Comments posted organically
SelectSmart.com Homepage
Display Order:

What should we make of the Michigan primary results?
Politics by Curt_Anderson     February 28, 2024 9:42 pm (Rating: 0.0) Last comment by: Indy! (1 comments) [8 views]


Is Trump going broke? Is he bringing the GOP down with him?
Politics by Curt_Anderson     February 28, 2024 5:46 pm (Rating: 0.0) Last comment by: Curt_Anderson (1 comments) [59 views]


Clueless Sen. Tuberville 'running in circles' in response to IVF question
Politics by Curt_Anderson     February 23, 2024 12:53 pm (Rating: 0.0) Last comment by: Indy! (24 comments) [279 views]


Holy FrigginFreakinEFFIN Cow! Supreme Court agrees to hear Trump immunity claim!
Crime by HatetheSwamp     February 28, 2024 2:54 pm (Rating: 0.0) Last comment by: Indy! (7 comments) [37 views]


"Where's Hunter?" He is in the capitol building kicking Republican ass!
Politics by Curt_Anderson     February 28, 2024 12:02 pm (Rating: 0.0) Last comment by: Curt_Anderson (11 comments) [91 views]


The Doddering Old Fool's two serious problems coming out of Michigan
Politics by HatetheSwamp     February 28, 2024 6:39 am (Rating: 0.0) Last comment by: Indy! (4 comments) [28 views]


Fake news? Are supposed voter concerns over Biden’s age overblown?
Politics by Curt_Anderson     February 28, 2024 11:20 am (Rating: 0.0) Last comment by: Indy! (4 comments) [20 views]


Mitch McConnell to step down from GOP leadership position in the
Government by HatetheSwamp     February 28, 2024 9:42 am (Rating: 0.0) Last comment by: oldedude (3 comments) [34 views]


pb's prediction: Hunter Biden’s testimony before the House Oversight Committee on Wednesday
Crime by HatetheSwamp     February 27, 2024 7:49 am (Rating: 0.0) Last comment by: Curt_Anderson (18 comments) [235 views]


Pro-Palestinian advocates urge 'uncommitted' vote during Michigan presidential primary
Politics by HatetheSwamp     February 26, 2024 3:30 am (Rating: 0.0) Last comment by: oldedude (7 comments) [77 views]


Politics selectors, pages, etc.
Stacey Abrams again refuses to name any limits on abortion
By HatetheSwamp
October 9, 2022 8:15 am
Category: Politics

(0.0 from 0 votes)
Rules of the Post

SelectSmart.com SelectSmart.com SelectSmart.com


Rate this article
5 Stars
4 Stars
3 Stars
2 Stars
1 Star
0 Stars
(5=best, 0=poor)


This is the radical position of the Dem Party.

Shannon Bream, the new host of Fox News Sunday is the best interviewer in TV journalism, except, perhaps, for her predecessor, Chris Wallace.

Bream raised the question with finesse, allowing Abrams freedom to address the abortion issue on her own terms while, at the same time, framing the question in terms of the laws of other Western nations...

...and of the most commonly held view by America's voters,...

...i.e., abortion, without restriction, only up to 15-ish weeks.

And, Abrams' answer is typically radical, as it is for nearly every Dem. She favors access to abortion as a woman's unencumbered choice, without restriction, up to the moment of birth.

Nasty.



Comments Start Below


The views and claims expressed by contributors are their own and do not necessarily reflect the views and beliefs of SelectSmart.com. Not every statement made here can be assumed to be a fact.
Comments on "Stacey Abrams again refuses to name any limits on abortion":

  1. by Curt_Anderson on October 9, 2022 9:31 am
    Stacey Abrams again refuses to name any GOVERNMENTAL limits on abortion.

    HtS, you and your headline miss a very important distinction.


  2. by Donna on October 9, 2022 12:00 pm

    Did y'all know that Stacey Abrams used to be opposed to abortion?

    "Stacey Abrams again refuses to name any limits on abortion" - Hts

    Bullshit. I believe that you heard that lie, though.

    Stacey Abrams outlines stance on abortion limits (6/29/22)

    Stacey Abrams said Wednesday that she would support legislation that would protect the right to an abortion before the point of fetal viability if she’s elected the state’s first Democratic governor in decades.

    Abrams told The Atlanta Journal-Constitution that she intends to pass legislation that enshrines a woman’s right to an abortion, “and that right continues until a physician determines the fetus is viable outside of the body, except in the case of protecting the woman’s life or health.” [...]


    ajc.com


  3. by oldedude on October 10, 2022 2:24 am
    "Abrams told The Atlanta Journal-Constitution that she intends to pass legislation that enshrines a woman’s right to an abortion, “and that right continues until a physician determines the fetus is viable outside of the body, except in the case of protecting the woman’s life or health.”"

    So if a "doctor" is working for planned parenthood, then he 'claims" the fetus isn't viable outside the body until after the birth. The child is killed and it's perfectly legal.

    I don't think that's a scenario you would agree with, and it is possible with that wording. That's the fight over the time limits on abortion. Although I don't particularly care for it, I think the 15 weeks is a decent compromise. At 15 weeks, you can find almost every genetic issue via amniocentesis. Unlike my wife, I believe in the rape and incest clause, but still within the 15 weeks. Especially in rape, the chemical abortion (morning after pill) could be considered a medical procedure. I know that's not popular with a whole bunch of folks, but the rape is traumatic enough.


  4. by HatetheSwamp on October 10, 2022 6:00 am

    Donna,

    Bullshit. I believe that you heard that lie, though.

    The lie? Whose lie!!!!!? pb linked to a Stacey Abrams video! Stacey Abrams in the words of Stacey Abrams! Did you look at it!!!!!?

    BTW, I watched the whole Abrams interview. To nearly every question, she answered her own question, not Bream's,...and with a lot of words spoken very quickly.

    Watch the video...AGAIN??????

    Abrams is...not very cleverly IMO...avoiding the question by answering her own. The question had to do with where Abrams would support a limit, "15 weeks?, 36 weeks?"

    And all Abrams did was say that this is a health issue. That this is a matter to be decided by a woman and her doctor.

    HtS is bang on! Stacey Abrams refuses to name any limits on abortion.


  5. by oldedude on October 10, 2022 9:09 am
    The flip side of what she said is that if a Doctor has an ethical objection to abortion, they can say that at 4 weeks, they heard a heartbeat and is therefore "viable" as a human being. She did nothing but open up more hatred than what's already there. And you can't see her lie through your dogma.


  6. by Donna on October 10, 2022 9:10 am

    What Stacey Abrams said, which I posted, is very clear. After fetal viability, abortion isn't allowed except if the health of the mother is at stake.

    If you eant to continue lying about her stance, Hts, I can't stop you. The only thing I can do is shine a light on your mendacity.



  7. by oldedude on October 10, 2022 9:24 am
    I've shown you both sides of what she said. Legally, it's going to be held up in courts until repealed and there is a time limit and extenuating circumstances placed into law. Both sides of what I said are possible, and probable. This from what you said she said.

    Lead said, "Stacey Abrams again refuses to name any limits on abortion" - Hts"

    I've given you two examples that show that from two sides. I'm sure my second example is not what stacy is thinking of, nor did she consider the opposite view.


  8. by HatetheSwamp on October 10, 2022 9:43 am

    Donna,

    Your account of Abrams' position just ain't true.

    ...in an interview with the Atlanta Journal-Constitution, Stacey Abrams revealed that she supports no limits for abortions. Despite 71% of Americans wanting significant limits on abortions and 80% of Americans wanting third-trimester abortions to be illegal, Stacey Abrams placed herself firmly among the most radical of pro-abortion Democrats.

    ...she's so devoted to her radical position that she announced today that she is pausing her own fundraising campaign to instead raise money for abortion groups across the country.

    In an interview Tuesday with The Atlanta Journal-Constitution, she elaborated on why she found the [leaked Supreme Court opinion] “deeply concerning” and why abortion rights will be at the center of her campaign for governor in Georgia.

    “This campaign will absolutely lean into and lead on that issue,” the Atlanta Democrat said. “Because if I want to be the governor of one Georgia, that means I’ve got to govern for the women of Georgia. And the women of Georgia by and large agree that their right to choose should not be stripped away from them.”

    The AJC asked Abrams whether there were any limitations on abortions that she would support. She said any decisions on how and when to terminate a pregnancy should be left up to women, their doctors and, if warranted, their families. But not elected officials.

    “My support of abortion is grounded in the belief that this is not the role of our government, it is not the role of lawmakers,”

    This comports perfectly with what she said in the video.

    So, if you're confused, wise up. If you're lying, cut it out!

    gop.com


  9. by Donna on October 10, 2022 10:11 am

    That video is from May 4, 2022. Her remarks that I posted were made in late June when she clarified her position. That won't stop stupid people from believing that she loves killing babies, though.




  10. by HatetheSwamp on October 10, 2022 10:22 am

    My video, that launched this thread, IS FROM YESTERDAY! Minutes before I placed it on SS!


  11. by Donna on October 10, 2022 11:04 am

    My bad. I was referring to the gop.com piece.

    Btw, I just watched the new Fox News Sunday interview. Abrams spoke a lot about fetal viability. If her stance was the free-for-all you and your news sources are making it out to be, there would be no need to discuss fetal viability in a discussion about abortion.

    Right now, GA's ridiculous abortion law says no abortions after 6 weeks unless the life of the mother is at stake. Reasonable people agree that 6 weeks is much too early, as many mothers don't even know they're pregnant at 6 weeks. And then of course there's a wait time to be able to have the procedure done. So that law effectively bans abortion except in cases where the life of the mother is at stake, which is exactly what the law was designed to do.

    Looking at the totality of her statements on abortion, her stance is that abortion access should be guaranteed up to the point of fetal viability, which can vary from case to case, and then after that, the decision should be left up to her and her OB-GYN as opposed to Big Brother, which I agree with.


  12. by Donna on October 10, 2022 11:38 am

    Here's a synopsis of France's abortion law. Although I prefer fetal viability over a hard "14 weeks", I like how the decision after 14 weeks is left up to the medical community as opposed to a government bureaucracy.

    Abortion in France is legal on demand during the first 14 weeks from conception.[1][2] Abortions at later stages of pregnancy up until birth are allowed if two physicians certify that the abortion will be done to prevent injury to the physical or mental health of the pregnant woman; a risk to the life of the pregnant woman; or that the child will suffer from a particularly severe illness recognized as incurable.[3][4][5] The abortion law was liberalized by the Veil Law (fr) in 1975. (from Wikipedia, which lists the sources)


  13. by Donna on October 10, 2022 11:42 am

    I meant to underline the rest of the part about when abortion could be allowed after 14 weeks. I like that France also allows the possibility of ending the pregnancy if the fetus has an incurable disease.


  14. by oldedude on October 10, 2022 2:00 pm
    "Abortion in France is legal on demand during the first 14 weeks from conception.[1][2] Abortions at later stages of pregnancy up until birth are allowed if two physicians certify that the abortion will be done to prevent injury to the physical or mental health of the pregnant woman; a risk to the life of the pregnant woman; or that the child will suffer from a particularly severe illness recognized as incurable.[3][4][5] The abortion law was liberalized by the Veil Law (fr) in 1975. (from Wikipedia, which lists the sources)"

    I'm good from 15-16 weeks. I moved to the timeframe later after I looked at this article. I think within that time, there are ways to find out if there are issues with the child, and later, if there are issues with the mother, which would be considered medical emergencies. I have known several Jewish couples that have a high rate of genetic issues where the child has a life expectancy of minutes to hours. They get tested before they announce the pregnancy, but I never knew the timeline on that. I'm hoping the amniocentesis gets better (I think it's more of an issue with getting in the amniotic sac effectively). So you and I are tracking on this.


    "When is amniocentesis performed?
    Amniocentesis is usually performed between 14 and 20 weeks. Some medical facilities may perform amniocentesis as early as 11 weeks.

    Amniocentesis can be used later in the third trimester for a few reasons. Your healthcare provider may recommend the procedure if your membranes have ruptured prematurely, in order to assess for uterine infections. Amniocentesis may also help determine the severity of fetal anemia in babies with Rh disease, and assist your physician to determine whether the fetus requires lifesaving blood transfusions."


    americanpregnancy.org


  15. by HatetheSwamp on October 10, 2022 2:38 pm

    Looking at the totality of her statements on abortion, her stance is that abortion access should be guaranteed up to the point of fetal viability, which can vary from case to case, and then after that, the decision should be left up to her and her OB-GYN as opposed to Big Brother, which I agree with.

    That's fine.

    It's an unpopular opinion. As you know most voters that abortion should be restricted from the 13th to 15th ish week on.


  16. by Curt_Anderson on October 10, 2022 2:56 pm
    Olde Dude,
    Although amniocentesis is considered to be a safe procedure, it is recognized as an invasive diagnostic test that does pose potential risks. According to the Mayo Clinic, it is performed approximately 200,000 times a year. Miscarriage is the primary risk related to amniocentesis.

    The risk of miscarriage ranges from 1 in 400 to 1 in 200. In facilities where amniocentesis is performed regularly, the rates are closer to 1 in 400. Miscarriages can occur because of infection in the uterus, water breaking, or labor being induced prematurely.



    Also, there are over three millions babies born annually. That means over 90% of mothers do not have a amniocentesis performed. Money is probably an issue. Would you support the government offering free amniocentesis testing? Should it be mandatory?
    americanpregnancy.org


  17. by oldedude on October 10, 2022 6:52 pm
    See? I gave in and relented because there were reliable ways to find out information.

    Since you don't like it. I'm back to 2 weeks. That's just as justified as 15. Fuk it.


  18. by oldedude on October 10, 2022 6:55 pm
    You just screwed any pooch you can find, although you can go to MT and find sheep. It doesn't matter to me. 2 weeks is my stand. I believe that's a viable human being. I don't consider you a viable human being, but a two week fetus. yes.


  19. by Donna on October 11, 2022 1:31 pm

    Newly released voter registration data shows a surge in women registering to vote in the months following the Supreme Court decision overturning the landmark abortion protections established under the 1973 Roe v. Wade decision.

    According to data compiled by Democratic political data and data services firm TargetSmart, women have made up the vast majority of newly registered voters in battleground states in the months since Roe was overturned, with the numbers weighing heavily in favor of Democrats.

    In the battleground state of Pennsylvania, women have accounted for more than 56 percent of newly registered voters since the June 24 decision, with nearly two-thirds registering as Democrats and more than half under the age of 25.



    newsweek.com


  20. by oldedude on October 11, 2022 6:17 pm
    "Also, there are over three millions babies born annually. That means over 90% of mothers do not have a amniocentesis performed. Money is probably an issue. Would you support the government offering free amniocentesis testing? Should it be mandatory?"

    This was my answer to that for Donna before you asked the question.
    "I'm hoping the amniocentesis gets better (I think it's more of an issue with getting in the amniotic sac effectively). So you and I are tracking on this."
    I would absolutely support health care to cover it. That's why I made that remark. I also absolutely do not support welfare medicine from the government. This issue with having socialized medicine is the government decides if the test is called for. And if too many people have had them from the year prior, they're not done until (maybe) the next quarter.

    My question to you is; What makes a difference if it's not used until the third trimester? What is it going to find that it wouldn't find in the 15th week? The idea is that I believe this is a test that won't be done often anyway, AND I'm allowed a grace period for it to happen. The difference is that you believe that cutting up a viable child in the womb is okay and is the mother's and the doctor's right to murder the childas the mother is giving birth. I don't.


Go To Top

Comment on: "Stacey Abrams again refuses to name any limits on abortion"

* Anonymous comments are subject to approval before they appear. Cookies Consent Policy & Privacy Statement. All Rights Reserved. SelectSmart® is a registered trademark. | Contact SelectSmart.com | Advertise on SelectSmart.com | This site is for sale!

Find old posts & articles

Articles by category:

SelectSmart.com
Report spam & abuse
SelectSmart.com home page