on abortion?

    If that’s not revisionist mandating, I’m not sure what is. That’d be akin to me declaring that Obama’s election mandated the nationalization of the energy industry is support of him if he goes to develop such a policy.

    #431692

    gramarye
    Participant

    myliftkk wrote >>

    gramarye wrote >>

    sirlancelot wrote >>
    Morally and legally, almost everyone agrees that human life begins at or near birth.

    Cite for this? That’s a pretty bold claim, and I think strongly counterintuitive, given the way the votes have gone (not just the votes in the legislature, but the votes of the public to choose who goes to the legislature).

    You’re reading a mandate on abortion legislation based on the election of Republican legislators who spent the entirety of their campaigns preaching tea party economics, while strangely silent on abortion?
    If that’s not revisionist mandating, I’m not sure what is. That’d be akin to me declaring that Obama’s election mandated the nationalization of the energy industry is support of him if he goes to develop such a policy.

    Then ignore the rest of my post and leave only my request for the citation. It’s a pretty bold claim that “almost everyone agrees that human life begins at or near birth.” That does not appear to be an assertion of consensus with any basis in empirical evidence.

    #431693

    myliftkk
    Participant

    gramarye wrote >>

    myliftkk wrote >>

    gramarye wrote >>

    sirlancelot wrote >>
    Morally and legally, almost everyone agrees that human life begins at or near birth.

    Cite for this? That’s a pretty bold claim, and I think strongly counterintuitive, given the way the votes have gone (not just the votes in the legislature, but the votes of the public to choose who goes to the legislature).

    You’re reading a mandate on abortion legislation based on the election of Republican legislators who spent the entirety of their campaigns preaching tea party economics, while strangely silent on abortion?
    If that’s not revisionist mandating, I’m not sure what is. That’d be akin to me declaring that Obama’s election mandated the nationalization of the energy industry is support of him if he goes to develop such a policy.

    Then ignore the rest of my post and leave only my request for the citation. It’s a pretty bold claim that “almost everyone agrees that human life begins at or near birth.” That does not appear to be an assertion of consensus with any basis in empirical evidence.

    The proper phrasing would likely be a “majority”, not “almost all” if we went digging through polling data (something I’m not going to waste time on right now – though I’ve read it in the past). I would counter that nearly all polling on abortion shows a pragmatic streak in the majority US citizens base as how to how the subject should be legislated. Not that that has ever mattered to extremists, who won’t be satisfied until 100% of their extremity is met.

    #431694
    Snarf
    Snarf
    Participant

    Praise the shit out of some Jesus, y’all.

    #431695

    StormKing
    Participant

    sirlancelot wrote >>
    Morally and legally, almost everyone agrees that human life begins at or near birth.

    Not according to Planned Parenthood v. Casey. States may protect the life of a fetus at the point of viability.

    The plurality then overturned the strict trimester formula used in Roe to weigh the woman’s interest in obtaining an abortion against the State’s interest in the life of the fetus. Continuing advancements in medical technology meant that at the time Casey was decided, a fetus might be considered viable at 22 or 23 weeks rather than at the 28 weeks that was more common at the time of Roe. The plurality recognized viability as the point at which the state interest in the life of the fetus outweighs the rights of the woman and abortion may be banned entirely “except where it is necessary, in appropriate medical judgment, for the preservation of the life or health of the mother”.

    There is little or no evidence that viability could happen at 20 weeks. Thus, this will likely be struck down, depending on who is sitting on the bench at the time.

Viewing 15 posts - 151 through 165 (of 340 total)

The forum ‘General Columbus Discussion’ is closed to new topics and replies.

Subscribe below: