Yes, just like how the anti-gun movement is composed of NWO/Bilderberg/Trilateral Commission servants and dupes who care nothing for safety or for anything else but the imposition of a communist dictatorship in the United States. :rolleyes:
A silly argument. The anti-abortion movement is quite blatant in its nastiness; i recall you yourself in the past calling forcing women to bear children against their will a “punishment” for what you consider their "immoral"c behavior. But there’s no evidence at all linking the antigun movement to mystical conspiracies.
And if anything I’d expect any would-be authoritarian movement in America to be pro-gun, not anti-gun.
I understand the mandatory waiting period before getting executed is a decade or more. There are guys on Death Row dying of old age before getting the needle.
I will support a background check and a 10-day waiting period for those seeking an abortion if the same rules apply to publishing statements on the internet.
Unless I was sarcastic,I haven’t ever opposed abortion in order to punish women for immoral behaviour. If you can dig up a post where I actually said something so retarded, I’ll apologize.
Erhm…why? Granted there is no major authoritarian movement in the United States currently, but it would be illogical for them not to support gun control (at least for “undesirables”).
The pro-gun movement is composed mostly of right wingers; the sort who’d love some kind of fascist or theocratic government. The sort of people who show up at rallies wearing guns as a blatant threat and make speeches about “Second Amendment solutions”; support for gun ownership is strongly correlated with support for violence, murder and the threat of them as valid political tools. Widespread gun ownership would give a dictatorial government plenty of cannon fodder for paramilitary death squads and the like; while at the same time being no threat at all to the government despite the fantasies of the gun nuts.
Well, perhaps they don’t, but have you ever been robbed at partial-birth point ? It’s quite gruesome.
Bad recoil leads to grape jelly all over the floor. Best to dis-arm the foeti so they can’t play with guns.
How about a ten-day waiting period before you’re allowed to post here?
Establishing a waiting period for abortions would violate the second amendment by unreasonably restricting the right to chicken cannon ammunition.
Perhaps the intent is right, the idea that given a bit of extra time mother and child will connect, but the method is wrong, restricting, causing frustration and having to live in a personal hell during that time for mother and IMHO the child who (again IMHO - deal with it) knows exactly what is going on on a soul level.
Because the method proposed is state enforcement, which is rule by fear, it can never work, never bring about peace and healing.
What I would like to see is the ability of those who have had abortions to have more resources to healing help, no matter how long ago that abortion has been, or where that child’s soul is in it’s journey, to ensure that for both mother and child (where ever he/she is now) there is caring available for them to heal that rift.
With people coming forward and able to receive loving care to help them when they are ready, and that help available without stigma, but only caring and helping, and the openness of this in the public will be the only loving way to reduce the number of abortions. As such I would like to have a much longer waiting period, not for the abortion, but for the woman, for her to wait as long as she desires, but whenever she is ready she can get the help she needs to deal with the loss of her child, as we were never meant to bear such things on our own.
Peace
If we do this, I say we also require an ultrasound probe before buying a gun.
Besides, women can get around the waiting period by having the abortion at an abortion show.
“Be vewwy, vewwy quiet… I’m hunting gotchas!”
Mr. OP, you may be new around here, but allow me to explain that when kanicbird makes a smarter, more compassionate, more reasonable post than you do it is time to sit back and think for a bit.
Yeah, that’s the one I’m thinking of. Thanks.
I might actually support that.
*Note: Quotes are left the same, but I removed the coloring. It’s an eyesore.
Why not? Because it hasn’t happened in 30 years since Roe v Wade.
I’d actually like to see a cite of the popularity of gender based abortion in the US. I know it’s common in other countries, but I claim the opposite - it’s not common in the US to any significant degree, except possibly among some Asian (East, Southeast, and Indian subcontinent) immigrant populations. And even there, abortion itself, much less sex-selective abortion, still isn’t that common.
There may be laws about it but how much of that is based on fear-mongering vs actual numbers?
As for race based abortion - huh? Seriously? Most women have a pretty good idea of the race of their babies. Where are you getting this at all?
Big money? You’re sounding like a conspiracy theorist here. There is no “Big Abortion”. There is no big money to be made in performing them.
Again, CITE YOUR ASSERTIONS. This one is complete bunk.
More or less. It’s quite apparent you haven’t lurked on the boards or you’d be more familiar with board culture, including the need to cite questionable assertions. You’ve made quite a lot of assertions that don’t make sense. Generally, board members will request citations or numbers in such cases. Unsupported arguments are often treated as reliably as the numbers that (don’t) back them up.
And a common occurrence is for a new poster to come in with what they think are reasonable POVs that have no numbers backing them, nor a solidly reasoned rationale. If you happen to refine your argument a bit, it might make some sense. But right now it’s closer to a caricature of the argument of a gun-rights advocate than a well-reasoned argument for few restrictions on gun ownership/use.
Who said anything about prison?
I see you’ve graduated from false equivalence to false dichotomy.
Reasonable laws and regulations dealing with the use and ownership of firearms don’t make you a criminal. It’s not either/or between unrestricted use/ownership of firearms and the path to criminalization of ownership, which, based on my reading of your posts, is the false dichotomy you are trying to set up. You can claim “slippery slope” or whatever you want, but it doesn’t make it true, either.
Given the typical wait at some doctors’ offices (fortunately not mine – she keeps appointments like clockwork), the ten day waiting period is moot. Want an abortion? Just arrive for your appointment, and pack ten lunches.
So is abortion.
So is an appendectomy.