Chip Bok for February 02, 2019

Bok, like Trump (and most republicans) is AMORAL.

His comprehension of English, and use of logic, are also faulty.

If all abortions are exactly the same as infanticide, like Republicans claim, what does it matter in which trimester it happens?

.

And, of course, since every abortion is MURDER, everyone involved ought to get the death penalty, right? Doctors, nurses, receptionists, anyone who drove the woman to the clinic and the mother.

Because pro-life.

Violently pro-life.

Right wingers will club women with the abortion issue until the end of time.

This cartoon made me mad when I first saw it but then I considered the source.

I’m 100% pro life and I will KILL you if you disagree!

Infanticide is, of course, the murder of a baby who has already been born. By the way, states and countries where abortion is least restricted (and with ready access to birth control) have the lowest abortion rates. Countries and states with the strictest abortion laws have the highest abortion rates (not to mention the highest teen birth rates).

I don’t like abortion. Therefore I support birth control, sex education (and education in general), and living wages. Living wages would help people support themselves and their families without needing government support, and like birth control and sex education, reduce the number of abortions.

I’d be willing to bet that if you took a poll among people who called themselves pro-life that you would find that at least 90% of them are in favor of capital punishment. Because, you know, all human life is sacred.

From what I understand, the legislation is for cases where something goes wrong late in pregnancy. The fetus is not expected to live until term, or die at birth. This puts the mother at risk of carrying to term. Not to mention being forced to carry a baby that has already died in the womb. Women who find themselves in the above scenarios wanted to have their baby. They did not suddenly change their minds late term. The legislation is NOT for healthy pregnancies.

The better question here is why are conservatives, normally anti-government, so much in favor of government intervention in choices a woman or couple makes about something that won’t be any of their business until the progeny reaches the age of majority? School choice is framed as parents over government, but abortion…

Perhaps the solution is to note that offspring that are aborted would vote progressive if brought to term.

The next step will be allowing you to off the kid up to x number of years if you don’t like the results you’re getting.

And calling abortion “infanticide” is a barefaced lie.

15,000 children in Kiddie Koncentration Kamps IS Immoral!

Remember, the Republicans LOVE children from the moment of conception to the moment of birth. THEN, it’s “You’re on your own kid…until you turn 18, and we can send you off to war as cannon fodder to make our Big Corporate Donors RICHER!!!”

Interesting isn’t it that the conjobs have no ability to understand the difference between actively killing an infant — true infanticide — and allowing a damaged infant who is dying to die naturally. The former is immoral, the latter unquestionably moral.

Maybe if it’s morals you want to discuss you should talk about lying with impunity, converting a position of trust to your personal benefit, or just being a narcissistic psychopath.

I am NOT agreeing with what has been reported about the NY law, but god forbid women’s health would be on any of the alleged minds of Republicans!

Bok and friends demand women conform to the christian perception of what constitutes infancy.

How often does Bok illustrate that he is pro-Life?

Dems worst nightmare is coming true. The uninformed moderates are learning the fine details of the “pro-choice” agenda.

As long as it was “safe, legal and rare” the center paid little attention to the screaming on either side of the issue. But with the nuances of the laws explained a huge sleepy eyed population is saying “wait a minute, I don’t like this at all.”

It all comes back to the language in Doe v. Bolton.

“Medical judgment may be exercised in light of all factors—physical, emotional, psychological, familial and the woman’s age—relevant to the wellbeing of the patient,” the court wrote. “All these factors may relate to health.”

This is part of what many people find objectionable in this and similar laws. Lacking the word “physical” in the phrase “NECESSARY TO PROTECT THE PATIENT’S LIFE OR HEALTH” (from the NY law) opens the door to a wide range of reasons outside the very valid need for protecting the physical health of the woman.

There are quite a few studies on the subject of why women choose to have an abortion (outside of purely physical health issues). The vast majority boil down to being emotionally and/or financially unprepared to be a parent.

Never mind the pro-life people. There is a significant segment of the population who support the right to an abortion while still actually being uncomfortable the practice itself. People who believe that there should be SOME limits. It is these people who look at the NY law and find it objectionable (because of the Doe/Bolton language).

Many strong supporters of abortion rights agree that a decision related to non-health issues should have been considered and made long before the 3rd trimester. 3-4 months (assuming confirmation at 60 days) should be more than enough time to make that decision. To choose.

Dumb. Twisted dumbassery…

And mass shootings are “national security”. Right, Chip?