Ms. Benson. has any woman in your life had an abortion? If my Mother had not had one I would have grown up without her. A living breathing mother or a tiny fetus? I would pick my Mother every damn time.
Take that baby out of the womb and she will slap you in the face. Is this what Lisa thinks a fetus looks like?
Those who oppose a woman’s choice should be required to raise the unwanted child. But conserves like Lisa only care about the child until birth, after that the kid in on its own.
Far left wants unrestricted abortion, fundamentalists want absolutely no abortion. Neither are right or in the majority. Reality is that abortion will occur so it is practical to allow it to be done safely under medical supervision.
It seems we are arguing on the edges. According to the CDC, 92.7% of abortions occur in the first trimester and another 6.2% withing 20 weeks – 2019 data, latest on their website. That is 98.9% within 20 weeks. So we are looking at a 5% or less limitation of abortions in Mississippi at 15 weeks.
From listening to talking heads, Roe apparently has a 24 week viability metric, which was probably reasonable for medical science 47 years ago. If viability is the issue, technology has lowered the bar. If it is political, most of the world is at 20 weeks for legal abortions.
Upholding the Mississippi law would not change any laws that California, Massachusetts, New York, etc. have or can enact. The court will not make law, just uphold what Mississippi, and only Mississippi, can or cannot do. Nothing from Dobbs would have any effect on any liberal state that passes less restrictive measures. It hopefully will put a cap to slow Texas and other states that try to go too far. Let’s be reasonable.
Yes, seriously. You won’t ever EVER see a conservative saying so, but it’s actually pretty easy to see how it should work. If, for instance, a MALE person… had a kidney that was a perfect match for some other person who needed a transplant, would any state feel okay about mandating (yep) that HE must use HIS body to provide life for someone else? Never in a thousand years. But these states are in fact mandating that a FEMALE person does NOT have the right to refuse to provide life for someone else.
The worst VISUAL lie here is dolling up the zygote and drawing it as though it were ready to be born.
Have you ever heard a right winger say “I disagree with what you say, but will defend to the death your right to say it”? (Well, they DID… once upon a time). Bodilyi autonomy is even more important than free speech. But right wingers won’t see it that way until it’s THEIR OWN body.
“There is a concept called body autonomy. It’s generally considered a human right. Bodily autonomy means a person has control over who or what uses their body, for what, and for how long. It’s why you can’t be forced to donate blood, tissue, or organs. Even if you are dead. Even if you’d save or improve 20 lives. It’s why someone can’t touch you, have sex with you, or use your body in any way without your continuous consent.
A fetus is using someone’s body parts. Therefore under bodily autonomy, it is there by permission, not by right. It needs a persons continuous consent. If they deny and withdraw their consent, the pregnant person has the right to remove them from that moment. A fetus is equal in this regard because if I need someone else’s body parts to live, they can also legally deny me their use.
By saying a fetus has a right to someone’s body parts until it’s born, despite the pregnant person’s wishes, you are doing two things:
1. Granting a fetus more rights to other people’s bodies than any born person.
2. Awarding a pregnant person less rights to their body than a corpse.”
A right to abortion is seriously part of the fabric of women’s existence in this country. My healthcare should not be restricted based on your religion.
My objection to limiting abortion rights is totally pragmatic. Those that want to force the child to be born have no interest in helping to provide for the child and its mother after birth. And this country does not need thousands of unwanted children added to the population every year.
They say that the right is not in the Constitution. Neither is the income tax, or the Air Force, or public school, or an interstate highway. Funny how some things pass, and others don’t. Almost like politics, rather than the Constitution are the deciding factor. BTW, the Constitution doesn’t ban abortion, either.
I’m sure Lisa will be first in line to adopt all the abandoned babies that will be turned in. Conservatives adore Black Crack Babies and want to do everything they can to support them!! Take the Pro Life stance 3 guys did with Aubrey, for example!!!
When you reject science, your left with…..Religion. You know, that thing that has been trying to keep mankind steeped in ignorance for centuries. When are Republicans going to stop foisting their current interpretation of the bible on us?
George Carlin was right. Republicans believe that if you’re Pre-born, you’re fine. If you’re Pre-school, you’re FU@#ED…until you turn 18, and they can send you to die in another corporate-sponsored WAR to protect their profit margins!
How much of our current crime problem is the result of past abortion policy? Yes, we may abort a few Einsteins but some of those denied abortions children later grow up to shoot possible Einsteins.. and a lot more.
An unwanted child is better not born than to grow up unwanted and become a burden on society.
While I’m 100% pro-choice, there must be a red line on how far along a Mother can be preggers. That line moves with Tech leading the way. There in lies the Rub.
Some Qpublicans are against Abortions, but think nothing of trying to KILL Abortion Providers. Anyone else notice the disconnect in their “logic” here???
As usual, the hypocritical Conservative that demand individual freedoms are arguing the right to strip others of individual freedoms to impose their religious beliefs on them. They want the right to decide what vaccines they’ll take but they will tell women what medical decisions they can make for themselves, they’ll tell strangers who they can marry, they’ll support child marriages if it avoids statutory rape charges (yes this still happens), they’ll tell children that Christianity is the only religion they should respect, and so on and so on.
Well, I am a woman and am not a femininst. I do not support abortion on demand. I believe if a woman must have an abortion to save her life, or because she was raped, then yes, I think it is her right to decide to terminate her pregnancy.
Any other case? Ladies, if you do not want to be pregnant, then when you go to a party, do not make yourself so drunk that you open your legs for the first man who offers. If you do, accept the consequences! If you want to get rid of your child because you are too lazy to raise him or her, then it is murder. Yes, it is murder, so why should it be legal?!
I have a sister with 3 children, and she is one of the happiest mothers I have ever known. Her first two kids, who were twins, came after she attended a party where she met a man. Soon after, when she learned she was pregnant, she did not want to kill her babies. She gave birth to them and raised them herself, working multiple jobs to support them. They are 18 years old now, and both of them are wonderful persons.
The one thing I have not heard mentioned is the constitutional rights of women i.e.
AMENDMENT IVThe right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.
AMENDMENT XV – Passed by Congress February 26, 1869. Ratified February 3, 1870.Section 1.The right of citizens of the United States to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of race, color, or previous condition of servitude—
AMENDMENT XIX – Passed by Congress June 4, 1919. Ratified August 18, 1920.The right of citizens of the United States to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of sex.
If you read these 3 amendments it appears to state that if a right is granted to anyone it is granted to all. That would imply that you can not force a requirement on anyone which could not be required and enforced on anyone else.i.e. you could not require a man to carry a baby to term nor restrict his right to abort. This is simply because men can not, under the normal range of circumstances, become pregnant. So if men and women have equal rights you may not pass any law and or make any extra requirements upon a woman than you would a man.It follows that if you pass a law or requirement on on sex, race, religion or other group that is not applicable to another group Equal Rights is no longer viable.
For as long as I can remember, I’ve advocated for a woman’s right to choose. I told this, many years ago, to an in-law cousin, a woman, who said that a woman makes that choice when she has sex. At the time, I remember rejecting her statement, but upon reflecting on the concept of “body autonomy” as penned by Hanna Golf via Patjade, above, I might be adjusting my belief.
Golf states that a person, in particular, a woman, must give permission for her body to be used in any way. But, if a woman is engaged in sex, and she is able to become pregnant, she is, in effect, giving permission for herself to become pregnant and must allow the fetus to exist and come to term. Now, it is assumed that the sex is agreed to by both parties and no rape or incest is involved.
Let’s see- the arguments we are seeing include rape, foolishness, change of heart, and the stony unwillingness of liberal voters to support unwanted children.
I am especially amused by the argument “Do Republican/conservatives comprehend that by banning abortion minorities and people of color would soon become majorities and outnumber them?” It shows clearly how the elitist liberals really think.
We hear constantly here about “rich Republicans”. It is refreshing to hear “rich Democrats” expressing their true reason for encouraging abortions. Usually, I only hear such honesty in private conversations.
No, we do not support abortion-on-demand. Yes, we do support abortion to save the life of the mother, or to save a woman who has had someone’s semen forced into her.
BTW, ‘people of color’ will soon be the majority anyway. Will the new ‘white minority’ get preference in the granting of federal contracts, along with the other minorities, like native americans, jews, asians and women? (No, women are not really a minority.)
Maybe we should all just try to get along, and ignore the blaring alarmist divisive posts of the MDM (Money Driven Media).
Peace, Sisters and Brothers.
BTW, feel free to use ‘MDM’ whenever and wherever you like. :)
You want to make abortion a crime. That implies criminal punishment. Who is the criminal in this case?The woman who was raped? Or forced to have incest? The teen who was coerced into sex the first time and didn’t know she was pregnant? The woman with 5 children with a husband who will not let her have birth control? You put these people into prison then what do you gain?How about the doctor She spent a great deal of time and money for her education. She has deep concern for the well-being and welfare of her patients and you want to send her to prison. How do you gain from that?You say “life is sacred” but you do not sanctify those lives. The religious texts you cite are a combination of many disparate passages of religious literature and the opinions of men you believe are “holy”. Then too, you are placing your bet on a hypothetical. I don’t see how such a law should be enforceable. A hypothetical problem is a hypothesis. You don’t gain no matter what the outcome.The sin lies on those who judge.
Such a lie. No one is aborting little girls with ribbons in their hair. Abortion is about terminating pregnancies before viability. Fetuses are not children. Once you get over that inconvenient (for the Right) little fact, the abortion argument falls away.
Abortion is no different from any other medical procedure decided upon between the patient and the medical provider. To say otherwise is to create a huge and false strawman argument.
To those that espouse liberty, the government shouldn’t have control over your body. So no vaccine mandate for you, yet you claim to have control over a woman’s body.
Lisa,Lisa,Lisa: Why would u draw what looks to be a full-term baby as part of your abortion cartoon? In my ignorance I don’t think abortions are allowed on full term fetuses……but I could be wrong……why stir the pot in already boiling cauldron? :-(
ACB says that Safe Haven will solve everything. There are many risks and responsibilities that come with pregnancy but she says women should just put up with that even if it ruins their health and then “just” give the baby away.
Roberts doesn’t know why 15 weeks isn’t long enough because he is obviously unaware of tests that cannot be done until 20 weeks. He isn’t considering that a victim of incest may take a while to come forward and the restrictions that are placed on abortions in many states make it difficult to get a timely abortion, e.g. Mississippi has ONE abortion clinic.
Thomas got away with sexual harassment and Kavanaugh got away with attempted rape and other sexual assaults. Neither should even be on SCOTUS at all.
Alito’s comment about “a fetus wants to live” is stupid and ignores the woman.
Why are there SEVEN Catholics on SCOTUS? And ACB is from one of the cults within the Catholic church that says women must submit to their husband’s wishes. Is HE making the decisions for her?
sipsienwa Premium Member over 2 years ago
Ms. Benson. has any woman in your life had an abortion? If my Mother had not had one I would have grown up without her. A living breathing mother or a tiny fetus? I would pick my Mother every damn time.
suv2000 over 2 years ago
Woman has the right to decide what happens to her body her problem is the baby is not her body it’s in her body
Say What Now‽ Premium Member over 2 years ago
Take that baby out of the womb and she will slap you in the face. Is this what Lisa thinks a fetus looks like?
Those who oppose a woman’s choice should be required to raise the unwanted child. But conserves like Lisa only care about the child until birth, after that the kid in on its own.
LVObserver over 2 years ago
Far left wants unrestricted abortion, fundamentalists want absolutely no abortion. Neither are right or in the majority. Reality is that abortion will occur so it is practical to allow it to be done safely under medical supervision.
It seems we are arguing on the edges. According to the CDC, 92.7% of abortions occur in the first trimester and another 6.2% withing 20 weeks – 2019 data, latest on their website. That is 98.9% within 20 weeks. So we are looking at a 5% or less limitation of abortions in Mississippi at 15 weeks.
From listening to talking heads, Roe apparently has a 24 week viability metric, which was probably reasonable for medical science 47 years ago. If viability is the issue, technology has lowered the bar. If it is political, most of the world is at 20 weeks for legal abortions.
Upholding the Mississippi law would not change any laws that California, Massachusetts, New York, etc. have or can enact. The court will not make law, just uphold what Mississippi, and only Mississippi, can or cannot do. Nothing from Dobbs would have any effect on any liberal state that passes less restrictive measures. It hopefully will put a cap to slow Texas and other states that try to go too far. Let’s be reasonable.
Concretionist over 2 years ago
Yes, seriously. You won’t ever EVER see a conservative saying so, but it’s actually pretty easy to see how it should work. If, for instance, a MALE person… had a kidney that was a perfect match for some other person who needed a transplant, would any state feel okay about mandating (yep) that HE must use HIS body to provide life for someone else? Never in a thousand years. But these states are in fact mandating that a FEMALE person does NOT have the right to refuse to provide life for someone else.
The worst VISUAL lie here is dolling up the zygote and drawing it as though it were ready to be born.
Have you ever heard a right winger say “I disagree with what you say, but will defend to the death your right to say it”? (Well, they DID… once upon a time). Bodilyi autonomy is even more important than free speech. But right wingers won’t see it that way until it’s THEIR OWN body.
Daeder over 2 years ago
YES!!!!!!!! &#$%ING SERIOUSLY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
braindead Premium Member over 2 years ago
Next up: Kavanaugh leads the Court into a new age where they are “scrupulously” neutral about every issue.
If some states want to reestablish Jim Crow laws, the Court is certainly not going to “take sides”.
braindead Premium Member over 2 years ago
Lisa, THIS is what you and other Trump Disciples have been craving for decades, right?
That, and elimination of all taxes for billionaires.
Patjade over 2 years ago
“There is a concept called body autonomy. It’s generally considered a human right. Bodily autonomy means a person has control over who or what uses their body, for what, and for how long. It’s why you can’t be forced to donate blood, tissue, or organs. Even if you are dead. Even if you’d save or improve 20 lives. It’s why someone can’t touch you, have sex with you, or use your body in any way without your continuous consent.
A fetus is using someone’s body parts. Therefore under bodily autonomy, it is there by permission, not by right. It needs a persons continuous consent. If they deny and withdraw their consent, the pregnant person has the right to remove them from that moment. A fetus is equal in this regard because if I need someone else’s body parts to live, they can also legally deny me their use.
By saying a fetus has a right to someone’s body parts until it’s born, despite the pregnant person’s wishes, you are doing two things:
1. Granting a fetus more rights to other people’s bodies than any born person.
2. Awarding a pregnant person less rights to their body than a corpse.”
—Hannah Goff
GOGOPOWERANGERS over 2 years ago
Yes , it their choice not the child’s
Mr. Blawt over 2 years ago
A right to abortion is seriously part of the fabric of women’s existence in this country. My healthcare should not be restricted based on your religion.
GiantShetlandPony over 2 years ago
Abortions Save Lives.
alex Coke Premium Member over 2 years ago
Men should be held much more accountable. Women don’t (usually) get pregnant on their own.
FGWaiss over 2 years ago
My objection to limiting abortion rights is totally pragmatic. Those that want to force the child to be born have no interest in helping to provide for the child and its mother after birth. And this country does not need thousands of unwanted children added to the population every year.
1BlackLivesMatter Premium Member over 2 years ago
Great ’toon! Unborn lives matter!
FrankErnesto over 2 years ago
They say that the right is not in the Constitution. Neither is the income tax, or the Air Force, or public school, or an interstate highway. Funny how some things pass, and others don’t. Almost like politics, rather than the Constitution are the deciding factor. BTW, the Constitution doesn’t ban abortion, either.
NeedaChuckle Premium Member over 2 years ago
I’m sure Lisa will be first in line to adopt all the abandoned babies that will be turned in. Conservatives adore Black Crack Babies and want to do everything they can to support them!! Take the Pro Life stance 3 guys did with Aubrey, for example!!!
moderateisntleft over 2 years ago
When you reject science, your left with…..Religion. You know, that thing that has been trying to keep mankind steeped in ignorance for centuries. When are Republicans going to stop foisting their current interpretation of the bible on us?
Teto85 Premium Member over 2 years ago
Do you want Doctor Coathanger to resume practice? Because this is how you get Doctor Coathanger to resume practice.
thelordthygod666 over 2 years ago
It’s simple. Unless it is your own womb, you don’t get to make the choice.
Masterskrain Premium Member over 2 years ago
George Carlin was right. Republicans believe that if you’re Pre-born, you’re fine. If you’re Pre-school, you’re FU@#ED…until you turn 18, and they can send you to die in another corporate-sponsored WAR to protect their profit margins!
Retrac Premium Member over 2 years ago
Can the mother choose an abortion, then also choose to donate viable tissues and organs as can be harvested from the fetus? Just asking.
Bendarling1 over 2 years ago
Right republican. Does this mean government mandates for masks and vaccinations?
Valiant1943 Premium Member over 2 years ago
Well said!
Alberta Oil Premium Member over 2 years ago
By the time the baby is at the ribbon wearing stage.. abortions are not likely an option.
inevattable over 2 years ago
Yes! Seriously!
Alberta Oil Premium Member over 2 years ago
How much of our current crime problem is the result of past abortion policy? Yes, we may abort a few Einsteins but some of those denied abortions children later grow up to shoot possible Einsteins.. and a lot more.
An unwanted child is better not born than to grow up unwanted and become a burden on society.
Ammo is on a break Premium Member over 2 years ago
While I’m 100% pro-choice, there must be a red line on how far along a Mother can be preggers. That line moves with Tech leading the way. There in lies the Rub.
ncorgbl over 2 years ago
Do Republican/conservatives comprehend that by banning abortion minorities and people of color would soon become majorities and outnumber them?
waltkamp over 2 years ago
GQP: the party of Rapists’ Reproduction Rights.
Masterskrain Premium Member over 2 years ago
Some Qpublicans are against Abortions, but think nothing of trying to KILL Abortion Providers. Anyone else notice the disconnect in their “logic” here???
librarylady59 over 2 years ago
Life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. Anti-abortionists deny living, breathing women these rights. Period.
ndblackirish97 over 2 years ago
As usual, the hypocritical Conservative that demand individual freedoms are arguing the right to strip others of individual freedoms to impose their religious beliefs on them. They want the right to decide what vaccines they’ll take but they will tell women what medical decisions they can make for themselves, they’ll tell strangers who they can marry, they’ll support child marriages if it avoids statutory rape charges (yes this still happens), they’ll tell children that Christianity is the only religion they should respect, and so on and so on.
Lana M. over 2 years ago
Well, I am a woman and am not a femininst. I do not support abortion on demand. I believe if a woman must have an abortion to save her life, or because she was raped, then yes, I think it is her right to decide to terminate her pregnancy.
Any other case? Ladies, if you do not want to be pregnant, then when you go to a party, do not make yourself so drunk that you open your legs for the first man who offers. If you do, accept the consequences! If you want to get rid of your child because you are too lazy to raise him or her, then it is murder. Yes, it is murder, so why should it be legal?!
I have a sister with 3 children, and she is one of the happiest mothers I have ever known. Her first two kids, who were twins, came after she attended a party where she met a man. Soon after, when she learned she was pregnant, she did not want to kill her babies. She gave birth to them and raised them herself, working multiple jobs to support them. They are 18 years old now, and both of them are wonderful persons.
jbhorton1 over 2 years ago
The one thing I have not heard mentioned is the constitutional rights of women i.e.
AMENDMENT IVThe right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.
AMENDMENT XV – Passed by Congress February 26, 1869. Ratified February 3, 1870.Section 1.The right of citizens of the United States to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of race, color, or previous condition of servitude—
AMENDMENT XIX – Passed by Congress June 4, 1919. Ratified August 18, 1920.The right of citizens of the United States to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of sex.
If you read these 3 amendments it appears to state that if a right is granted to anyone it is granted to all. That would imply that you can not force a requirement on anyone which could not be required and enforced on anyone else.i.e. you could not require a man to carry a baby to term nor restrict his right to abort. This is simply because men can not, under the normal range of circumstances, become pregnant. So if men and women have equal rights you may not pass any law and or make any extra requirements upon a woman than you would a man.It follows that if you pass a law or requirement on on sex, race, religion or other group that is not applicable to another group Equal Rights is no longer viable.
Aliquid over 2 years ago
Yes seriously. Very seriously.
Oh, and maybe you should work your drawing skills at depicting an actual fetus.
preacherman over 2 years ago
For as long as I can remember, I’ve advocated for a woman’s right to choose. I told this, many years ago, to an in-law cousin, a woman, who said that a woman makes that choice when she has sex. At the time, I remember rejecting her statement, but upon reflecting on the concept of “body autonomy” as penned by Hanna Golf via Patjade, above, I might be adjusting my belief.
Golf states that a person, in particular, a woman, must give permission for her body to be used in any way. But, if a woman is engaged in sex, and she is able to become pregnant, she is, in effect, giving permission for herself to become pregnant and must allow the fetus to exist and come to term. Now, it is assumed that the sex is agreed to by both parties and no rape or incest is involved.This is interesting. Perhaps, I’ve been wrong.
bow493 Premium Member over 2 years ago
well done
rmfrye Premium Member over 2 years ago
Yeah, seriously.
Flower Girl over 2 years ago
Let’s see- the arguments we are seeing include rape, foolishness, change of heart, and the stony unwillingness of liberal voters to support unwanted children.
I am especially amused by the argument “Do Republican/conservatives comprehend that by banning abortion minorities and people of color would soon become majorities and outnumber them?” It shows clearly how the elitist liberals really think.
We hear constantly here about “rich Republicans”. It is refreshing to hear “rich Democrats” expressing their true reason for encouraging abortions. Usually, I only hear such honesty in private conversations.
No, we do not support abortion-on-demand. Yes, we do support abortion to save the life of the mother, or to save a woman who has had someone’s semen forced into her.
BTW, ‘people of color’ will soon be the majority anyway. Will the new ‘white minority’ get preference in the granting of federal contracts, along with the other minorities, like native americans, jews, asians and women? (No, women are not really a minority.)
Maybe we should all just try to get along, and ignore the blaring alarmist divisive posts of the MDM (Money Driven Media).
Peace, Sisters and Brothers.
BTW, feel free to use ‘MDM’ whenever and wherever you like. :)
Tzinger over 2 years ago
You want to make abortion a crime. That implies criminal punishment. Who is the criminal in this case?The woman who was raped? Or forced to have incest? The teen who was coerced into sex the first time and didn’t know she was pregnant? The woman with 5 children with a husband who will not let her have birth control? You put these people into prison then what do you gain?How about the doctor She spent a great deal of time and money for her education. She has deep concern for the well-being and welfare of her patients and you want to send her to prison. How do you gain from that?You say “life is sacred” but you do not sanctify those lives. The religious texts you cite are a combination of many disparate passages of religious literature and the opinions of men you believe are “holy”. Then too, you are placing your bet on a hypothetical. I don’t see how such a law should be enforceable. A hypothetical problem is a hypothesis. You don’t gain no matter what the outcome.The sin lies on those who judge.
rs0204 Premium Member over 2 years ago
Oh no, we should make them have to be born, go to school, and get gunned down. You know, the American way of life.
UnklGene over 2 years ago
Kill ’em early term, kill ’em mid to late term, sell THEIR parts! Molech and Baal will be proud!
ferddo over 2 years ago
The GQPs are all about “pro-life” until the baby is born… after that, they turn their backs upon the mother and child…
Lola85 Premium Member over 2 years ago
So if the Supremes overturn Roe v. Wade, will the morning after pill be banned, too?
Radish the wordsmith over 2 years ago
Life hating sexist Republicans want the government to track every woman’s pregnancy.
hermit48 over 2 years ago
“Eggbert” is a cartoon.
Rich Douglas over 2 years ago
Such a lie. No one is aborting little girls with ribbons in their hair. Abortion is about terminating pregnancies before viability. Fetuses are not children. Once you get over that inconvenient (for the Right) little fact, the abortion argument falls away.
Abortion is no different from any other medical procedure decided upon between the patient and the medical provider. To say otherwise is to create a huge and false strawman argument.
Scoutmaster77 over 2 years ago
To those that espouse liberty, the government shouldn’t have control over your body. So no vaccine mandate for you, yet you claim to have control over a woman’s body.
Masterskrain Premium Member over 2 years ago
Funny how the Qpublicans think that “My Body, My Choice” works for vaccines, but NOT for ANYTHING ELSE!!!!
IDEALeducation over 2 years ago
Seriously.
ragsarooni Premium Member over 2 years ago
Lisa,Lisa,Lisa: Why would u draw what looks to be a full-term baby as part of your abortion cartoon? In my ignorance I don’t think abortions are allowed on full term fetuses……but I could be wrong……why stir the pot in already boiling cauldron? :-(
Nantucket Premium Member over 2 years ago
ACB says that Safe Haven will solve everything. There are many risks and responsibilities that come with pregnancy but she says women should just put up with that even if it ruins their health and then “just” give the baby away.
Roberts doesn’t know why 15 weeks isn’t long enough because he is obviously unaware of tests that cannot be done until 20 weeks. He isn’t considering that a victim of incest may take a while to come forward and the restrictions that are placed on abortions in many states make it difficult to get a timely abortion, e.g. Mississippi has ONE abortion clinic.
Thomas got away with sexual harassment and Kavanaugh got away with attempted rape and other sexual assaults. Neither should even be on SCOTUS at all.
Alito’s comment about “a fetus wants to live” is stupid and ignores the woman.
Why are there SEVEN Catholics on SCOTUS? And ACB is from one of the cults within the Catholic church that says women must submit to their husband’s wishes. Is HE making the decisions for her?
Plumb.Bob Premium Member over 2 years ago
How did that bow get there? That is going to cause sepsis or something.
Conservative Man over 2 years ago
Too bad your mother didn’t feel that way
UnklGene over 2 years ago
If they should survive…, get ‘em while they’re old…EUTHANIZE them! Tell them Dr. Fauci & Dr. Megele said it’s in the Science!