My position is extraordinarily moderate within pro-life circles. A radical position would be giving the death penalty to women who get an abortion, allowing a woman to be handicapped for the rest of her life, etc. I do not support these things because I'm anti-death penalty and I value the health of a woman. Also, you have to remember that the VOTERS elected STATE LEGISLATURES to make these laws! If the voters were AGAINST these policies AND this was an issue of importance, then the laws would be different. But they aren't because my position is the winning position.

I mean, take a look at yourself. You're so upset about trans rights, Mexicans, and gas prices that there's no way that you'll vote for the other side. People like you will turn a blind eye to this and that will be that. The next step is to leverage this power and enact a national abortion ban. I can't wait for pro-abortion states to try and fight us on that too. Let's see how badly you want to kill your own kid when there's a federal marshal sticking a gun in your fucking face. I know guys like DeSantis will have no problem enforcing the law because he's not one to be fucked with.

Whether the claim of rape is true would be for the authorities to decide. I can't confirm the veracity of this specific case, but similar cases have been reported on througout the years. Not just from the U.S. but also from countries around the world. Far too young girls who have just barely hit puberty getting knocked up by rapists is not some fabrication and happens more often than most people would think.

Here's one real life example from the top of my head:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Titus_O'Neil#Early_life




Good, now I at least know that you're just trolling ^^^^^

This post was edited by Black XistenZ on Jul 2 2022 08:07pm

Nope. You just haven't been listening and are in denial. You think you can have your cake and eat it too...just like the Neocons

I'm not saying it doesn't happen. And again, I already stated I do not disagree with your post in the context it was presented. My questions are around the timing and lack of detail. It seems a lot like a copypasta of a story that's been run every couple years over the last forty years. The timing is suspect.

I'm also curious, given Ohio law says it's legal to provide abortion services until there is a fetal heartbeat, where's the evidence of the heartbeat? It's not uncommon for abortion providers to immediately stop providing services the moment they may become liable for... Anything. Is it possible, assuming this case happened and that this girl exists, that the planned parenthood or whatever else refused the service with no heartbeat just to avoid liability. They talk about "as early as six weeks" but on average the first heartbeat hits between week 12 and 18. 6 weeks and 3 days is once again highly suspect.

I'm not here to cast doubt on everything, but the article and the timing are both suspects, and no comments from parents, nothing. And even a pregnancy from a 15 year old goes to an "abuse doctor" as any teen pregnancy is considered "suspect" by our current government. Because I mean, if you can't consent, how can you get pregnant? Doesn't matter if the 15 year old got pregnant by perfectly consensual sex with a 13 year old boy.

They're simply questions designed to make you think. I do not disagree in any way with your earlier post in the context it's presented. I simply want to know from where you drew that context.

You're far too smart and grounded in reality to genuinely believe that "ban all abortions, without exceptions for rape or the life of the mother" is a winning position.

And while politically engaged partisans like myself might care about too many other issues to buck their party, the effect of this position on swing voters, moderates and female voters would be catastrophic. In an era where presidential elections as well as the balance of power in Congress are decided by the tiniest of margins, this would all but guarantee a Democratic trifecta - and you know it.

Side note: isn't it kinda the goal of clientele politics to be able to have one's cake and eat it too?

It already won in several states...do you really need me to name them?

I'm not concerned about swing voters, moderates, etc. because they always vote for their wallet first. Polling shows that abortion just isn't a particularly important issue. Look, these people were my allies for YEARS and are willing to crawl through broken glass to vote against their own interests. The least we can do is give them the win for being so loyal. If the GOP abandons them, then you're GUARANTEEING a Democrat trifecta. This is the same reason why the GOP won't abandon Trump and why he's going to be the 2024 nominee. The GOP NEEDS these voters. For someone who says they are informed, you're profoundly ignorant when it comes to understanding the bread and butter of the GOP.

This is far more pragmatic and honest than I've ever seen from you. I agree with you both on much of what you're saying. I'm still more concerned of the validity of the story itself, but there's an incredibly large amount of awareness shown here.

As an Independent voter, who hates both Dems and Republicans, my ability to provide for my family is and always has been number 1. This is why I think Dems will likely lose spectacularly in 2022, and possibly in 2024. On the flipside, if you DO cater to people who say the 10 year old victim of a rapist *must* give birth to the rapist's child? That's likely to turn me away as well.

Good way to create a Ross Perot or Ron Paul type candidate, who merely draws away from your preferred party. Interesting take though. Going to have to sit down and think a bit on what you're saying as far as "throwing a bone" to extremists. Many could say that Dems have been throwing progressive extremists a bone since 2015 with the advent of the Antifa riots, with an additional bone starting with the mass BLM rioting since George Floyd. Is that what won them the 2020 election?

Paparick's victims*

FTFY

This post was edited by ChocolateCoveredGummyBears on Jul 2 2022 09:20pm

It won in several states at a time when state trigger laws were nothing but consequence-free virtue signalling and posturing to the base because no one thought Roe would be overturned. Now, the situation has fundamentally changed; now, radical pro-life politicians will actually have to deal with the fallout from their stance.



But that's the point: will pro-lifers really feel abandoned if 99.X% of abortions are banned, but we don't force underage rape victims to carry stepdaddy's child to term? Of course the GOP would lose them as a voting bloc if it passes laws which allow abortions until the 22nd week or something like that. But this is not what we're discussing here, we're discussing exceptions for very rare and very tragic cases.

In my opinion, these common-sense exceptions are necessary to enable the mechanism that you just described to come into effect: swing voters and independents not caring too much about the abortion issue. If the pro-life faction isn't willing to accept such a compromise, one in which they get 99+% of what they wanted, they are doomed.

And there will be no lasting federal abortions ban anyway.

This post was edited by Black XistenZ on Jul 3 2022 06:36am

"could you just be a TINY bit less of a woman-hating religious bigot, to spare the lives and mental health of rape and incest victims, of 10 year old kids that were brutally abused?"

american conservatives: "absolutely not!"


agree with tcock though, this won't REALLY hurt republicans electorally. their voters are deplorables anyway, and even those that are not religious zealots and (like many of them) had abortions themselves, and generally don't see a problem with it, will STILL vote red because of tribalism and brainwashing.

This post was edited by fender on Jul 3 2022 07:10am