Alabama Democrat on Fetuses: ‘Kill Them Now or You Kill Them Later’

Discussion in 'Politics, Religion, Social Issues' started by Rogifan, May 1, 2019.

  1. Rogifan, May 1, 2019
    Last edited: May 1, 2019

    Rogifan macrumors Core

    Rogifan

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2011
    #1
    So this is what Democrats stand for now? If it’s OK to kill babies in the womb because they might not be wanted then why not let people do it after they’re born? Why the distinction? Disgusting. But then I shouldn’t be surprised the party that supports well known eugenics supporter Margaret Sanger would have this opinion.

    A Democratic state official in Alabama on Wednesday defended abortion as a question of whether "to kill them now" or in "the electric chair" later.

    State Rep. John Rogers spoke as part of a Democratic filibuster against an abortion ban in the state house. The law would define fetuses as distinct and living children, granting them protections under law.

    The law, House Bill 314, is sponsored by State Rep. Terri Collins (R.).

    Collins explained the bill as a formal recognition of the life of the unborn child. "The heart of this bill is to confront a decision by the Court in 1973 that says that the child in the womb is not a human being," she said.

    Rogers saw things differently. He defended the right of the mother to kill the child, saying as much.

    "Some kids are unwanted," Rogers said. "So you kill them now or you kill them later."

    Rogers argued that those children, if brought into the world, would have broken lives and end up in prison facing execution.

    "You bring them into the world unwanted, unloved, and then you send them to the electric chair," he said. "So you kill them now or you kill them later, but the bottom line is I don't think we should be making that decision."

    https://freebeacon.com/politics/ala...ill-them-later/amp/?__twitter_impression=true
     
  2. Zenithal macrumors G3

    Joined:
    Sep 10, 2009
    #2
    She or he isn't exactly wrong. Most abortions are from less socioeconomic regions and often minorities at that. Minorities are the greater pool of race or religion in prisons. While her or his words sound racist, it holds water.
     
  3. raqball macrumors 68000

    Joined:
    Sep 11, 2016
    #3
    I'm not surprised one bit.... Liberals do love them some abortion...
     
  4. ucfgrad93 macrumors P6

    ucfgrad93

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2007
    Location:
    Colorado
  5. The-Real-Deal82 macrumors 604

    The-Real-Deal82

    Joined:
    Jan 17, 2013
    Location:
    Wales, United Kingdom
    #5
    While I’m pro choice in terms of abortion, there is a massive difference between an abortion and the death of a live child. This person in this article sounds nuts.
     
  6. ThisBougieLife macrumors 68000

    ThisBougieLife

    Joined:
    Jan 21, 2016
    Location:
    SF Bay Area, California
    #6
    Well, at least he isn't being euphemistic about it. I don't think that's a good argument for abortion, however.
     
  7. jerwin macrumors 68020

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2015
    #7
    As a matter of public policy, I'd prefer abortions to remain legal. As a matter of public policy, the Alabama pols want to treat abortion as a class A felony.
    Disingenuity should be recognized for what it is, and not form the basis of debate or legislation.

    I'd prefer not to end up in the handmaid's tale, not knowing how the **** it came to this. But that appears to be the plan.
     
  8. Night Spring macrumors G5

    Night Spring

    Joined:
    Jul 17, 2008
    #8
    This person didn't word it very well, but what he's trying to do is point out that Republicans want to force women to have children they don't want and may not have the resources to care for, but they are also usually against social programs that help care for unwanted children and families that need assistance. These anti-abortion legislations, if they are enforced, would result in many more disadvantaged children being born and raised in non-optimal circumstances. And such children are at a higher risk of turning to crime and ending up in prison.

    If you are really pro-life, you should care for people at all stages of their life, not just until they are born.
     
  9. VulchR macrumors 68020

    VulchR

    Joined:
    Jun 8, 2009
    Location:
    Scotland
    #9
    I think the point Rogers was trying to make is that it less immoral to terminate a pregnancy before there is a functioning nervous system than to allow a human being with a fully formed functional nervous system to die or suffer from deprivation, injustice, or lack of medical care caused by the policies of the GOP. However, I am not defending the crude way it was put by Rogers.
     
  10. Rogifan thread starter macrumors Core

    Rogifan

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2011
    #10
    Can you name me a Republican forcing any women to get pregnant? The situations you’re describing sound like someone needs to keep their pants on. If you don’t want children or can’t afford to raise them then don’t get pregnant. Not complicated. And don’t come back at me with Republicans don’t support government paying for birth control. If you can’t afford that then don’t have sex. Again not complicated.
    --- Post Merged, May 2, 2019 ---
    What GOP policies are causing women who don’t want or can’t afford children to get pregnant? And it’s complete BS that’s women who do have an unwanted pregnancy have no options other than murder. Nothing is preventing the woman from putting the baby up for adoption.
     
  11. samcraig macrumors P6

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2009
    Location:
    USA
    #11
    I know this is a passionate topic for you, Rogifan. But you can't claim one person's comments would be what the Democratic Party stands for.

    Also - your latest post is just not realistic. People are going to have sex. If you can't afford birth control you shouldn't have sex? Is that really the line of logic you want to go with there? I mean - I don't entirely disagree with the idea that everyone should be responsible. But I'm also a realist.
     
  12. Rogifan thread starter macrumors Core

    Rogifan

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2011
    #12
    And all they can come back with is he worded it wrong.
    --- Post Merged, May 2, 2019 ---
    Yes, I absolutely think if you can’t afford to have children you make damn sure you don’t get pregnant. But if you do you take responsibility for it and by that I don’t mean killing it. Abortion exists for one reason - so women can have as much sex as possible without consequences.
     
  13. jkcerda macrumors 6502a

    jkcerda

    Joined:
    Jun 10, 2013
    Location:
    Criminal Mexi Midget
    #13
    TAKES 2 to tango, why don't guys wear rubbers? why do plenty insist on going bareback? why are there so many irresponsible males? if the women have the kid and end up on the system along because the POS turd she had sex with was a no good moron then they are leeches on the system, if they decide to terminate the pregnancy they are murderers. not your body/not your problem, when they do end up in the system then WE all pay for that . YES BOTH should be wearing protection by rubbers or pills or IUD, whatever work but I bet plenty here got laid w/o any protection a few times and got lucky their partner did not get pregnant................. almost betting none here waited to have sex and lack of condoms was not a deterrent................I remember my first sheep......er I mean my first time............
     
  14. samcraig macrumors P6

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2009
    Location:
    USA
    #14
    I have a HUGE problem with that remark. Only women?
     
  15. jkcerda macrumors 6502a

    jkcerda

    Joined:
    Jun 10, 2013
    Location:
    Criminal Mexi Midget
    #15
    of course only women, don't you know how much guys struggle to have sex? all women have to do is wink & boom guys all over her, and women are MEAN, MEAN I tell you, when they reject you they say hurtful things like, "it's not me it's your face, or height, or clothes" , or "you must be this tall to get on this ride baby", or " you would be considered a mercy ****" or " small hands & small feet? you must be fun sized everywhere" EVEN when they FINALLY agree to your desires they say weird things like " why does this smell like chloroformmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz"

    they are mean I tell you :(
     
  16. Huntn, May 2, 2019
    Last edited: May 2, 2019

    Huntn macrumors P6

    Huntn

    Joined:
    May 5, 2008
    Location:
    The Misty Mountains
    #16
    Does the Bible say every fetus has a right to be born? Or is this simply a projection of be fruitful and multiply? Generally speaking, I support the idea that a woman has dominion over her body and any fetus she produces and that personhood rights start with being born and viable outside the womb without heavy reliance on technology.

    The concepts expressed in your 2 posts, seem to be beyond some of our forum members consideration. Instead of being motivated by what the Man In The Sky dictates, based on a simplistic idea, back when the motivation was, we need more people. Today, if the idea is that human life is sacred, they should be doing a much better job of helping children after they are born, lead productive lives. But that is too expensive, don’t you know. :oops:

    With the GOP approach, their concern only seems to go as far as a fetus having a right to be born. After that, you're are on your own, kid. :oops:
     
  17. Eraserhead macrumors G4

    Eraserhead

    Joined:
    Nov 3, 2005
    Location:
    UK
    #17
    It’s more than a bit ghoulish. But the choice can be prison or abortion.
    --- Post Merged, May 2, 2019 ---
    The bible says the baby in the womb is the property of the father.
     
  18. Bug-Creator macrumors 6502a

    Bug-Creator

    Joined:
    May 30, 2011
    Location:
    Germany
    #18
    There is difference between how things should be and how they are in the real world.

    -> people will have sex no matter the consequence

    -> communism will fail if applied to >300 people at once

    -> same for "pure" capitalism :confused:
     
  19. ucfgrad93 macrumors P6

    ucfgrad93

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2007
    Location:
    Colorado
    #19
    Source?
     
  20. Rogifan thread starter macrumors Core

    Rogifan

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2011
    #20
    The pro-abortion crowd keeps crowing about how it’s all about women having control of their bodies. Except apparently when it comes to having sex. Then the women have no control at all.

    Do women have control over their bodies or not?
     
  21. Huntn macrumors P6

    Huntn

    Joined:
    May 5, 2008
    Location:
    The Misty Mountains
    #21
    Did a quick search on that and came up empty handed. Do you have reference for me? :)
    If accurate, that does quite a bit to discredit the Bible as far as a reference that has modern affiliation with human morals, yet we face people citing the Bible daily as God’s rule book for humanity. Hmm. Pick and choose, ignore when inconvenient. :rolleyes:
     
  22. jkcerda macrumors 6502a

    jkcerda

    Joined:
    Jun 10, 2013
    Location:
    Criminal Mexi Midget
    #22
    you are a guy? why don't YOU control where YOU leave your sperm? top gun method only works on movies (eject eject eject).....................
    glad sheep can't get pregos............
     
  23. Rogifan thread starter macrumors Core

    Rogifan

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2011
    #23
    So because people will have sex no matter the consequences let’s make it easier for them to do so? That’s :confused:
    --- Post Merged, May 2, 2019 ---
    I’m a woman. If woman are going to argue they should control their bodies then that includes whether or not they have sex.
     
  24. jkcerda macrumors 6502a

    jkcerda

    Joined:
    Jun 10, 2013
    Location:
    Criminal Mexi Midget
    #25
    1. no matter what some shows tell you, abortion is NOT easy. and neither is sex, I got rejected all the time :(
    2. why is the SAME not true for the guys? why can't they control where they leave their sperm?
     

Share This Page

73 May 1, 2019