[Ghaati]

Originally Posted by bmw335xi

I'll be supporting marijuana and pro-choice, while voting for Trump.

So you're going to vote for someone who put the anti-choice judges in SCOTUS - you know, the ones who insisted during their confirmation hearings that Roe v. Wade was settled law and as such, had intrinsic value. And then - they overturned it like a frozen popover in the toaster oven - because in truth, it had NO value to them, at all.

Every one of those judges was recommended, preferred, pushed, and installed by your boy trump. I mean, you can vote for whoever you want, and voice yes or no on any ballot you want. That's your right.

Just be sure you are aware of the abject hypocrisy when you make conflicting choices like that.

[Ghaati]

Originally Posted by RayHammer

Most people are fairly reasonable. The far left likes to frame the abortion issue in an all-or-nothing context while the vast majority of people are nuanced on the subject. True, there are some fundamentalists out there who believe that abortion should never occur under any circumstances, but these groups are small and the left likes to paint all conservatives with this brush.

The great majority of people find that some time restriction on abortion is morally sound. Is it right to abort a baby at 30 weeks? Or 25? Most people would find that to be abhorrent. 15 weeks is the limit for many, but some might consider a more strict 12 or even 6 weeks to be justifiable. I'm not sure on the issue, but I think that under 15 weeks it should be between a woman and her doctor and family.

My wife is pregnant with our 2nd child, both have been healthy and my wife has been mostly healthy for both pregnancies, and we'll likely have a couple more after this. We are family-oriented people, and I encourage sane, responsible people who are not a burden on others to go out and have children in order to prevent Idiocracy from occurring in real time.

As for MJ, I think it's fine in private. I don't care. What I am against is people using it in public spaces, especially in the park where children (including my son and I) play. I don't want them inhaling the stuff and I don't want them to associate fond childhood memories of playing on a playground with the smell of marijuana.

So, if your wife goes into her third trimester, is in the middle of her 7th month and they discover the fetus is not only not viable, but the placenta is starting to rip away from the womb and allowing her to remain pregnant will kill her - oh well, sucks to be her, right? Or would you beg the doctor to take that unviable fetus out, and let your wife live - maybe even possibly to bear you another child some day?

[bmw335xi]

Originally Posted by Ghaati

So you're going to vote for someone who put the anti-choice judges in SCOTUS - you know, the ones who insisted during their confirmation hearings that Roe v. Wade was settled law and as such, had intrinsic value. And then - they overturned it like a frozen popover in the toaster oven - because in truth, it had NO value to them, at all.

Every one of those judges was recommended, preferred, pushed, and installed by your boy trump. I mean, you can vote for whoever you want, and voice yes or no on any ballot you want. That's your right.

Just be sure you are aware of the abject hypocrisy when you make conflicting choices like that.

I am pro-choice, but there are far more issues than just abortion. And most of those issues I side with Trump given how far left democrats have gone in recent years.

[PamelaIamela]

Originally Posted by Ghaati

So you're going to vote for someone who put the anti-choice judges in SCOTUS - you know, the ones who insisted during their confirmation hearings that Roe v. Wade was settled law and as such, had intrinsic value. And then - they overturned it like a frozen popover in the toaster oven - because in truth, it had NO value to them, at all.

Every one of those judges was recommended, preferred, pushed, and installed by your boy trump. I mean, you can vote for whoever you want, and voice yes or no on any ballot you want. That's your right.

Just be sure you are aware of the abject hypocrisy when you make conflicting choices like that.

I am a feminist who believes in the right to choose up to the 16th week, or later for serious medical reasons.
(I studied embryology.... it changed me forever.)

But from a legal perspective Roe v Wade was a terrible and wrongly constructed 'legal' precedent.
The radical left made a strategic mistake in forcing such a misguided, politically motivated decision on every state.
By doing so they turned Scotus into a cudgel not a court.
Guess it's no fun when your side isn't doing the hammering.

[prospectheightsresident]

It'll be interesting to see how these amendments turn out. Unlike other states, as I understand things Florida voters must ratify constitutional amendments with 60% of the vote. I don't doubt that a decent majority of Floridians support both amendments. Whether they'll get 60% of the vote remains to be seen.

[USNRET04]

Originally Posted by silverct9a

Doesn't that go against MAGA belief systems?

If you look and ask good questions like this one, you will find that most Trump supporters are actually open minded people. I'm pro-life, but am glad that we are letting the states/voters decide these important issues.

[Karl Lagos]

Originally Posted by Ghaati

So, if your wife goes into her third trimester, is in the middle of her 7th month and they discover the fetus is not only not viable, but the placenta is starting to rip away from the womb and allowing her to remain pregnant will kill her - oh well, sucks to be her, right? Or would you beg the doctor to take that unviable fetus out, and let your wife live - maybe even possibly to bear you another child some day?

Of course the law allows abortions if the pregnancy is dangerous to the woman, so why would you lie about that?

[Ghaati]

Originally Posted by PamelaIamela

I am a feminist who believes in the right to choose up to the 16th week, or later for serious medical reasons.
(I studied embryology.... it changed me forever.)

But from a legal perspective Roe v Wade was a terrible and wrongly constructed 'legal' precedent.
The radical left made a strategic mistake in forcing such a misguided, politically motivated decision on every state.
By doing so they turned Scotus into a cudgel not a court.
Guess it's no fun when your side isn't doing the hammering.

It is a valid medical procedure. The government shouldn't be legislating it at all. Not on the federal level or the state level. It shouldn't be illegal, or legal. Law should have nothing to do with the current medical status of my womb.

[Ghaati]

Originally Posted by Karl Lagos

Of course the law allows abortions if the pregnancy is dangerous to the woman, so why would you lie about that?

Because it doesn't.

In order for that to happen, the lawyers have to get involved, and petition the courts to allow a medical abortion. That means a court date, a judge assignment, $$$$$$$ to pay the lawyer, and meanwhile the woman is getting more and more pregnant, and more and more at risk of death. And then - a judge has to actually make that decision to allow it. And only then can a doctor schedule it.

Most women who can afford it, will just go to a state that doesn't require them to jump through hoops in an effort to save her own life.

Most women who can't afford it, will either die in childbirth, or die having an illegal abortion.

Great way to get rid of the poor. Two more lives off the welfare rolls right? That's all the "conservatives" want.

[bmw335xi]

Originally Posted by Ghaati

Great way to get rid of the poor. Two more lives off the welfare rolls right? That's all the "conservatives" want.

So, preventing poor people from killing their unborn children = conservatives wanting to kill off the poor? How does your argument make any sense? It would actually increase the poor population by not allowing poor people to get abortions. You are going off the deep end here lol.