Liberal Forum

The Texas Supreme Court upheld Texas' no-abortion law for a woman who's fetus was not viable due to a catastrophic genetic defect.  She was not allowed to have an abortion in Texas and had to go to another state to have one.  I have two comments about this:

1.  Democrats have been looking for a case like this one and funded her litigation.  This case went to trial, appeal and then to Texas' Supreme Court. So, yeah, it was a Democrat set-up. 

2.  This is not going to be good for Republicans.  I know there are a lot of Communists (Russian Communists and National Socialists) on this board who hate Republicans, but y'all better hold onto your dicks, because what's coming ain't good.
 

This is a sad case, and I admit to being torn. Personally, I am opposed to all abortions but understand that is not effective government policy. We just need to move toward making abortions a rare event. That said, I would like to see the Texas legislature change the law so non-viable fetus can be aborted. As someone who lost a grandchild due to miscarriage (I believe life begins as conception), I can assure you the pain felt by the parents and grandparents is real. I cannot imagine what it would be like to go through carrying a child that everyone knows cannot survive more than a few days all the way to birth.

Just a sadly, she was used as a pawn in an effort to get the courts to overstep their authority and change a law she didn't like. Changing the law is the responsibility of the legislature, not some judge. If her only concern was her health, she would have left the state for an abortion long ago.

ConsRule » 12 Dec 2023, 9:48 am » wrote: ↑

12 Dec 2023, 9:48 am

This is a sad case, and I admit to being torn. Personally, I am opposed to all abortions but understand that is not effective government policy. We just need to move toward making abortions a rare event. That said, I would like to see the Texas legislature change the law so non-viable fetus can be aborted. As someone who lost a grandchild due to miscarriage (I believe life begins as conception), I can assure you the pain felt by the parents and grandparents is real. I cannot imagine what it would be like to go through carrying a child that everyone knows cannot survive more than a few days all the way to birth.

Just a sadly, she was used as a pawn in an effort to get the courts to overstep their authority and change a law she didn't like. Changing the law is the responsibility of the legislature, not some judge. If her only concern was her health, she would have left the state for an abortion long ago.

Your thoughts on this are aligned pretty close to mine.  She was used as a pawn, but a willing pawn.  Were Republicans ready for this?  They should have been, but I doubt it.

DeSantis is the big loser here - his staunch unwavering stand on abortion won't play well with suburban women.  If Trump is smart, he will capitalize on this and use it as a way to distinguish him from DeSantis.  Haley will surely use this to her advantage.  But, overall, its not good for Republicans.
 

OMG, she had to go to another state?

The horrors, that's as difficult as going to Mars.

RebelGator » 12 Dec 2023, 10:01 am » wrote: ↑

12 Dec 2023, 10:01 am

OMG, she had to go to another state?

The horrors, that's as difficult as going to Mars.

Well a couple of things:

• Insurance probably doesn't cover it in another state
• Travel costs; time off from work
• Doctors could refuse to work on out-of-state or "out-of-plan" patients.

Regardless, Democrats will use this to their advantage.  What is your plan to combat their wave of propaganda on this?
 

Skans » 12 Dec 2023, 11:12 am » wrote: ↑

12 Dec 2023, 11:12 am

Well a couple of things:

• Insurance probably doesn't cover it in another state
• Travel costs; time off from work
• Doctors could refuse to work on out-of-state or "out-of-plan" patients.

Regardless, Democrats will use this to their advantage.  What is your plan to combat their wave of propaganda on this?

If this was indeed life threatening, an abortion would be a suitable medical procedure. The facts in the case seem to be an orchestrated attempt to sway votes in a direction that weaker minds will be directed to. I believe it's a child's body, not a woman's, that is impacted by 99% of abortions. In this case, less agenda driven decisions should have been made prior to it becoming a CNBC sound byte. 

RebelGator » 12 Dec 2023, 11:34 am » wrote: ↑

12 Dec 2023, 11:34 am

If this was indeed life threatening, an abortion would be a suitable medical procedure. The facts in the case seem to be an orchestrated attempt to sway votes in a direction that weaker minds will be directed to. I believe it's a child's body, not a woman's, that is impacted by 99% of abortions. In this case, less agenda driven decisions should have been made prior to it becoming a CNBC sound byte.

While it was not life threatening, there was no chance the fetus would survive.  It would continue to grow, but end up dying in utero. This does present a health risk to the mother.  And, there his hardly any chance of the fetus surviving even birth.  So, in this case, I would agree that the mother should have the option to abort. She should not be forced to carry the baby until it dies naturally inside of her.

In any event, the damage is done.  Democrats will orchestrate a huge propaganda campaign around this. And, once again, Republicans should have anticipated this and aren't ready for the propaganda onslaught.  That's my prediction, anyway.  We'll see how it plays out.
 

Skans » 12 Dec 2023, 9:29 am » wrote: ↑

12 Dec 2023, 9:29 am

The Texas Supreme Court upheld Texas' no-abortion law for a woman who's fetus was not viable due to a catastrophic genetic defect.  She was not allowed to have an abortion in Texas and had to go to another state to have one.  I have two comments about this:

1.  Democrats have been looking for a case like this one and funded her litigation.  This case went to trial, appeal and then to Texas' Supreme Court. So, yeah, it was a Democrat set-up. 

2.  This is not going to be good for Republicans.  I know there are a lot of Communists (Russian Communists and National Socialists) on this board who hate Republicans, but y'all better hold onto your dicks, because what's coming ain't good.

Stuff like this is why republicans will continue to take a beating over Roe

I don’t like abortion being used as birth control at a certain stage of the pregnancy 

but this is a young loving mother of two that is going through something few of us will ever endure 

and the republicans can’t get out of their own way 

Cox’s fetus had trisomy 18, a chromosomal disorder. Trisomy 18 is a devastating diagnosis. Most pregnancies end in stillbirths; those infants born alive with the disorder live anguished, short and painful lives. Cox was informed that her fetus, in the sterile medical parlance, “could not sustain life”. The fetus had malformations of the spine, heart, brain and limbs. The pregnancy also posed dire threats to Cox’s health; most significantly, she was at risk of losing her future fertility if she remained pregnant.

the country sees her in interviews saying how they desperately want another child

 she doesn’t what her baby to needlessly suffer 

and risk not being able to have another 

and you guys are calling it a political stunt

you deserve what you get on this case
 
 

Skans » 12 Dec 2023, 11:38 am » wrote: ↑

12 Dec 2023, 11:38 am

While it was not life threatening, there was no chance the fetus would survive.  It would continue to grow, but end up dying in utero. This does present a health risk to the mother.  And, there his hardly any chance of the fetus surviving even birth.  So, in this case, I would agree that the mother should have the option to abort. She should not be forced to carry the baby until it dies naturally inside of her.

In any event, the damage is done.  Democrats will orchestrate a huge propaganda campaign around this. And, once again, Republicans should have anticipated this and aren't ready for the propaganda onslaught.  That's my prediction, anyway.  We'll see how it plays out.

They're going to whip up all the women out there. And repeat it over and over until election. This IS bad. Republicans should WISE UP. 
an entire country is at stake.  Not just fetuses. They win- This country is Done. Its already almost to late
 

Republican intransigent ignorance is dooming this country. There is no way the government should be involved in this decision between a mother and her doctor. When Dems win, look in the mirror for someone to blame.

Punch » 12 Dec 2023, 12:32 pm » wrote: ↑

12 Dec 2023, 12:32 pm

Republican intransigent ignorance is dooming this country. There is no way the government should be involved in this decision between a mother and her doctor. When Dems win, look in the mirror for someone to blame.

I get your point...but technically the government is not involved in the decision between a mother and her doctor.  The two of them can still decide an abortion is the best, or even the favorable, option.  The woman just might not be able to get said abortion in that state.  It's nit picking...but it's a nit worth picking to keep the situation factual.

Mrkelly » 12 Dec 2023, 11:59 am » wrote: ↑

12 Dec 2023, 11:59 am

Stuff like this is why republicans will continue to take a beating over Roe

I don’t like abortion being used as birth control at a certain stage of the pregnancy 

but this is a young loving mother of two that is going through something few of us will ever endure 

and the republicans can’t get out of their own way 

Cox’s fetus had trisomy 18, a chromosomal disorder. Trisomy 18 is a devastating diagnosis. Most pregnancies end in stillbirths; those infants born alive with the disorder live anguished, short and painful lives. Cox was informed that her fetus, in the sterile medical parlance, “could not sustain life”. The fetus had malformations of the spine, heart, brain and limbs. The pregnancy also posed dire threats to Cox’s health; most significantly, she was at risk of losing her future fertility if she remained pregnant.

the country sees her in interviews saying how they desperately want another child

 she doesn’t what her baby to needlessly suffer 

and risk not being able to have another 

and you guys are calling it a political stunt

you deserve what you get on this case

You must be a moron to not realize it's a political stunt.

RebelGator » 12 Dec 2023, 1:04 pm » wrote: ↑

12 Dec 2023, 1:04 pm

You must be a moron to not realize it's a political stunt.

Oh it’s a political stunt

one that is gonna backfire on the republicans 

I bet even tRump knows enough to become moderate on abortion 

just watch 

 
 

Skans » 12 Dec 2023, 9:29 am » wrote: ↑

12 Dec 2023, 9:29 am

The Texas Supreme Court upheld Texas' no-abortion law for a woman who's fetus was not viable due to a catastrophic genetic defect.  She was not allowed to have an abortion in Texas and had to go to another state to have one.  I have two comments about this:

1.  Democrats have been looking for a case like this one and funded her litigation.  This case went to trial, appeal and then to Texas' Supreme Court. So, yeah, it was a Democrat set-up. 

2.  This is not going to be good for Republicans.  I know there are a lot of Communists (Russian Communists and National Socialists) on this board who hate Republicans, but y'all better hold onto your dicks, because what's coming ain't good.

So, yeah, it was a Democrat set-up. 

Let me see if I get you....

This woman gets pregnant, infects her fetus with a chromosomal abnormality insuring its imminent death and her considerable peril as a political stunt?

Wouldn't it be much more reasonable to conclude that what you acknowledge is "bad for the GOP" is an act of utter mindlessness?

I remind you, Ken Paxton is an adulterer and felon in waiting....

R.Suave » 12 Dec 2023, 2:31 pm » wrote: ↑

12 Dec 2023, 2:31 pm

Let me see if I get you....

This woman gets pregnant, infects her fetus with a chromosomal abnormality
 

No, you don't get me.  Read what I said, as opposed to what you wish I said.  
 

Skans » 12 Dec 2023, 2:34 pm » wrote: ↑

12 Dec 2023, 2:34 pm

No, you don't get me.  Read what I said, as opposed to what you wish I said.

I did....even cut and pasted your words.

But tell me how this was "set up"....

R.Suave » 12 Dec 2023, 2:37 pm » wrote: ↑

12 Dec 2023, 2:37 pm

I did....even cut and pasted your words.

But tell me how this was "set up"....

Sure, you cut and pasted my words at the top of your response.  But, the only "words" you wanted to discuss were the ones you made up, i.e.: " Let me see if I get you....This woman gets pregnant, infects her fetus with a chromosomal abnormality insuring its imminent death and her considerable peril as a political stunt?"   THOSE ARE NOT MY WORDS.
 
 
 

Z09 » 12 Dec 2023, 2:39 pm » wrote: ↑

12 Dec 2023, 2:39 pm

And I remind you...

In California you can get an abortion anytime...

But if you murder a pregnant woman you get charged with two murders.
Why is that?

  BUTWHATABOUT   

Skans » 12 Dec 2023, 2:43 pm » wrote: ↑

12 Dec 2023, 2:43 pm

Sure, you cut and pasted my words at the top of your response.  But, the only "words" you wanted to discuss were the ones you made up, i.e.: " Let me see if I get you....This woman gets pregnant, infects her fetus with a chromosomal abnormality insuring its imminent death and her considerable peril as a political stunt?"   THOSE ARE NOT MY WORDS.

This isn't about me...

this is about you asserting that this case was a "democratic setup"

If that isn't what you meant, qualify it.
 

Mrkelly » 12 Dec 2023, 2:46 pm » wrote: ↑

12 Dec 2023, 2:46 pm

  BUTWHATABOUT 

Always "?"

NEVER is a question answered, the real source identified, or an elaboration provided.

Just the slogan in question form...

**** sock puppet.​​​​​​​