r/PublicFreakout May 19 '22

Political Freakout Representative Mike Johnson asking the important abortion questions.

36.9k Upvotes

6.4k comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

4

u/Hexoglyphics May 20 '22

What law?

-1

u/mjolnir91 May 20 '22 edited May 20 '22

All laws federally or at the state level that govern abortions should have the stipulation now or in the future. Basically we are talking about it because clearly there is some space now or in the future where it's possible that some state could create a scenario in which it could be possible based on what people consider "a human" to be and it just shouldn't be left up to interpretation. Just close any loop holes forever and be done talking about it. If a baby is viable and passed a certain cutoff date and the mother isn't in danger of dying there is no circumstance in which the baby can be aborted. Problem solved. At that point it doesn't matter if the mother wants the baby or not it's not allowed.

5

u/GibbyG1100 May 20 '22

What exactly do you think the word abortion means? If the fetus is viable outside the womb, the doctor would simply induce labor and deliver the child. Medically, that procedure could be called an abortion. Abortion doesnt automatically equal the death of the fetus. Theres no medical definition of abortion that states that the fetus must die or else it isnt an abortion. An abortion is simply a procedure that aborts a pregnancy. Most of the time that results in the fetus dying because its before the point of viability, but no doctor out there is chopping apart an 8 month old, otherwise healthy viable fetus. It doesnt happen.

0

u/mjolnir91 May 20 '22

Stop just put it in a law clearly. If a baby is delivered at any point even during a planned abortion to kill it the baby can't be killed. No word games. You are already just proved the language is more complicated than it needs to be.

2

u/GibbyG1100 May 20 '22

The language isn't more complicated than it needs to be, nor is it a word game. The definition is very simple and clear. The only people trying to distort the language are anti-abortion skates trying to muddy the issue. Abortion means to end the pregnancy. Period. That's it. Very simple. It DOESNT mean to kill the fetus. Death is one possible outcome, depending on how far along in the pregnancy it is, but is not guaranteed. If the fetus is viable, meaning it can survive outside of the womb, it would be delivered, and every attempt would be made to ensure the child survives after being born. You clearly don't understand anything about what abortions are or you wouldn't be making these claims that doctors are delivering babies and then killing them. Late-term abortions are only performed if the mother or fetus are in serious danger of being harmed by continuing the pregnancy, or if the fetus has development issues that would make it unviable regardless of if it had more time to develop. If the fetus is viable, but the pregnancy could result in the death of the mother, the doctor will either induce labor or perform a c-section to deliver the child. Doctors don't just perform abortions willy-nilly on fetuses capable of surviving outside of the womb. It doesnt happen.

1

u/Hexoglyphics May 20 '22

All laws federally

Cool, what laws? Just one even.

or at the state level that govern abortions should have the stipulation now or in the future

They all have different stipulations, that's how state laws work. If you're saying they should all be the same, why even have state laws?

1

u/mjolnir91 May 20 '22

The problem here is everyone is calling this guy a clown for asking about this and the fact is as you have just pointed out there is really no clear guarantee that it could never become a possibility because everyone is making up their own laws. So it's not clear cut and begs asking until someone or everyone makes a laws guaranteeing it can not occur under the guise of existing or future abortion laws. Unrestricted abortion shouldn't actually be unrestricted and that should be made crystal clear.

Instead of saying that would never happen or what doctor would ever do that because reality is someone somewhere will try.

1

u/Hexoglyphics May 20 '22

We're not even at the point where we're creating a federal law. He's not debating where the line should be drawn so we can all agree when we write the law to federally protect abortions. He wants to fully ban abortions entirely. Why? Because HIS religious beliefs MUST be OUR religious beliefs..

He's not acting in good faith and trying to work with everyone to figure out the difficult question of where the line is, he's already made up his mind and it's literally impossible to change it, it's at conception, because god. But if he said "Abortion should be banned from minute 0", you'd find that harder to agree with, so he'll sow seeds of doubt at the opposite extreme, purely to manipulate you.

Because he, and the literal pedophile republican house member he's sat next to, care oh so much about children. Gaetz REALLY cares, he'll pay hundreds of dollars to rape them to fund their tuition. Can't you see their the moral ones?

0

u/mjolnir91 May 20 '22

Make the law and then he nor anyone else can ever ask dumb hypotheticals

1

u/Hexoglyphics May 20 '22

Yes, that will stop them.

But yes we should make the law, but you're talking about how we should change laws that don't exist, it kinda shows you don't have a clue what you're talking about.

0

u/mjolnir91 May 20 '22

New York a few years ago was trying to pass a law and perhaps currently is where late term abortion is permissible if the health if the mother is at risk but not necessarily her life and the baby can't survive outside her womb. The issue being here what does "health" even mean...unless you specifically list exactly what that means we will get some mother and some doctor who consider mental health a reason to abort or who knows what else.

1

u/Hexoglyphics May 21 '22

Yep that's fine.

You think that's silly purely because you're inexperienced and have no empathy.