Cuomo Celebrates Abortion Up Until Birth

This_person

Well-Known Member
I don't get it, either, and I'm pro-abortion. It's one thing to not get in someone's business and let them exterminate their unwanted spawn - less future felons, and that's a good thing; it's something else entirely to actively celebrate full-term babies being basically tortured to death.

I figure if enough progbot women kill their children, that's less Democrat votes in the future. So let 'em do their thing, but Cuomo actively celebrating it is just gross and stupid.

While we vehemently disagree on the idea of killing kids because they may (even if it is "likely") turn out to be future felons or worse, I have always appreciated that you have a respectful way of discussing the topic.
 

Sapidus

Well-Known Member
I don't get it, either, and I'm pro-abortion. It's one thing to not get in someone's business and let them exterminate their unwanted spawn - less future felons, and that's a good thing; it's something else entirely to actively celebrate full-term babies being basically tortured to death.

I figure if enough progbot women kill their children, that's less Democrat votes in the future. So let 'em do their thing, but Cuomo actively celebrating it is just gross and stupid.

Do you ever read the article before commenting?
 

Sapidus

Well-Known Member
Powerful, well thought-out, reasoned argument. Well done.


:sarcasm:



that's rich coming from you who fangirls over every idiotic thing Vrail says despite the evidence she didn't even read the article. Brown Noser You would be a great yes man in the Trump white house
 

vraiblonde

Board Mommy
PREMO Member
Patron
While we vehemently disagree on the idea of killing kids because they may (even if it is "likely") turn out to be future felons or worse, I have always appreciated that you have a respectful way of discussing the topic.

I have a practical way of looking at it. I see what happens to the unwanted children of irresponsible people, and them never having been born in the first place is better, in my opinion. We see all those stories about some little kid horribly victimized by their drugged out Mommy and her vicious boyfriend, and wouldn't it be better for that child to have never been born and never suffered that fate? I am more heartbroken over abused children than I am abortion.

What's amusing is women who abort their children bristling when people like me suggest they did the right thing because they clearly aren't motherhood material. :lol:
 

Hijinx

Well-Known Member
I have a practical way of looking at it. I see what happens to the unwanted children of irresponsible people, and them never having been born in the first place is better, in my opinion. We see all those stories about some little kid horribly victimized by their drugged out Mommy and her vicious boyfriend, and wouldn't it be better for that child to have never been born and never suffered that fate? I am more heartbroken over abused children than I am abortion.

What's amusing is women who abort their children bristling when people like me suggest they did the right thing because they clearly aren't motherhood material. :lol:

It takes 9 month for most mothers to present a child to birth.
9 freaking months for this stupid bitch who wasn't smart enough to get on the pill to decide whether or not she wants this child.?
No not 9 months. IMO if she hasn't figured it out in the 4th month she should lose her right to decide.
The child has the right to be born.

Killing a fully formed child between the 5th and 9th month is murder.
The Doctor(butcher) should be charged and the mother should be charged.
 

Sapidus

Well-Known Member
It takes 9 month for most mothers to present a child to birth.
9 freaking months for this stupid bitch who wasn't smart enough to get on the pill to decide whether or not she wants this child.?
No not 9 months. IMO if she hasn't figured it out in the 4th month she should lose her right to decide.
The child has the right to be born.

Killing a fully formed child between the 5th and 9th month is murder.
The Doctor(butcher) should be charged and the mother should be charged.



Another one who didn't read the article. Why is it always the angriest ones who are last informed?
 

Hijinx

Well-Known Member
Another one who didn't read the article. Why is it always the angriest ones who are last informed?

My argument has nothing to do with any article, it is my own opinion on killing the unborn .

All I can say to you is that it's a damned shame your mother didn't feel the way you do .
 

vraiblonde

Board Mommy
PREMO Member
Patron
The child has the right to be born.

Then what? It goes home with the woman who wanted to kill it? The woman who was so irresponsible that she waited 9 months to get around to having an abortion? What kind of life is that?
 

Hijinx

Well-Known Member
Then what? It goes home with the woman who wanted to kill it? The woman who was so irresponsible that she waited 9 months to get around to having an abortion? What kind of life is that?

I am not saying it is perfect.
I am saying that after a child could be viable on the outside and has feeling it is murder to kill it.
 

TCROW

Well-Known Member
Then what? It goes home with the woman who wanted to kill it? The woman who was so irresponsible that she waited 9 months to get around to having an abortion? What kind of life is that?

What you describe is not the sort of abortion this law provides for. This has been show with the language of the law already.

Ninth month of pregnancy ... “I think I’ll go ahead and finally schedule this abortion that I meant to do 6 months ago but just never got around to”, said no one ever.
 

Christy

b*tch rocket
If anyone bothered to read the bill, this change for babies with lethal anomalies, many of which may not show up until 24 weeks of gestation.

It’s literally right on the 2nd page of the link below in upper case font.

https://legislation.nysenate.gov/pdf/bills/2019/S240

I've read the bill and it says absolutely nothing about "babies with lethal anomalies"

It says:

"§ 2599-BB. ABORTION. 1. A HEALTH CARE PRACTITIONER LICENSED, CERTIFIED, OR AUTHORIZED UNDER TITLE EIGHT OF THE EDUCATION LAW, ACTING WITHIN HIS OR HER LAWFUL SCOPE OF PRACTICE, MAY PERFORM AN ABORTION WHEN, ACCORDING TO THE PRACTITIONER'S REASONABLE AND GOOD FAITH PROFESSIONAL JUDGMENT BASED ON THE FACTS OF THE PATIENT'S CASE: THE PATIENT IS WITHIN TWENTY-FOUR WEEKS FROM THE COMMENCEMENT OF PREGNANCY, OR THERE IS AN ABSENCE OF FETAL VIABILITY, OR THE ABORTION IS NECESSARY TO PROTECT THE PATIENT'S LIFE OR HEALTH."

The Statement in red is pretty subjective don't you think? If you do not think that this statement is not the legal "get out of jail free" card, you would be mistaken.

I personally don't believe the government should be involved in personal medical decisions, but at what point does this become a human rights issue? If a child is only "human" at birth, then we should abolish the laws that allow for anyone to be charged with murder if they cause a woman to miscarry. Can't have it both ways.

It is absurd to me that you can abort a child within seconds of birth due to "absence of fetal viability", but once that child is born, no matter how ill or deformed, it is murder to euthanize it. What is the difference?





 

TCROW

Well-Known Member
I've read the bill and it says absolutely nothing about "babies with lethal anomalies"

It says:

"§ 2599-BB. ABORTION. 1. A HEALTH CARE PRACTITIONER LICENSED, CERTIFIED, OR AUTHORIZED UNDER TITLE EIGHT OF THE EDUCATION LAW, ACTING WITHIN HIS OR HER LAWFUL SCOPE OF PRACTICE, MAY PERFORM AN ABORTION WHEN, ACCORDING TO THE PRACTITIONER'S REASONABLE AND GOOD FAITH PROFESSIONAL JUDGMENT BASED ON THE FACTS OF THE PATIENT'S CASE: THE PATIENT IS WITHIN TWENTY-FOUR WEEKS FROM THE COMMENCEMENT OF PREGNANCY, OR THERE IS AN ABSENCE OF FETAL VIABILITY, OR THE ABORTION IS NECESSARY TO PROTECT THE PATIENT'S LIFE OR HEALTH."

The Statement in red is pretty subjective don't you think? If you do not think that this statement is not the legal "get out of jail free" card, you would be mistaken.

I personally don't believe the government should be involved in personal medical decisions, but at what point does this become a human rights issue? If a child is only "human" at birth, then we should abolish the laws that allow for anyone to be charged with murder if they cause a woman to miscarry. Can't have it both ways.

It is absurd to me that you can abort a child within seconds of birth due to "absence of fetal viability", but once that child is born, no matter how ill or deformed, it is murder to euthanize it. What is the difference?






“Babies with lethal anomalies” was my term. But what you highlighted means the same thing.
 

Hijinx

Well-Known Member
I've read the bill and it says absolutely nothing about "babies with lethal anomalies"

It says:

"§ 2599-BB. ABORTION. 1. A HEALTH CARE PRACTITIONER LICENSED, CERTIFIED, OR AUTHORIZED UNDER TITLE EIGHT OF THE EDUCATION LAW, ACTING WITHIN HIS OR HER LAWFUL SCOPE OF PRACTICE, MAY PERFORM AN ABORTION WHEN, ACCORDING TO THE PRACTITIONER'S REASONABLE AND GOOD FAITH PROFESSIONAL JUDGMENT BASED ON THE FACTS OF THE PATIENT'S CASE: THE PATIENT IS WITHIN TWENTY-FOUR WEEKS FROM THE COMMENCEMENT OF PREGNANCY, OR THERE IS AN ABSENCE OF FETAL VIABILITY, OR THE ABORTION IS NECESSARY TO PROTECT THE PATIENT'S LIFE OR HEALTH."

The Statement in red is pretty subjective don't you think? If you do not think that this statement is not the legal "get out of jail free" card, you would be mistaken.

I personally don't believe the government should be involved in personal medical decisions, but at what point does this become a human rights issue? If a child is only "human" at birth, then we should abolish the laws that allow for anyone to be charged with murder if they cause a woman to miscarry. Can't have it both ways.

It is absurd to me that you can abort a child within seconds of birth due to "absence of fetal viability", but once that child is born, no matter how ill or deformed, it is murder to euthanize it. What is the difference?






I am much in agreement with you.
 

TCROW

Well-Known Member
By the way, I am very much against abortion. My wife and I adopted two children and we are thrilled their respective mothers chose life for them. Our lives are richer for our kids being part of it.

With that said, no way in a millions years would I ever ask my government to get involved in that decision process for a pregnant woman.

Freedom is and should be dangerous and that’s exactly how I prefer it. Dangerous and with consequence.

And no government funds, at any level, should be used to perform abortions.

I’ve read the law, and this won’t result in Big Abortion setting up shop in New York State.

Hope this helps.
 

vraiblonde

Board Mommy
PREMO Member
Patron
With that said, no way in a millions years would I ever ask my government to get involved in that decision process for a pregnant woman.

Agree. My objection to this is solely with regard to Cuomo's excessive and inappropriate celebration by lighting up monuments. It's ghoulish and it's an obvious ham-handed pander to the crazy abortion nutters who are at the extreme end of the abortion debate.

And no government funds, at any level, should be used to perform abortions.

I disagree. It's cheaper to pay for her abortion than it is to lock her neglected and abused kid up when he starts knocking over liquor stores to support his drug habit. I used to say I didn't want to pay for someone's irresponsibility, but emotion aside I'm paying for that anyway and abortion is a better deal.

I’ve read the law, and this won’t result in Big Abortion setting up shop in New York State.

It already has. It's called "Planned Parenthood".
 

black dog

Free America
PREMO Member
Don't forget the "slippery slope" part. I know, some people don't get slippery slope. It's okay. You will when it has an impact on your life.

Its never impacted my life, Its none of anyone's business what medical choices a woman makes..
 

TCROW

Well-Known Member
Agree. My objection to this is solely with regard to Cuomo's excessive and inappropriate celebration by lighting up monuments. It's ghoulish and it's an obvious ham-handed pander to the crazy abortion nutters who are at the extreme end of the abortion debate.

Ah, understand completely. Abortion is an extremely dark side of humanity and should in no way be celebrated. It's there, it has always been there, and will always be there. We know this and we just sort of try not to think about it, I suppose. I don't think it's a false choice to say we're fine with the government staying out of it, while at the same time being grossed out by a celebration. With that said, it is fairly common for politicians to high-five and all that after a bill they pushed for is passed into law. So as a news article, this just doesn't bother me all that much I guess.


I disagree. It's cheaper to pay for her abortion than it is to lock her neglected and abused kid up when he starts knocking over liquor stores to support his drug habit. I used to say I didn't want to pay for someone's irresponsibility, but emotion aside I'm paying for that anyway and abortion is a better deal.

A very pragmatic way to look at it, cost/benefit analysis is always a good thing. I think I'll have to chew on that for a bit to see how I feel about it.
 

vraiblonde

Board Mommy
PREMO Member
Patron
A very pragmatic way to look at it, cost/benefit analysis is always a good thing. I think I'll have to chew on that for a bit to see how I feel about it.

See, feel. My feelings are a lot different than harsh reality. When I got pregnant with my son, his dad and I got married. Abortion wasn't even something we discussed because even at our young ages we found it personally offensive. 25-some years later when my daughter called to tell me she was pregnant without benefit of marriage, I'd have supported her either way but MAN was I glad when she said she was having the baby. Although, really, if she were going to abort she wouldn't have called and told me because she knows how I feel.

What I think about abortion and how I feel about it are two different things.
 
Top