Leaked/breaking:Roe v. Wade expected to be overturned

The #1 community for Gun Owners in Indiana

Member Benefits:

  • Fewer Ads!
  • Discuss all aspects of firearm ownership
  • Discuss anti-gun legislation
  • Buy, sell, and trade in the classified section
  • Chat with Local gun shops, ranges, trainers & other businesses
  • Discover free outdoor shooting areas
  • View up to date on firearm-related events
  • Share photos & video with other members
  • ...and so much more!
  • BugI02

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Jul 4, 2013
    31,896
    149
    Columbus, OH
    Lets say this, im a Jehovahs Witness and my believes are no more blood transfusions for me. And my believe is correct so no transfusions for anybody.
    No, actually a hypothetical would be more like you choose to have unprotected sex, get an STD, the law places restrictions on your ability to select medical treatment (perhaps a requirement to name your 'contacts') that you don't like and THEN you decide no one should have sex because of some imagined fallacy about what 'your rights' are or you believe they should be

    It is difficult to see how anyone can be unable to see where risk mitigation should take place in the chain of events leading to unwanted pregnancy, other than willfully
     

    GodFearinGunTotin

    Super Moderator
    Staff member
    Moderator
    Site Supporter
    Rating - 100%
    1   0   0
    Mar 22, 2011
    50,586
    113
    Mitchell
    So ****ing irresponsibly is all on the woman? She’s the ho, and the dude is simply lucky?
    Both are equally in the wrong, in my world view. But if she values herself so lowly as to give it away outside the commitment of marriage, why would she expect the dude to value her any more?
     

    BugI02

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Jul 4, 2013
    31,896
    149
    Columbus, OH
    So ****ing irresponsibly is all on the woman? She’s the ho, and the dude is simply lucky?
    Which party endures the most serious consequences? That is the party that should exhibit the most caution

    You don't ride motorcycles, do you? In an accident, the cage driver may be more or entirely at fault, but if you didn't utilize maximum caution you are still just as dead
     

    chipbennett

    Grandmaster
    Site Supporter
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Oct 18, 2014
    10,943
    113
    Avon
    Rare events should still be taken into account. I'm not suggesting that all manners of abortions should be allowed, but the rare events like life of the mother, non-viable fetuses (by this I mean where they can reliably predict that the baby won't survive), rape of minors, these things can and should be taken into account since we already have these things documented.

    It's a nice deflection to say that "well, they're just driving over to Indiana, so everything is fine," but IN delayed its special session in order to see what happens in the trigger-law states. While I haven't read the proposed HB1282 bill page by page, my cursory inspection seems that these exceptions aren't in the current proposed bill. (For the record, I'm with you on the federalist system of governance, but the fact that IN has a bill planned but not yet enacted and saying that the federalist system fixes all of it is really just a short-term circumstance if we're talking about this particular issue.) That lack of any exceptions is, in my opinion, bad. Yes, those exceptions are rare, but we already know about these things and can foresee their importance.
    If a doctor made a medical judgment that it would be unsafe for that 10-year-old to carry, much less, give birth to, a child, would anyone (outside of extreme radicals) take issue with ending the pregnancy to save the life of that girl?

    (I do understand that, under current medical care, it is likely that it very well may be perfectly safe for a 10-year-old to bear a child, without risking her life.)

    The better question is: who was the father, and has he been found and castrated yet?
     

    Route 45

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 100%
    92   0   0
    Dec 5, 2015
    14,884
    113
    Indy
    Both are equally in the wrong, in my world view. But if she values herself so lowly as to give it away outside the commitment of marriage, why would she expect the dude to value her any more?
    And again, we have the man determining the woman's value based on whether or not she "gives up" sex. You're free to think that sex is some kind of commodity that a woman has to give up when she signs on the dotted line. I much prefer to believe that sex is something shared between two people who both want it. A person's "worth" has nothing to do with it, but if you believe that for the woman, then you must believe that for the man. Otherwise, we see the real dynamic in play.
     

    GodFearinGunTotin

    Super Moderator
    Staff member
    Moderator
    Site Supporter
    Rating - 100%
    1   0   0
    Mar 22, 2011
    50,586
    113
    Mitchell
    And again, we have the man determining the woman's value based on whether or not she "gives up" sex. You're free to think that sex is some kind of commodity that a woman has to give up when she signs on the dotted line. I much prefer to believe that sex is something shared between two people who both want it. A person's "worth" has nothing to do with it, but if you believe that for the woman, then you must believe that for the man. Otherwise, we see the real dynamic in play.
    Duly noted.
     

    JEBland

    INGO's least subtle Alphabet agency taskforce spy
    Rating - 100%
    9   0   0
    Oct 24, 2020
    1,976
    113
    South of you
    If a doctor made a medical judgment that it would be unsafe for that 10-year-old to carry, much less, give birth to, a child, would anyone (outside of extreme radicals) take issue with ending the pregnancy to save the life of that girl?

    (I do understand that, under current medical care, it is likely that it very well may be perfectly safe for a 10-year-old to bear a child, without risking her life.)

    The better question is: who was the father, and has he been found and castrated yet?
    My complaint is that in the proposed bill, that medical exception does not seem to be in the new code post-HB1282. I, like many on here, think overturning Roe was the correct legal decision. I'm certainly not opposed to people being responsible for the consequences of their actions. We should all be concerned for these (quite rare) exceptions, in my opinion.

    I'm not sure it's the better question when the legislation is pending. We don't have to restrict ourselves to one or the other; we can have parallel solutions.
    Personally, I don't think we should castrate him - I think execution of the variant of his choice is more appropriate (in another recent SC decision, they recognized the right of death row prisoners to request a method of execution).
     

    Route 45

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 100%
    92   0   0
    Dec 5, 2015
    14,884
    113
    Indy
    If a doctor made a medical judgment that it would be unsafe for that 10-year-old to carry, much less, give birth to, a child, would anyone (outside of extreme radicals) take issue with ending the pregnancy to save the life of that girl?
    If the law doesn't make exception for that case, and no one seems to have a problem that, then you've got more of an extreme radical problem than you realized.

    With all of the slippery slope arguments regarding gun control on this forum, it's hard to believe that some people can't see what a worrying number of theologically driven extremists really want...

     

    JCSR

    NO STAGE PLAN
    Site Supporter
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    May 11, 2017
    8,971
    133
    Santa Claus
    Women ( not all women) have used sex as a commodity since the beginning of time. There's a pretty good chance that most of us have been a part of such .
     

    jamil

    code ho
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Jul 17, 2011
    60,169
    113
    Gtown-ish
    Both are equally in the wrong, in my world view. But if she values herself so lowly as to give it away outside the commitment of marriage, why would she expect the dude to value her any more?
    If they're both equally wrong, what's the equivalent to "whore" that you guys call the dudes? I haven't heard that term yet. It would be interesting to know.

    I think you guys are holding women to your standards. Or probably more accurately, you're holding them to the standards of your belief system. I'm pretty sure they don't believe that they're devaluing themselves at all. I don't think they think of sex as "giving it away", at least not completely in those terms.

    It's not as if the only reason women have sex at all is for the express enjoyment for the dude. I'm not a woman, so I can't be 101% certain but I'm pretty sure the science is solid that women like to *** too. Women do use sex, but that has little to do with whether they're married or not.

    Women use sex to influence men. Men use money, prestige, power, to influence women. Marriage doesn't matter in that regard. And I'm not saying I think sex outside of marriage is benign. People should reserve sex for someone they have a long term commitment with.

    I just think that calling the women who end up with unwanted pregnancies, whores, is not right. It implies the father has no responsibility at all, and especially, seems as though you guys have utter contempt for the people you think are caught up in sin. It's one thing to joke about it. And I get that. I joke as much as anyone about stuff like that. But the defense I hear for calling them whores isn't that it's just a joke. The contempt looks real to me.
     

    jamil

    code ho
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Jul 17, 2011
    60,169
    113
    Gtown-ish
    Which party endures the most serious consequences? That is the party that should exhibit the most caution

    You don't ride motorcycles, do you? In an accident, the cage driver may be more or entirely at fault, but if you didn't utilize maximum caution you are still just as dead
    That's a cop out. But in reality, that makes the dude even more of an ******* than the woman is a whore, because he's getting his without any regard for the consequences he has helped put on the woman. How much more of an ******* could a person humanly be? "Hey, thanks for the ****, you worthless whore." Yeah. That's an *******. Well. I mean, not like Hitler/Stalin *******, but regular *******, top of the heap.
     

    GodFearinGunTotin

    Super Moderator
    Staff member
    Moderator
    Site Supporter
    Rating - 100%
    1   0   0
    Mar 22, 2011
    50,586
    113
    Mitchell
    If they're both equally wrong, what's the equivalent to "whore" that you guys call the dudes? I haven't heard that term yet. It would be interesting to know.

    I think you guys are holding women to your standards. Or probably more accurately, you're holding them to the standards of your belief system. I'm pretty sure they don't believe that they're devaluing themselves at all. I don't think they think of sex as "giving it away", at least not completely in those terms.

    It's not as if the only reason women have sex at all is for the express enjoyment for the dude. I'm not a woman, so I can't be 101% certain but I'm pretty sure the science is solid that women like to *** too. Women do use sex, but that has little to do with whether they're married or not.

    Women use sex to influence men. Men use money, prestige, power, to influence women. Marriage doesn't matter in that regard. And I'm not saying I think sex outside of marriage is benign. People should reserve sex for someone they have a long term commitment with.

    I just think that calling the women who end up with unwanted pregnancies, whores, is not right. It implies the father has no responsibility at all, and especially, seems as though you guys have utter contempt for the people you think are caught up in sin. It's one thing to joke about it. And I get that. I joke as much as anyone about stuff like that. But the defense I hear for calling them whores isn't that it's just a joke. The contempt looks real to me.
    Man-whore.

    As to the rest of that, I’d be glad to discuss in real life. I simply don’t care to do a point by point response.
     

    jamil

    code ho
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Jul 17, 2011
    60,169
    113
    Gtown-ish
    If the law doesn't make exception for that case, and no one seems to have a problem that, then you've got more of an extreme radical problem than you realized.

    With all of the slippery slope arguments regarding gun control on this forum, it's hard to believe that some people can't see what a worrying number of theologically driven extremists really want...

    There's a rationale that abortion at some point during the pregnancy is immoral. I'm not gonna argue when that point is, but the closest thing we have in this country to a consensus on the whole issue of abortion is that. That not all abortions should be legal. And so the question of where to draw that line seems most appropriate to leave to the states. I'm fine with that.

    There is no rationale, nor no consensus that any governing body can prohibit birth control outright. There may be some legitimate "public health" related concerns that justifies regulating birth control. If Republicans push this they're going to lose a lot of the very needed support they have from independents.

    It is between couples and their own conscience whether they want to prevent pregnancies. Period.
     

    jamil

    code ho
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Jul 17, 2011
    60,169
    113
    Gtown-ish
    My statement was specific to this pic. It was not a blanket state about all women. I stand by it.

    View attachment 209363
    1) So this woman is a whore (someone who trades sex for money or whatever) because she thinks it's no one's business why she might abort a pregnancy. And you stand by that knowing nothing else about the woman other than what the picture objectively reveals.

    2) The ******* in the back holding the "real men support..." sign is basically saying, I support women getting abortions so I can **** them without responsibility. I think if the woman's a whore, that dude should evoke some comment if we're being sincere. Right?

    3) that dude holding the sign is just simping. He ain't gettin' that.
     

    JCSR

    NO STAGE PLAN
    Site Supporter
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    May 11, 2017
    8,971
    133
    Santa Claus
    1) So this woman is a whore (someone who trades sex for money or whatever) because she thinks it's no one's business why she might abort a pregnancy. And you stand by that knowing nothing else about the woman other than what the picture objectively reveals.

    2) The ******* in the back holding the "real men support..." sign is basically saying, I support women getting abortions so I can **** them without responsibility. I think if the woman's a whore, that dude should evoke some comment if we're being sincere. Right?

    3) that dude holding the sign is just simping. He ain't gettin' that.
    download (2).jpg
     

    jamil

    code ho
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Jul 17, 2011
    60,169
    113
    Gtown-ish
    Man-whore.

    As to the rest of that, I’d be glad to discuss in real life. I simply don’t care to do a point by point response.
    Dang it. I meant for that to be 110% instead of 101 to poke some fun at the woman's math.

    ETA: would be a good topic to discuss in person. But I think it would have to be a different venue this time. I think Indiuky has closed his firearms shiop and museum of firearms and history.
     
    Last edited:
    Top Bottom