DawgTalkers.net Forums DawgTalk Palus Politicus Ohio reintroduces 'heartbeat' abortion bill!

Trump administration to ban abortion referrals by taxpayer-funded family planning clinics

The Trump administration announced Friday that it intends to bar taxpayer-funded family planning centers from promoting or perfoming abortions or referring women to other clinics for them -- a move that is likely to yank money from groups like Planned Parenthood.

The Department of Health and Human Services announced that the Title X program, a family-planning grant that helps approximately four million women a year, would be subject to a revision of regulations -- including one that “prohibits the use of Title X funds to perform, promote, refer for, or support abortion as a method of family planning.”

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/trump-a...lanning-clinics

I'm not a doctor either but I'm sure there is one that has a way to know by measuring electrical pulses from the baby's brain or something along those lines. Hopefully in a noninvasive way.

The problem with the argument that I see is that unlike a braindead adult at this time we have to way to repair and reactive their brains but with a baby we know that in most cases it will become a living and healthy person if left alone.

So where it's fine to me to pull the plug on a vegetative adult who we know will not get better but with a baby you don't have that line of reasoning. So while the line in the sand might shift around for some my line is always that the lives of baby's are precious. Far more precious than an adult's.

I would just rather have a society that bands together to care for all of it's children than to celebrate the right to kill children. We have killed more than 50 million babies since roe vs wade. What if just one of those was the one that found a cure for cancer or was meant to give mankind some other precious gift. I mean who knows what great achievement we have lost from all the babies we have allowed to die.

I feel sadness for all the voices that were silenced before they ever had a chance to be heard.

You think every time Trump says something it actually means something. Some people never learn. You advocate for a wanna be a king, not a president.

After 8 years of a weak court jester running the show, I am sure a real man leading our Nation looks like a king to you.

You really shouldn't be bashing W like that. He didn't know any better.

jUST BECAUSE THIS THREAD GOT QUIET.



Stop killing babies

Stop trying to live other people’s lives by your standards.


Just to keep the bickering going.

Let me try it this way... stop killing babies who were born yesterday.

Personally I wish people would stop having babies. If everyone stopped for 30 years the world population would shrink by about 1.6 billion people.
It took humans 200,000 years to get to our first billion people, then 126 years to double to 2 billion, 30 years to add another billion and 14 years for the next billion. Each subsequent billion has only taken 12 years.
How long can this go on?

30 years might be too much. You need enough breeding age women to keep the population at the new level.

Dems block 'born alive' bill to provide medical care to infants who survive failed abortions

Senate Democrats on Monday blocked a Republican bill that would have threatened prison time for doctors who don't try saving the life of infants born alive during abortions, leading conservatives to wonder openly whether Democrats were embracing "infanticide" to appeal to left-wing voters.

All prominent Democratic 2020 presidential hopefuls in the Senate voted down the measure, including Bernie Sanders of Vermont, Kamala Harris of California, Cory Booker of New Jersey, Kirsten Gillibrand of New York, Amy Klobuchar of Minnesota and Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts. The final vote was 53-44 to end Democratic delaying tactics -- seven votes short of the 60 needed.

The Born-Alive Abortion Survivors Protection Act would have required that "any health care practitioner present" at the time of a birth "exercise the same degree of professional skill, care, and diligence to preserve the life and health of the child as a reasonably diligent and conscientious health care practitioner would render to any other child born alive at the same gestational age."

"Senate Democrats just voted against legislation to prevent the killing of newborn infant children. The Democrat position on abortion is now so extreme that they don’t mind executing babies AFTER birth....

....This will be remembered as one of the most shocking votes in the history of Congress. If there is one thing we should all agree on, it’s protecting the lives of innocent babies."

-President of the United States of America
Donald Trump

Do you think Trump really cares about saving aborted babies or is he using this as a divisive issue for 2020? Seeing how both the article clip and tweet are political in nature, I'd say it's the latter.

I think we have just looked evil directly in the eyes.

The Left has just brought infanticide to America.

Does it matter? Either way it's smart politics. He made Hillary look like a complete monster in the debate where she said she supported partial birth abortion. If he was a slightly more self aware candidate right after she declared support for the procedure he would have described the procedure.

HEY now we need those young folks to keep Social Security going

for a long time one of the lefts arguments in favor of allowing abortion is that the baby is 100% dependent on the mother for life so the mother should get to decide..

to which the argument was made by the pro-lifers that is is 100% dependent for a while after birth too so why stop at birth..

the left would respond that was a stupid argument, nobody would be so vile as to kill babies after they were born...

and here we are.

I don't think the left brought anything like infanticide. Republican women have abortions too.

My problem is the "late term abortion". If a fetus is developed far enough along to be viable outside the womb, then abortion for any reason other than a life or death circumstance would be murder IMHO.

In a situation where the pregnancy must end to save the mother, then it's justified. But if you are killing viable (again, outside the womb) fetuses that survive a late term abortion then you are a murderer.

MURDERS???

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CKiqHpbFz68

I'm not changing my mind on early abortion being the woman's choice. That said I'd like to know exactly how many late term abortions are being performed, how many of those result in the fetus surviving the procedure, and how many of those are then intentionally killed.

I saw bits and pieces of a movie recently about a doctor that did a bunch of these, he was considered a mass murderer. The little of it I watched made it seem like a right wing hit piece on abortion that was using the most rare extreme cases to justify calling it mass murder and the doctor a serial killer. But I would really like to know the numbers on all of this before dismissing it as rhetoric. Maybe when I'm feeling better I'll research it a little. Unless you or somebody else has some fair reporting sources on it to share. I'll scan the thread again.

EDIT: The rest of this thread is useless political attacks and BS. I don't agree with the thread topic "heartbeat bill" because 20 Days does not make a viable outside the womb fetus. But I don't agree with late term abortions.

VIEW ARCHIVED FLOOR PROCEEDINGS
Roll Call Vote 116th Congress - 1st Session


XML
Vote Summary

Question: On Cloture on the Motion to Proceed (Motion to Invoke Cloture Re: The Motion to Proceed to S. 311 )
Vote Number: 27
Vote Date: February 25, 2019, 05:42 PM

Required For Majority: 3/5
Vote Result: Cloture on the Motion to Proceed Rejected

Measure Number: S. 311 (Born-Alive Abortion Survivors Protection Act )
Measure Title: A bill to amend title 18, United States Code, to prohibit a health care practitioner from failing to exercise the proper degree of care in the case of a child who survives an abortion or attempted abortion.
Vote Counts:
YEAs53

NAYs
44

Not Voting
3

*Information compiled through Senate LIS by the Senate Bill Clerk under the direction of the Secretary of the Senate
Vote Summary
By Senator Name
By Vote Position
By Home State
Alphabetical by Senator Name
Alexander (R-TN), Yea
Baldwin (D-WI), Nay
Barrasso (R-WY), Yea
Bennet (D-CO), Nay
Blackburn (R-TN), Yea
Blumenthal (D-CT), Nay
Blunt (R-MO), Yea
Booker (D-NJ), Nay
Boozman (R-AR), Yea
Braun (R-IN), Yea
Brown (D-OH), Nay
Burr (R-NC), Yea
Cantwell (D-WA), Nay
Capito (R-WV), Yea
Cardin (D-MD), Nay
Carper (D-DE), Nay
Casey (D-PA), Yea
Cassidy (R-LA), Yea
Collins (R-ME), Yea
Coons (D-DE), Nay
Cornyn (R-TX), Yea
Cortez Masto (D-NV), Nay
Cotton (R-AR), Yea
Cramer (R-ND), Not Voting
Crapo (R-ID), Yea
Cruz (R-TX), Yea
Daines (R-MT), Yea
Duckworth (D-IL), Nay
Durbin (D-IL), Nay
Enzi (R-WY), Yea
Ernst (R-IA), Yea
Feinstein (D-CA), Nay
Fischer (R-NE), Yea
Gardner (R-CO), Yea
Gillibrand (D-NY), Nay
Graham (R-SC), Yea
Grassley (R-IA), Yea
Harris (D-CA), Nay
Hassan (D-NH), Nay
Hawley (R-MO), Yea
Heinrich (D-NM), Nay
Hirono (D-HI), Nay
Hoeven (R-ND), Yea
Hyde-Smith (R-MS), Yea
Inhofe (R-OK), Yea
Isakson (R-GA), Yea
Johnson (R-WI), Yea
Jones (D-AL), Yea
Kaine (D-VA), Nay
Kennedy (R-LA), Yea
King (I-ME), Nay
Klobuchar (D-MN), Nay
Lankford (R-OK), Yea
Leahy (D-VT), Nay
Lee (R-UT), Yea
Manchin (D-WV), Yea
Markey (D-MA), Nay
McConnell (R-KY), Yea
McSally (R-AZ), Yea
Menendez (D-NJ), Nay
Merkley (D-OR), Nay
Moran (R-KS), Yea
Murkowski (R-AK), Not Voting
Murphy (D-CT), Nay
Murray (D-WA), Nay
Paul (R-KY), Yea
Perdue (R-GA), Yea
Peters (D-MI), Nay
Portman (R-OH), Yea
Reed (D-RI), Nay
Risch (R-ID), Yea
Roberts (R-KS), Yea
Romney (R-UT), Yea
Rosen (D-NV), Nay
Rounds (R-SD), Yea
Rubio (R-FL), Yea
Sanders (I-VT), Nay
Sasse (R-NE), Yea
Schatz (D-HI), Nay
Schumer (D-NY), Nay
Scott (R-FL), Yea
Scott (R-SC), Not Voting
Shaheen (D-NH), Nay
Shelby (R-AL), Yea
Sinema (D-AZ), Nay
Smith (D-MN), Nay
Stabenow (D-MI), Nay
Sullivan (R-AK), Yea
Tester (D-MT), Nay
Thune (R-SD), Yea
Tillis (R-NC), Yea
Toomey (R-PA), Yea
Udall (D-NM), Nay
Van Hollen (D-MD), Nay
Warner (D-VA), Nay
Warren (D-MA), Nay
Whitehouse (D-RI), Nay
Wicker (R-MS), Yea
Wyden (D-OR), Nay
Young (R-IN), Yea

Save this list for the upcoming Nuremberg trials.

I'd like to know how many Late-Term Abortions there are as well.

I mean, why would a woman want to suffer through an entire pregnancy just to have an abortion at the end? I'd reckon there'd probably be a pretty good reason.



Me, personally, I'm against Late-Term Abortion. That's something i believe most Americans agree about. And for abortion rights advocates, it's only gonna get harder, as science is actually going to go against them.

I mean, within the next ten years, we'll probably be able to develop a baby in an artificial womb.



But, anyway, why would a woman want to suffer through an entire pregnancy just to get an abortion at the end? It's gotta be pretty rare

The term "viable" really has no standing in the topic. I'm not saying that in an attempt to dismiss you out of hand but rather, the term has never been defined. Pro-abortion people for decades had used that as their justification for denying the unborn was "life". A fetus in the womb is not viable because it can't survive on it's own is what they always said.

The problem with their rationale is that even a perfectly healthy newborn baby isn't viable by their own definition. After all, there's nothing that a newborn can do to contribute to it's own survival. It's still just as dependent on the mother. In fact, when you start to tease out the premise, a child isn't viable until at least primary school age, if not later. That would be the age where they start to become more self aware of their place in their environment and only have a rudimentary understanding of how to address particular needs like what to do when they are hungry or are cold.

Like I said, I'm not trying to be purposefully dismissive. Trying to base a solution on the concept of viability simply isn't a tenable position for either side.

My cousin was born at 24 weeks.
She just played the lead in a school play last week.

The other problem with it, and the reason the left has largely abandoned it as a point in their argument... is that with modern medicine and technology, "viability" keeps getting earlier.

Normal gestation is 40 weeks. more than quarter of babies survive if born after 23 weeks. The record is around 21 weeks for a baby that survived.

According to studies between 2003 and 2005, 20 to 35 percent of babies born at 23 weeks of gestation survive, while 50 to 70 percent of babies born at 24 to 25 weeks, and more than 90 percent born at 26 to 27 weeks, survive. It is rare for a baby weighing less than 500 g (17.6 ounces) to survive.

Viability, as the word has been used in United States constitutional law since Roe v. Wade, is the potential of the fetus to survive outside the uterus after birth, natural or induced, when supported by up-to-date medicine. Fetal viability depends largely on the fetal organ maturity, and environmental conditions.[2] Another definition for viability, as used in the medical phrase limit of viability, is the expectation that a fetus has an equal chance of surviving and not surviving outside his or her mother's womb.

According to Websters Encyclopedic Unabridged Dictionary of the English Language, viability of a fetus means having reached such a stage of development as to be capable of living, under normal conditions, outside the uterus. Viability exists as a function of biomedical and technological capacities, which are different in different parts of the world. As a consequence, there is, at the present time, no worldwide, uniform gestational age that defines viability.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fetal_viability

Found this info on late term abortions 40, not sure how reliable.

US Number abortions ≥21 weeks, 2012

1,186!

Eye Popping number to me. Didn't think there would be that many.

According to the CDC, almost 13,000 late-term abortions happen in the U.S. annually.

https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/ss6015a1.htm

That's greater than or equal to 21 weeks gestation. The fetus is not viable until 24 weeks (22-23 weeks? - is that small of percentage considered viable? Is 35% survival at 24 weeks truly viable? ), so I guess the actual number would be where you draw the line for late term. Personally I feel anything over 20 weeks which is almost 5 months along is too far for me to be comfortable with. I'd even be inclined to draw that line at 16-18 weeks since we live in a world with birth control, the morning after pill, and mostly reliable home pregnancy tests. BUT when the GOP and pro-lifers fight you at every turn on sex education, planned parenthood, promotion of birth control, and availability of abortion services or abortions themselves; it makes it hard for the pro-choicers to compromise.

I will not argue semantics with you over killing children.

What would really be nice is if there were a list of qualified people wanting to adopt babies that were willing to pay the expenses for a woman that does not want her child and wants to abort. Somehow I don't see that list being 825,564 (2008 CDC total abortions reported) potential adoptions deep per year...

I wonder how many children are waiting to be adopted in the system any given day? Pretty lame to only be open to a baby with all those kids needing parents. Pretty lame to insist that we add to that number when a fetus is NOT viable or only has a small percentage chance of living. Pretty lame that we insist women give birth to children with known life altering severe illnesses or deformities too. There are so many arguments on both sides of this that it's just impossible for everyone to get on one page.

You can't call abortion 'killing children' and expect anyone to take you seriously. Call me a baby killer, that might change my mind... smh

For the record I am all for sex education, and promotion of birth control. I don't have any problem with planned parenthood except for them supporting abortion.

Democrats can now return to doing more for animals than they do for children.

Shame!

Yeah, it's the Democrats who complain about and try to cut every social program that helps these children after they're born. You have never cared about their life after they're born. Only that they're born.

You are confused again.

Democrats just voted to allow one living citizen die on the table without treatment or outright killing him/her while working to treat the other citizen.

Ghoulish!

Animals are treated better.

Well you act like an animal and you seem to treat yourself rather poorly. You do understand that humans are mammals, right?

The whole ‘animals are treated better’ rhetoric is nonsense.
Ask a farmer what they do with a calf or piglet born with a deformity or physical impairment. Ask a farmer what they do when an animal gets too old to breed, or be ‘productive’.
What do pet owners do when their pets get old and infirmed, incontinent, etc?

On some levels you’re correct. We do treat our pets better than our elderly. We place our elderly in care facilities that drain them of their finances while typically caring for them fair to poorly. Then we keep them alive, often times completely unable to care for themselves on any level, or interact with the outside world due to Alzheimer’s/dementia. We feed them pureed textured foods and Ensure ‘health shakes’ (cancer in a can) when they are no longer able to chew. Eventually many come to even choke on that. Often times then passing from aspiration pneumonia. Basically we don’t extend their lives, we merely prolong their deaths... because ‘compassion’. Meanwhile many of you fight ‘right to die’ laws...because ‘compassion’.
So yes, we often do treat our pets better than our loved ones.

Take your false equivalency elsewhere.

No one lets a hit dog laying on the street crying. Children is another story with the Left.

Yet you wish to deny healthcare to all Americans.