Current Events > Trump's national abortion ban plan got leaked.

(+) Yeah! (+)

https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/politics-features/trump-abortion-plan-leak-inflamed-campaign-1234973014/

The Times reported that Trump favors a national ban at 16 weeks in part because it is a round number. His campaign counters that Trump hasnt settled on a specific gestational limit he would support yet. Over the course of the campaign, some of Trumps most senior aides, including GOP operative Susie Wiles, have strategized that his road to victory includes Trump running as a moderate on abortion despite his comments and record as president, including the appointment of three of the Supreme Court justices responsible for obliterating Roe.

I hope the Dems use this.

Its ok women hes only going to moderately control your bodies

He should ease it back to 20 weeks, around a month before the fetus can gain consciousness/feel pain. And past that date add the standard exceptions.

Yes many people don't think it should be banned ever but he's running as a conservative.

64 weeks tbqh

That will singlehandedly hand the win to Biden so cool

16 weeks in part because it is a round number.

I had to remind myself with Google how that's wrong.

A round number is an integer that ends with one or more "0"s in a given base. So, 590 is rounder than 592, but 590 is less round than 600.

Still a dumb reason even at 20.

what does he think a round number is?

thronedfire2 posted...

what does he think a round number is?

An even number.

And even with this bullshit there are still some woken who are gonna vote for him. Absolutely ridiculous. I'm starting to hate this country more and more

Axiom posted...

That will singlehandedly hand the win to Biden so cool

You'd be surprised. It might make fewer people bother to vote for Biden because they think there's no way he can lose. It's part of how Hillary lost

SecretBase posted...

He should ease it back to 20 weeks, around a month before the fetus can gain consciousness/feel pain. And past that date add the standard exceptions.

Yes many people don't think it should be banned ever but he's running as a conservative.

I'd rather him and the GOP just fuck all the way off instead.

MrAntisocial posted...

You'd be surprised. It might make fewer people bother to vote for Biden because they think there's no way he can lose. It's part of how Hillary lost

Every single vote on abortion in the states since row has shown just how much the public opinion runs counter to the GOPs

They just wont accept it. This is definitely a losing issue for them

SecretBase posted...

He should ease it back to 20 weeks, around a month before the fetus can gain consciousness/feel pain. And past that date add the standard exceptions.

Yes many people don't think it should be banned ever but he's running as a conservative.

The problem is conservatives think a fetus has consciousness from the very beginning. My mom thinks fetuses try to escape from an abortion doctor's knife and that they feel fear. When they are barely formed. I blame the anti abortion propaganda that likes to show a baby inside a womb as a full 9 month baby.

SecretBase posted...

He should ease it back to 20 weeks, around a month before the fetus can gain consciousness/feel pain. And past that date add the standard exceptions.

Yes many people don't think it should be banned ever but he's running as a conservative.

Great news, I don't give a fuck about what any conservative has to say about anything.

1000% chance it's 16 weeks because 2016.

Zikten posted...

The problem is conservatives think a fetus has consciousness from the very beginning. My mom thinks fetuses try to escape from an abortion doctor's knife and that they feel fear. When they are barely formed. I blame the anti abortion propaganda that likes to show a baby inside a womb as a full 9 month baby.

It's scientifically considered a living organism.

SecretBase posted...

He should ease it back to 20 weeks, around a month before the fetus can gain consciousness/feel pain. And past that date add the standard exceptions.

Yes many people don't think it should be banned ever but he's running as a conservative.

It should be third trimester. We slaughter and eat animals who feel pain and are more conscious so it's not a good reason for a time period where some women might not even know they're pregnant and others would know at most for a month.

Vigero posted...

It's scientifically considered a living organism.

Oh goody. One of these.
I'll play. When is a being considered dead?

Vigero posted...

It's scientifically considered a living organism.

He didn't say it wasn't.....

16 isn't even round!

Vigero posted...

It's scientifically considered a living organism.

Yes but they don't have thoughts. Not til a certain stage of development. And most abortions happen before that stage I'm pretty sure

[LFAQs-redacted-quote]

And to make it doubly dumb, 16 isn't a round number.

Vigero posted...

It's scientifically considered a living organism.

So is a tumor. "Living" is not the same thing as "person". A fetus has not yet developed into a person.

Vigero posted...

It's scientifically considered a living organism.

Grass and bacteria are considered living organisms.

ButteryMales posted...

We slaughter and eat animals who feel pain and are more conscious

Not human so relatively few care.

Additionally predator-prey relations are a tragic fact of nature. Abortion is rarely necessary.

ButteryMales posted...

so it's not a good reason for a time period where some women might not even know they're pregnant and others would know at most for a month.

Most women discover their preganicies within the first 8 weeks.

Vigero posted...

It's scientifically considered a living organism.

Then birth control methods should be permitted as to avoid ending up having to make the choice altogether.

SecretBase posted...

He should ease it back to 20 weeks, around a month before the fetus can gain consciousness/feel pain. And past that date add the standard exceptions.

Yes many people don't think it should be banned ever but he's running as a conservative.

Or, and hear me out, don't interject politics into the medical field.

SecretBase posted...

Not human so relatively few care.

Additionally predator-prey relations are a tragic fact of nature.

So? I'm not advocating for meat to be illegal, just pointing out 20 weeks is a terribly arbitrary and bad restriction. Third trimester is arbitrary too but it's worked pretty well while Roe v Wade was in effect.

SecretBase posted...

Abortion is rarely necessary.

I don't give a crap about your opinion. Are you a doctor? Have a source that's not a religious or conservative website?

SecretBase posted...

Most women discover their preganicies within the first 8 weeks.

Even if that were true why should we screw over some women?

SecretBase posted...

Abortion is rarely necessary.

Neither is sticking your nose into other people's health choices, but lots of misogynists insist on doing so whilst pretending (badly) that their pushiness is about compassionate.

ButteryMales posted...

It should be third trimester. We slaughter and eat animals who feel pain and are more conscious so it's not a good reason for a time period where some women might not even know they're pregnant and others would know at most for a month.

Third trimester abortions only happen because of medical complications and legal limitations only delay life-saving care for pregnant women. There should be no legal ban and the decision should be made by medical professionals and their patients.

mercurydude posted...

Neither is sticking your nose into other people's health choices, but lots of misogynists insist on doing so whilst pretending (badly) that their pushiness is about compassionate.

They consider the fetus a person past whatever point. At which time it's no longer a decision that only effects you, to them.

What GOP governors are pushing is 6 week bans since that's when fetuses gain heartbeats. At least not every Republican is being that obtuse.

ButteryMales posted...

Even if that were true why should we screw over some women?

Because conservatives.

ssk9716757 posted...

Third trimester abortions only happen because of medical complications. There should be no legal ban and the decision should be made by medical professionals and their patients.

If they only happen over medical complications you could simply ban them with the exception of medical complications and nothing is effected.

SecretBase posted...

If they only happen over medical complications you could simply ban them with the exception of medical complications and nothing is effected.

Not true. There are countless stories right now of doctors not knowing whether their interventions will be acceptable under the law and delaying life-saving care. Legal bans only get in the way of providing proper care.

Good overview here: https://www.wolterskluwer.com/en/expert-insights/how-abortion-bans-prevent-clinicians-from-providing-essential-womens-health-care

ssk9716757 posted...

Not true. There are countless stories right now of doctors not knowing whether their interventions will be acceptable under the law and delaying life-saving care. Legal bans only get in the way of providing proper care.

Good overview here: https://www.wolterskluwer.com/en/expert-insights/how-abortion-bans-prevent-clinicians-from-providing-essential-womens-health-care

Simply adjust the law to acknowledge the doctor's opinion as absolute.

ButteryMales posted...

I don't give a crap about your opinion. Are you a doctor? Have a source that's not a religious or conservative website?

I acknowledge every instance where a doctor says abortion is necessary.

If you're claiming it's necessary in any case beyond where a doctor says so, well, then you're actually the one attributing unwarranted importance to unqualified peoples' opinions.

@SecretBase

They consider the fetus a person past whatever point. At which time it's no longer a decision that only effects you, to them.

I don't know. It's like with my thoughts that those who vote against LGBTQ+ rights should have to submit to and pass a purity test for their votes to count.

Anyone who votes against abortion should be required to be drafted into foster care (With their money being channeled into that service or any for children in need).

What GOP governors are pushing is 6 week bans since that's when fetuses gain heartbeats. At least not every Republican is being that obtuse.

If they aren't aiming to keep birth control legal, yeah they aren't opposing abortions for concern of children.

ButteryMales posted...

I had to remind myself with Google how that's wrong.

A round number is an integer that ends with one or more "0"s in a given base. So, 590 is rounder than 592, but 590 is less round than 600.

Still a dumb reason even at 20.

On one hand, 16 would be a round number in hexadecimal. On the other hand, I guarantee Trump doesn't even know what hexadecimal is.

SecretBase posted...

Simply adjust the law to acknowledge the doctor's opinion as absolute.

What's the point of the law then?

SecretBase posted...

They consider the fetus a person past whatever point. At which time it's no longer a decision that only effects you, to them.

What GOP governors are pushing is 6 week bans since that's when fetuses gain heartbeats. At least not every Republican is being that obtuse.

Because conservatives.

No one does or should give a shit about conservatives' opinions. All the recent elections and polls for a long time have shown anti-choice people are a minority.

SecretBase posted...

I acknowledge every instance where a doctor says abortion is necessary.

If you're claiming it's necessary in any case beyond where a doctor says so, well, then you're actually the one attributing unwarranted importance to unqualified peoples' opinions.

No answer of why I should care about your opinion or proof of your statement. Proof enough you just pulled it out of your ass.

Women who are themselves are the most qualified to make decisions for themselves. You're just plain wrong on all counts.

I wonder how the alternate universe where trump is obsessed with prime numbers is doing?

Abortion rights bring out a lot of single issue voters. So, this is a losing strategy for Trump.

ssk9716757 posted...

What's the point of the law then?

Are you implying some doctors would just lie?

ButteryMales posted...

Women who are themselves are the most qualified to make decisions for themselves.

To redirect your question back, are they doctors?

I can choose to go to sleep this hour, but that doesn't somehow make it necessary for me to do so.

Antiyonder posted...

I don't know. It's like with my thoughts that those who vote against LGBTQ+ rights should have to submit to and pass a purity test for their votes to count.

Anyone who votes against abortion should be required to be drafted into foster care (With their money being channeled into that service or any for children in need).

Understandable proposals. These laws do have consequences.

@SecretBase

Understandable proposals. These laws do have consequences.

Well it's kind of again with how I would go about a purity test. You probably would have someone voting to go along with it, but I have no doubt that if such a demand was presented, then there would be enough people detered from voting to remove abortion.

Or to put it another way, if a person for the banning of abortion after having some drinks was talking it up and someone brought up the concern about the rise in orphans or kids who would be in an abusive household (including neglected), said voter would just admit "Like I give a damn about a baby in those situations. I'm just looking to put them womens folks in there place".

And yes, some intentional spelling errors to fit a drunk and also sexist mind.

Antiyonder posted...

@SecretBase

I don't know. It's like with my thoughts that those who vote against LGBTQ+ rights should have to submit to and pass a purity test for their votes to count.

Anyone who votes against abortion should be required to be drafted into foster care (With their money being channeled into that service or any for children in need).

I would very much like people who voted no to Australias same-sex marriage referendum to have to explain why, but then people lose their minds and go into I have the right to vote and dont have to justify it to you, my opinion is valid and justified whether you like it or not, voting is sacred! mode

Even though, yeah, if your vote is tangibly affecting other peoples lives then fuck you for using the right to an opinion shield.

SecretBase posted...

To redirect your question back, are they doctors?

Some are. Google if women can be doctors and realize it's a stupid question.

The question was for you to prove your opinion's worth. I don't mind saying it wasn't the best question as if you were a woman who has had an abortion I would completely accepted you were qualified to make that decision for yourself but not others.

SecretBase posted...

I can choose to go to sleep this hour, but that doesn't somehow make it necessary for me to do so.

Your choosing when to sleep doesn't make sleep unnecessary either. You have to sleep which makes this an odd analogy for you to pick.

Edit: Who would know your sleep, work, medical, ect. schedule better than yourself to know when your sleep is necessary for success? I personally am very forgetful so actually other people keep my schedule for me. None of this translates well into when abortion is necessary or who is more qualified than the pregnant woman. A pregnant woman isn't going to forget they're pregnant.

@Dark-Arbron

I would very much like people who voted no to Australias same-sex marriage referendum to have to explain why, but then people lose their minds and go into I have the right to vote and dont have to justify it to you, my opinion is valid and justified whether you like it or not, voting is sacred! mode

Even though, yeah, if your vote is tangibly affecting other peoples lives then fuck you for using the right to an opinion shield.

Yes and I would retort that if removing say gay marriage and abortion is important to you (rhetorical), then any drawback or hardship is worth the outcome..

You know like a kid needing to do extra chores and such if they want something that their usual allowance won't suffice.

And I think for the reason of these people not being committed to what they wish for, some would abstain from voting whether it's for the right to abortion or say gay marriage.

I've said dumb stuff abort abortion before, but damn. The lengths people will go to create 'justification' to control someone's body.

These extreme scenarios are fearmongering. Most likely, statistically, instances of an lying doctor telling the patient she needs an abortion when she actually doesn't are unfathomably rare.

why is he even giving up 16 weeks? I thought he was against it.

Sucks I gotta choose between the racist old man contributing to a genocide and the racist old man who also is down for contributing to a genocide