Sen. Vivian Davis Figures (D-Mobile) files to repeal the just signed Alabama abortion bill.  This move could have been predicted but what's crazy about it is the State Senator trying to justify the repeal of the State law based mostly on outside of Alabama sources.   One is tourism and I'm wondering just how many times have you or anyone else investigated Florida or some locations politics before arranging a vacation there?   I'm sure that the number of people who said lets vacation to Alabama and have an abortion there was zero.  Why are so many people who not only don't live in Alabama but don't give a care about Alabama now wanting to have a say in Alabama politics?  Here is what the State Senator said that she is using for justification for filing the repeal.

“I have heard from people all over the country saying they planned a vacation to Alabama’s beautiful beaches, but when this extreme abortion ban was signed into law, they immediately canceled those plans,” Sen. Figures. “If we care about the future and well-being of our state, this law must be repealed.”

Since when does a State run it's state business based upon what is desirable or good for people outside the state?  I'm not comfortable with the new Alabama Law entirely and specifically when it comes to no provisions for incest and rape especially in a time when with "Plan B" type drugs a potential pregnancy can be terminated extremely early especially in cases like that.  

Not in any way though am I for the use of abortion for contraception purposes or to make up for someone not availing themselves of contraception provisions that are readily available.  Either way it goes it's a very divisive issue but whatever place a state resident falls on the issue it should be determined by state residents and those who reside within the state and not those that do not reside in Alabama and most likely never will.

Be as the Bereans ( Acts 17:11 )

Original Post

Now I do admit that I think it's barbaric how animals are treated and killed...but it's ridiculous to want to ban this...but  go to war for the right to continue slaughtering pre-born and born babies.

Celebrities Call for Ban on Boiling Lobsters Because They Feel Pain, But Aborting Babies is Fine

 NATIONAL   MICAIAH BILGER   FEB 1, 2018   |   6:44PM    WASHINGTON, DC
 

In a twist of tragic irony, several British celebrities are supporting a new effort to protect lobsters from a painful death while unborn baby humans suffer excruciating abortion deaths in England and America daily.

 

The humane treatment of animals is important, but many celebrities ignore how pain-capable human babies also are being brutally killed in abortions.

The Daily Mail reports British comedian Bill Bailey and wildlife presenter Chris Packham put their support behind an effort to prohibit lobsters from being boiled or dismembered alive in the UK.

They joined the organization Crustacean Compassion in sending a letter to British Environment Secretary Michael Gove, urging him to include lobsters as sentient creatures in a new Animal Welfare bill, according to the report.

Here’s more from the report:

The letter says decapods, the group of crustaceans including lobsters and crabs, are ‘crammed together in brightly lit tanks’ within restaurants.

It states: ‘There is no economic or culinary reason why decapods cannot be humanely dispatched, yet killing is sometimes preceded by breaking off the legs, head or tail, and is often accomplished by boiling alive.’

The groups claimed lobsters and other animals are subjected to “extreme treatments” in the food industry, including dismemberment while they are still alive.

Switzerland also recently banned the boiling of lobsters based on new scientific evidence that they feel pain.

There is strong evidence that unborn human beings, whose lives are much more valuable, also feel extreme pain by 20 weeks of pregnancy, if not sooner. Yet, the U.S. allows elective abortions past this stage, and the restrictions on late-term abortions in the UK are loose.

Tens of thousands of unborn babies are aborted at 20 weeks or later in these countries every year, yet there is no strong effort by celebrities to protect children. On Monday, the U.S. Senate failed to pass a bill to prohibit abortions on unborn babies after 20 weeks.

 

 

 

Though abortion advocates deny the science of fetal pain at 20 weeks, researchers have fully established fetal pain at 20 weeks or earlier. Dr. Steven Zielinski, an internal medicine physician from Oregon, is one of the leading researchers into it. He first published reports in the 1980s to validate research showing evidence for unborn pain.

At 20 weeks, the unborn child has all the parts in place – the pain receptors, spinal cord, nerve tracts, and thalamus – needed for transmitting and feeling pain. The unborn child responds to touch as early as week 6; and by week 18, pain receptors have appeared throughout the child’s body.

gbrk posted:

Sen. Vivian Davis Figures (D-Mobile) files to repeal the just signed Alabama abortion bill.  This move could have been predicted but what's crazy about it is the State Senator trying to justify the repeal of the State law based mostly on outside of Alabama sources.   One is tourism and I'm wondering just how many times have you or anyone else investigated Florida or some locations politics before arranging a vacation there?   I'm sure that the number of people who said lets vacation to Alabama and have an abortion there was zero.  Why are so many people who not only don't live in Alabama but don't give a care about Alabama now wanting to have a say in Alabama politics?  Here is what the State Senator said that she is using for justification for filing the repeal.

“I have heard from people all over the country saying they planned a vacation to Alabama’s beautiful beaches, but when this extreme abortion ban was signed into law, they immediately canceled those plans,” Sen. Figures. “If we care about the future and well-being of our state, this law must be repealed.”

Since when does a State run it's state business based upon what is desirable or good for people outside the state?  I'm not comfortable with the new Alabama Law entirely and specifically when it comes to no provisions for incest and rape especially in a time when with "Plan B" type drugs a potential pregnancy can be terminated extremely early especially in cases like that.  

Not in any way though am I for the use of abortion for contraception purposes or to make up for someone not availing themselves of contraception provisions that are readily available.  Either way it goes it's a very divisive issue but whatever place a state resident falls on the issue it should be determined by state residents and those who reside within the state and not those that do not reside in Alabama and most likely never will.

I'm not comfortable with this either.  It's a bad law because if Roe vs Wade is overturned, women or little girls in those situations will not have a choice. It's easy for the rest of us to say "well, heck. Just go buy a morning after pill." More than likely alot of us will never be in those shoes.  The "pro-life" arguments (talking-points, to be exact) are always changing as if they don't really know why they want this.

little girls in those situations will not have a choice.

Little girls shouldn't need to make that choice, it shouldn't come up.
So without the right morals of good parenting the children windup  
on MTV, divorce court, different sperm donors and it's the fault
of the village?   

I'm not comfortable with the new Alabama Law entirely and specifically when it comes to no provisions for incest and rape

Jack Hammer posted:

little girls in those situations will not have a choice.

Little girls shouldn't need to make that choice, it shouldn't come up.
So without the right morals of good parenting the children windup  
on MTV, divorce court, different sperm donors and it's the fault
of the village?   

I'm not comfortable with this either.  It's a bad law because if Roe vs Wade is overturned, women or little girls in those situations will not have a choice.

I'm not talking about the right morals or good parenting of the children.  I'm talking about women or little girls that may become pregnant because of rape or incest.

 

  I think we all can agree if someone breaks into a home, with the intent to do harm, we have the right to defend ourselves and loved ones, right? (a choice)

Now, if a woman or little girl is raped (an act of harm), why shouldn't they have the right to make a choice concerning their lives? Where is the justice in taking that choice away?

are we talking about what others think?  or abortion law?

people are boycotting any state that has stood up for anything.  I don't think it matters, just as many who support will makeup those who don't.

as far as abortion what doesn't get talked about is democrats in NY and Va. started this mess with their over reach.  then other states have started replying.

“I have heard from people all over the country saying they planned a vacation to Alabama’s beautiful beaches, but when this extreme abortion ban was signed into law, they immediately canceled those plans,” Sen. Figures. “If we care about the future and well-being of our state, this law must be repealed.”

Lies. There is so much wrong with the baby killer's "arguments" that one hardly knows where to begin.

Add Reply

Likes (0)
Post

×
×
×
×