You are here: Home > Message Board > News & Politics > Bias against Trump
November 28 2024 6.54pm

This page is no longer updated, and is the old forum. For new topics visit the New HOL forum.

Bias against Trump

Previous Topic | Next Topic


Page 191 of 573 < 187 188 189 190 191 192 193 194 195 >

  

W12 27 Feb 19 9.04pm

By the way, go and watch a real abortion at any stage and come back and tell me it’s a right for women.

 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Quote this post in a reply
Invalid user 2019 Flag 27 Feb 19 10.17pm

Originally posted by W12

By the way, go and watch a real abortion at any stage and come back and tell me it’s a right for women.

Ban them outright and you can watch some backstreet abortions too and tell me what you think of those.

As with everything in politics the issue of abortion is dragged to two unrealistic extremes by both parties. On the left side of that equation though I definitely worry about how cavalier some women can be about abortion.

 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Quote this post in a reply
W12 27 Feb 19 10.52pm

I repeat, go and see it. If you really want to be informed I would urge you and anyone.

Eyes properly wide open.

 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Quote this post in a reply
Invalid user 2019 Flag 27 Feb 19 11.04pm

Originally posted by W12

I repeat, go and see it. If you really want to be informed I would urge you and anyone.

Eyes properly wide open.

There's not a lot I haven't seen and my suggestion is that policy needs to be functional and sensible. If we enact law solely based on the emotion of watching an abortion youtube video or a war video or a child crying at a border wall video, it won't really be useful for society.

As I said, intrinsically I believe that society should see abortion as something that's serious and not some kind of lunch break whim. On the whole I'd be in favour of reducing the window for having an abortion, but keeping in mind that they shouldn't be outright illegal due to the very serious knock on effect of that.

 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Quote this post in a reply
Penge Eagle Flag Beckenham 27 Feb 19 11.55pm Send a Private Message to Penge Eagle Holmesdale Online Elite Member Add Penge Eagle as a friend

Originally posted by Wisbech Eagle

I have previously decided to stay out of these threads and was hoping someone else would pick up on this but as they haven't I cannot let it just stand, because the claim that the Democrats voted in favour of infanticide is completely wrong and is just being used by Trump to wind up his evangelical base.

No doctor, or nurse, would ever allow infanticide to take place and they have reacted with justified outrage at such a suggestion.

What actually happened was that the Democrats refused to endorse a bill that sought to make illegal something that is already illegal. They did so because they regarded the bill as a stalking horse attempt to introduce a wider ban on abortion.

So unless you regard abortion as infanticide what is suggested just isn't true.

That's it. I won't enter a long debate on this but urge those interested to research the real facts.

Well if you actually read the Born-Alive Abortion Survivors Protection Act, you will know there is no restriction of abortion in it.

Yes there was a 2002 bill, but there is currently no existing federal legislation that mandates medical care for children born alive after an attempted abortion.

The legislation states: "Any infant born alive after an abortion or within a hospital, clinic, or other facility has the same claim to the protection of the law that would arise for any newborn, or for any person who comes to a hospital, clinic, or other facility for screening and treatment or otherwise becomes a patient within its care."

I'm no evangelical, and like many, believe that a baby deserves medical care after a botched abortion and should not be put down like a dog.

Edited by Penge Eagle (28 Feb 2019 12.03am)

 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post | Board Moderator Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
Invalid user 2019 Flag 28 Feb 19 12.11am

Originally posted by Wisbech Eagle

I have previously decided to stay out of these threads and was hoping someone else would pick up on this but...

Honestly I just keep reading the very start of your posts and the ever present nature of them and the 'i'm just on my way out of the door, but..' aspect does bring a smile. Trump might call you high energy eagle.


Edited by dollardays (28 Feb 2019 12.11am)

 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Quote this post in a reply
Invalid user 2019 Flag 28 Feb 19 12.14am

Originally posted by Penge Eagle

Well if you actually read the Born-Alive Abortion Survivors Protection Act, you will know there is no restriction of abortion in it.

Yes there was a 2002 bill, but there is currently no existing federal legislation that mandates medical care for children born alive after an attempted abortion.

The legislation states: "Any infant born alive after an abortion or within a hospital, clinic, or other facility has the same claim to the protection of the law that would arise for any newborn, or for any person who comes to a hospital, clinic, or other facility for screening and treatment or otherwise becomes a patient within its care."

I'm no evangelical, and like many, believe that a baby deserves medical care after a botched abortion and should not be put down like a dog.

Edited by Penge Eagle (28 Feb 2019 12.03am)

I'd have to agree with the legislation as stated. The idea of a baby surviving an abortion and then after all of that being taken out by whatever means does sound both horrible and extreme.

 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Quote this post in a reply
Penge Eagle Flag Beckenham 05 Mar 19 12.52pm Send a Private Message to Penge Eagle Holmesdale Online Elite Member Add Penge Eagle as a friend

Why does the BBC not bleep out Trump saying "bulls***" in this 20 second clip? they would for anyone else [Link]

 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post | Board Moderator Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
Penge Eagle Flag Beckenham 07 Mar 19 8.15pm Send a Private Message to Penge Eagle Holmesdale Online Elite Member Add Penge Eagle as a friend

They changed the earlier headline from a statement of fact this morning: 'Donald Trump get Apple boss’s name wrong' to this: 'Does Donald Trump get Apple boss’s name wrong?' [Link]

Is this actual news? Or just an excuse to mock the president?


Edited by Penge Eagle (07 Mar 2019 8.15pm)

 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post | Board Moderator Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
Stirlingsays Flag 07 Mar 19 8.42pm Send a Private Message to Stirlingsays Holmesdale Online Elite Member Add Stirlingsays as a friend

Originally posted by Penge Eagle

They changed the earlier headline from a statement of fact this morning: 'Donald Trump get Apple boss’s name wrong' to this: 'Does Donald Trump get Apple boss’s name wrong?' [Link]

Is this actual news? Or just an excuse to mock the president?


Edited by Penge Eagle (07 Mar 2019 8.15pm)

I find the whole, 'Tim Apple' thing amusing.

He's the god emperor....these minions scuttle around his ankles blowing raspberries. His name will always be remembered, theirs won't.

 


'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen)

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
.TUX. Flag 22 Mar 19 10.52pm

The Mueller report is in and guess what............

 


Buy Litecoin.

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Quote this post in a reply
black eagle. Flag south croydon. 22 Mar 19 11.05pm Send a Private Message to black eagle. Add black eagle. as a friend

Originally posted by .TUX.

The Mueller report is in and guess what............

Trump getting impeached hopefully.
Fingers crossed.

 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply

  

Page 191 of 573 < 187 188 189 190 191 192 193 194 195 >

Previous Topic | Next Topic

You are here: Home > Message Board > News & Politics > Bias against Trump