ABORTION BILL PASSED. gg texas


Perry and his supporters, including the bill’s sponsor, Dwayne Bohac, a Republican member of the state’s House of Representatives from Houston, are hoping it catches on in the rest of the United States. Bohac reportedly drafted the bill after he found that his son’s school had a “holiday tree” that couldn’t be called a Christmas tree.

Oddly the Christmas tree's roots are Pagan and they weren't called "Christmas" trees so if you're going to call it something, go to the original name I'd say.

Why do Christians lie to themselves so much?
 
:lol:

Women Fight Back: Ohio Bill Makes Erectile Dysfunction Her Business

Screen-Shot-2013-06-28-at-3.39.58-PM.png


You want to regulate our ovaries, uteri and order us to carry state-mandated children? Well, fine. We want to regulate your erectile dysfunction.

That’s the message of state Democratic Senator Nina Turner’s erectile dysfunction bill in Ohio (SB307). The bill is meant to inflict the same sort of humiliation and violation of privacy on men as mostly male legislators are inflicting upon women across the country, but is wisely being sold under the exact same disingenuous “concern” as Republicans sell their attempts to control women’s wombs.

Turner sweetly pointed out, “I certainly want to stand up for men’s health and take this seriously and legislate it the same way mostly men say they want to legislate a woman’s womb.”
 
It isn't a crime, so your vindictive feelings about it are irrelevant

:lol:

It's a saying; a metaphor for one being responsible for their actions. Isnt that a novel idea?


Apparently its not, since judgmental fundies want to legislate what can or cannot be done about it, from the outside.

As for shouldering the burden... are you under the impression that you have anything to do with it financially?
You don't. No public funds are used to cover it. Never have, never will, it's already law, you're spouting ignorant fundie talking points.. again.

You're dead wrong on both counts. If you do not believe that we as taxpayers support these unfortunate kids who are brought into this world by their irresponsible parents, then you are incredibly ignorant.

Second, if taxpayers dont cover the costs, why would TX go from 37 clinics to only 5?

You certainly dont pay much attention to what been posted. It makes you look pretty stupid actually.


its got nothing to do with irresponsibility, that's, again, your conservatard judgmentalism interfering with someone's life as if your opinion from the outside, means anything at all.

:rofl:

It has everything to do with responsibility and apparently you have never had any in your life. Save a shred of dignity and go ask your parents to clue you in. They should know since they kept you instead of having you aborted.
 
Second, if taxpayers dont cover the costs, why would TX go from 37 clinics to only 5?
It places additional requirements on the abortion providers. But I'd think that some of those 32 might be able to meet the new regulations.
 
You certainly dont pay much attention to what been posted. It makes you look pretty stupid actually.
Interesting that you would phrase it in that way.

Page 2:
the ABORTION BILL didn't seem to bad, really. I'm all for abortion and what not, but the bill proposed:

no abortions after 20 weeks
doctor performing must be surgery certified
doctor must have patient admission privileges at local hospitals

And that's about it. The number of abortion facilities in the state would drop from 37 to 5, pretty far from an out right ban.

Page 8:
It's no the post 20 week abortion thing anybody cares about. It's that the bill would require abortion clinics to become licensed ambulatory surgery centers which only like 5 of all of the clinics in the entire state would be able to afford.

The ultimate point of the bill is to make it borderline impossible to legally operate an abortion clinic

Then on page 11:
Second, if taxpayers dont cover the costs, why would TX go from 37 clinics to only 5?
 
:lol:
It's a saying; a metaphor for one being responsible for their actions. Isnt that a novel idea?
its still non sequitur to the point
You're dead wrong on both counts. If you do not believe that we as taxpayers support these unfortunate kids who are brought into this world by their irresponsible parents, then you are incredibly ignorant.
Um no, I am correct.

Trying to shift the burden to the idea of welfare kids, from having tax support for abortion, just shows you're out of your depth.

If they'd been aborted, that issue disappears. But again, its irrelevant.

Second, if taxpayers dont cover the costs, why would TX go from 37 clinics to only 5?
What the fuck?? Are you drunk?

the State itself made specific moves to close them, that's why. Not that tax funding dried up.

Look it up, moron. Tax funding for abortions has been illegal for years, essentially nation wide. Every time you hear Republitards working for a Bill on it, it's just a repeated layover right over on-the-books, old laws. A rally cry for the easily-duped, ie., their constituents.

Abortions are paid for by the patient; their cash or their insurance premiums.
You certainly dont pay much attention to what been posted. It makes you look pretty stupid actually.
lol ok clueless person

It has everything to do with responsibility and apparently you have never had any in your life. Save a shred of dignity and go ask your parents to clue you in. They should know since they kept you instead of having you aborted.
lol, what a fucktard you are. But at least we understand that your cluelessness was evident to yourself, as well.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top