Tiger Board Logo

Donor's Den General Leaderboards TNET coins™ POTD Hall of Fame Map FAQ
GIVE AN AWARD
Use your TNET coins™ to grant this post a special award!

W
50
Big Brain
90
Love it!
100
Cheers
100
Helpful
100
Made Me Smile
100
Great Idea!
150
Mind Blown
150
Caring
200
Flammable
200
Hear ye, hear ye
200
Bravo
250
Nom Nom Nom
250
Take My Coins
500
Ooo, Shiny!
700
Treasured Post!
1000

YOUR BALANCE
Dems block born-alive bill...
storage This topic has been archived - replies are not allowed.
Archives - General Boards Archive
add New Topic
Replies: 40
| visibility 1

Dems block born-alive bill...


Feb 25, 2019, 8:46 PM

twitchy.com/brettt-3136/2019/02/25/unreal-check-out-the-hills-tweet-about-the-failed-born-alive-protection-act/

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

If she's a hollerer, she'll be a screamer.
If she's a screamer, she'll get you arrested.


Re: Dems block born-alive bill...


Feb 25, 2019, 8:55 PM

16 Repubs blocked it too. (update. I was wrong)

Message was edited by: Carlsbad®


flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

this was a senate vote 53-44 it needed 60 votes to go


Feb 25, 2019, 9:06 PM

forward. i'm not gonna look up individual votes but i'm pretty sure 16 republicans were not part of the 44

badge-donor-20yr.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Re: this was a senate vote 53-44 it needed 60 votes to go


Feb 25, 2019, 10:37 PM

I will look it up again. I read the article quickly earlier and was wrong. You are correct.

Message was edited by: Carlsbad®

Message was edited by: Carlsbad®


flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Re: Dems block born-alive bill...


Feb 25, 2019, 9:13 PM

It criminalizes something that's imaginary. All it does is open doctors up to lawsuits because it would require them to act a certain way. "Act in scenario x as you would in scenario y" is a dumb standard for a medical professional.

It's not a serious bill, it's meant to whip up gullible conservatives.

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Sad.***


Feb 25, 2019, 9:48 PM



2024 purple level memberbadge-donor-15yr.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

"Democracy is the theory that the common people know what they want, and deserve to get it good and hard."
- H. L. Mencken


They are farming children***


Feb 25, 2019, 11:06 PM



flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Re: They are farming children******


Feb 25, 2019, 11:55 PM





badge-donor-10yr.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Read up on this, folks. It was a publicity stunt.


Feb 25, 2019, 11:55 PM

1. The Republicans knew this bill wouldn't pass. They put it in for the media attention.
2. THERE IS ALREADY A VERSION OF THIS SIGNED TO LAW BY PRESIDENT BUSH IN 2002 CALLED THE BORN-ALIVE INFANTS PROTECTION ACT
3. THERE IS ALREADY A VERSION OF THIS SIGNED TO LAW BY PRESIDENT BUSH IN 2002 CALLED THE BORN-ALIVE INFANTS PROTECTION ACT. I posted this twice and in all caps due to the persistent reading comprehension problems on this board.
4. The situation described in the bill is very, very, very rare.
5. There are already laws on the books to prevent killing newborn babies. This all is silly.

This was a political stunt and many of y'all fell for it. The GOP is paving the way to make abortion a desperation issue for 2020.

And before the usual rabid crazies jump in here, yeah, I would definitely have a problem with a baby born in a botched abortion being killed. I just took the time to do some research here.

Let's maybe choose better sites than "Twitchy.com".

2024 white level memberbadge-donor-05yr.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

[Catahoula] used to be almost solely a PnR rascal, but now has adopted shidpoasting with a passion. -bengaline

You are the meme master. - RPMcMurphy®

Trump is not a phony. - RememberTheDanny


I think it proved their point. Either way it's bad.


Feb 26, 2019, 7:31 AM

Either you support infanticide or you are totally irrational in voting with your party instead of common sense.

Its like the Republicans could sponsor a bill to cure cancer and dems would vote against it.

Just a big spotlight on how broken Congress is.

2024 orange level memberbadge-donor-15yr.jpgringofhonor-tiggity-110.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up


Let me state this again...


Feb 26, 2019, 7:56 AM

This has already been done. All that stuff they wanted in this bill for that very rare occurrence already exist. This was grandstanding, and they got called on it. No, this isn't a case of "you either support infantcide or you don't."

Y'all fell for a political stunt.

2024 white level memberbadge-donor-05yr.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

[Catahoula] used to be almost solely a PnR rascal, but now has adopted shidpoasting with a passion. -bengaline

You are the meme master. - RPMcMurphy®

Trump is not a phony. - RememberTheDanny


You missed my second point. When I said either way


Feb 26, 2019, 8:42 AM

That meant:

1) You support infanticide (I'm gonna guess that's not the case for most, but not all)

OR.....

2) You will vote with your party, no matter how dumb it may sound, on a bill.


Again, one party (don't care who) can push a bill to end death, live forever, feed all the starving children, and cure cancer and the other party will vote against it. Even if there's nothing WRONG with the bill, they will make up #### like it restricts access to abortions (done in this case) or it's already been done (your example).

2024 orange level memberbadge-donor-15yr.jpgringofhonor-tiggity-110.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up


Re: You missed my second point. When I said either way


Feb 26, 2019, 9:37 AM

You are creating an oversimplified Either/Or Fallacy and it just doesn't work here. Your argument is that anyone who voted against this bill supports infantcide. That's a ludicrous claim, but you're killing those lately with your "only conservatives like football" types of posts.

This bill was opposed because it was unnecessary grandstanding.
1. A similar bill was passed in 2002, thus making this one unnecessary.
2. There are already laws that prevent infantcide in these rare occurrences.
3. The GOP knew it wouldn't get passed and was only attempting to get a reaction. Here's my Either/Or: You're either naively falling for it, or you know full well what they're doing and also embracing this cheap tactic.

2024 white level memberbadge-donor-05yr.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

[Catahoula] used to be almost solely a PnR rascal, but now has adopted shidpoasting with a passion. -bengaline

You are the meme master. - RPMcMurphy®

Trump is not a phony. - RememberTheDanny


Re: I think it proved their point. Either way it's bad.


Feb 26, 2019, 7:59 AM [ in reply to I think it proved their point. Either way it's bad. ]

Dems see everything as a threat to abolish abortions. Kind of like Repub politicians and common sense gun control. They just won't budge.

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Re: I think it proved their point. Either way it's bad.


Feb 26, 2019, 9:58 AM

This isn't a threat to abortion at all. It's a potential threat to doctors.

There are tons of news sources out there explaining this. There's no excuse to be ignorant.

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Re: I think it proved their point. Either way it's bad.


Feb 26, 2019, 10:03 AM

I am just making a point how Dems wouldn't budge anyway generally. They know what the conservative end game really is.

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Re: I think it proved their point. Either way it's bad.


Feb 26, 2019, 10:14 AM

Well yeah. Every medical organization is against it, so the GOP never would have let it pass. It's one of those things that never would have had a vote if it could have passed.

The GOP knows that Trump needs issues like this to win in 2020. Abortion isn't a winning issue for them, so they had to invent this infanticide crisis.

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Re: I think it proved their point. Either way it's bad.


Feb 26, 2019, 10:17 AM

That and to make it seem like the Dems will turn the USA into Venezuela.

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Deep state is played out.


Feb 26, 2019, 10:38 AM

I think they also jumped the gun on Border Crisis. That was something that should have been dangled through the election. Then Trump painted himself in a corner and needed an out immediately.

Look for more manufactured crisis in the coming months.

2024 white level memberbadge-donor-05yr.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

I like your funny words magic man


You took the bait.***


Feb 26, 2019, 11:46 AM [ in reply to I think it proved their point. Either way it's bad. ]



flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Pubs fall for things on days ending in y.***


Feb 26, 2019, 7:49 AM [ in reply to Read up on this, folks. It was a publicity stunt. ]



2024 purple level memberbadge-donor-10yr.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

That's right...all pubs...


Feb 26, 2019, 7:58 AM

every single one of them!!

badge-donor-05yr.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

I think you're missing the larger point.


Feb 26, 2019, 9:40 AM [ in reply to Read up on this, folks. It was a publicity stunt. ]

People "falling for it" was the goal.

2024 orange level memberbadge-donor-20yr.jpgringofhonor-obed.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up


Oh, I get that.


Feb 26, 2019, 2:18 PM

Believe me, I know what they intended. Just never ceases to amaze me how people keep falling for it.

2024 white level memberbadge-donor-05yr.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

[Catahoula] used to be almost solely a PnR rascal, but now has adopted shidpoasting with a passion. -bengaline

You are the meme master. - RPMcMurphy®

Trump is not a phony. - RememberTheDanny


Well, then why the Dems' argument against it?


Feb 26, 2019, 1:20 PM [ in reply to Read up on this, folks. It was a publicity stunt. ]

They claim the bill will force doctors to do things that their patients don't want them to do, and/or that might be against the doctor's discretion. It can't be both a "stunt" and substantial enough to be harmful to women. Maybe Chuck Schumer, the Democratic Senate Leader, should've read up on this and realized this was a "publicity stunt."

The real problem is that Democratic state legislatures are promoting and passing bills that would allow infanticide, because they're afraid of what might happen if the Supreme Court allows for restrictions of abortion.


Message was edited by: camcgee®

2024 white level memberbadge-donor-10yr.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Re: Well, then why the Dems' argument against it?


Feb 26, 2019, 1:25 PM

No one ever has nor ever will pass a bill legalizing infanticide.

You guys are so freaking gullible. It's pathetic.

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

So what were the Democrats talking about?


Feb 26, 2019, 1:54 PM

Were they gullible, too?

2024 white level memberbadge-donor-10yr.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Re: So what were the Democrats talking about?


Feb 26, 2019, 2:00 PM

I'm assuming you mean some Democrats were upset by it? If so, then yes.

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Let me help you:


Feb 26, 2019, 2:05 PM

this is the actual debate, involving the people actually making the bill:

During the floor debate over the bill this afternoon, several Democratic senators said they planned to oppose the legislation because they believe it limits women’s health-care options. “That is the actual intent of this bill, reducing access to safe abortion care would threaten the health of women in Hawaii,” said Mazie Hirono (D., Hawaii).

“This bill is just another line of attack in the ongoing war on women’s health,” said Jeanne Shaheen (D., N.H.).

Tina Smith, Democrat of Minnesota, said the born-alive bill “would override physicians’ professional judgment about what is best for their patients, and it would put physicians in the position of facing criminal penalties if their judgment about what is best for their patient is contrary to what is described in this bill.”

But nothing in the legislation forces doctors to provide any particular treatment to infants; it merely requires that they provide medical treatment. It mandates that doctors “exercise the same degree of professional skill, care, and diligence to preserve the life and health of the child as a reasonably diligent and conscientious health care practitioner would render to any other child born alive at the same gestational age.”

In other words, the born-alive bill would’ve done nothing more than insist that health-care providers treat children born alive after attempted abortions the same way that they’d treat any other infant.

Several Republican senators pushed back against the Democrats’ efforts to portray the bill as an attack on women’s health care. “I know a lot of opponents of this bill sincerely believe the talking points that they read from their staffs,” Sasse said. “We’ve heard speech after speech after speech that have nothing to do with what’s actually in this bill.”

“My colleagues across the aisle are debating a bill that’s not in front of us. They are talking about health care for women, which is abortion,” said Joni Ernst (R., Iowa). “This bill does not address abortion. . . . What this bill does is address the health care of a baby that is born alive after a botched abortion. We’re not talking about abortion, folks. We’re talking about the life of a child that is born.”

“I urge my colleagues to picture a baby that’s already been born, that’s outside the womb gasping for air,” Sasse added. “That’s the only thing that today’s vote is actually about. We’re talking about babies that have already been born. Nothing in this bill touches abortion access.”

2024 white level memberbadge-donor-10yr.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Re: Let me help you:


Feb 26, 2019, 2:09 PM

I'm not following you. No one suggested the bill would have no negative consequences, just that it would have no positive consequences.

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Here's Chuck Schumer:


Feb 26, 2019, 2:15 PM

"Shortly after McConnell’s remarks, Senate minority leader Chuck Schumer (D., N.Y.) said on the Senate floor that the born-alive bill “is carefully crafted to target, intimidate, and shut down reproductive health care providers.” He also claimed the bill “would impose requirements on what type of care doctors must provide in certain circumstances, even if that care is ineffective, contradictory to medical evidence, and against the family’s wishes.”"


I don't know why this would be hard to follow. If the bill doesn't actually accomplish anything that hasn't ready been done because it's just "symbolic," then why would Democrats object that it would force doctors to do anything?

2024 white level memberbadge-donor-10yr.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Re: Here's Chuck Schumer:


Feb 26, 2019, 3:54 PM

It takes something that's already illegal and attaches a criminal penalty to the doctor. So instead of just, say, losing his license, the doctor could go to jail.

What are you not getting?

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Re: So what were the Democrats talking about?


Feb 26, 2019, 2:06 PM [ in reply to So what were the Democrats talking about? ]

I read this again. You're talking about Tran and Northam?

Tran was just not very informed and misspoke. There is no need to abort a baby in labor since the pregnancy is already being brought to its end. No doctor (who is operating ethically and legally) will "abort" a baby during labor.

Northam was very clearly talking about a baby born critically ill. Honestly, anyone who thinks that any politician would propose resuscitating an already-dead baby just to kill it again isn't operating with a fully functioning brain. Granted, that's a huge portion of Trump supporters.

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Great points, because nowhere


Feb 26, 2019, 2:09 PM

in history have people shown a propensity to ignore basic ethics and push limits right up the the very edge of what's legal.

Yeah, we're the gullible ones.

2024 orange level memberbadge-donor-20yr.jpgringofhonor-obed.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up


Not to mention...


Feb 26, 2019, 2:10 PM

that when there's ambiguity in law, people tend to take advantage of it, and then courts are left to decide what the law actually says. In this case, the extreme laws being passed by Democratic state legislatures prompted Republicans in the Senate to address the ambiguity.

2024 white level memberbadge-donor-10yr.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Re: Great points, because nowhere


Feb 26, 2019, 4:41 PM [ in reply to Great points, because nowhere ]

Infanticide is already illegal.

Do Republicans not understand English?

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Why do you always bob and weave so much?


Feb 26, 2019, 6:19 PM

The point is what was in recently proposed bills. The VA one for instance made abortion legal up to and including the delivery stage.

2024 orange level memberbadge-donor-20yr.jpgringofhonor-obed.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up


Re: Why do you always bob and weave so much?


Feb 26, 2019, 8:13 PM

The purposed bill did not change when an abortion could occur.

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Dual grandstanding.***


Feb 26, 2019, 2:17 PM [ in reply to Well, then why the Dems' argument against it? ]



2024 white level memberbadge-donor-05yr.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

[Catahoula] used to be almost solely a PnR rascal, but now has adopted shidpoasting with a passion. -bengaline

You are the meme master. - RPMcMurphy®

Trump is not a phony. - RememberTheDanny


Re: Dems block born-alive bill...


Feb 26, 2019, 10:01 PM

Interesting to see the same political ideology that called our returning soldiers from the Vietnam war “baby killers”, now advocating for the killing of babies.

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Good.


Feb 27, 2019, 8:19 AM

I love dead babies

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Replies: 40
| visibility 1
Archives - General Boards Archive
add New Topic