4 ms·

Why keep out the context included in that bbc article? > Under current Virginia law, third-trimester abortions are only permitted if the risk to the mother's l

Why keep out the context included in that bbc article? > Under current Virginia law, third-trimester abortions are only permitted if the risk to the mother's life is "substantial and irremediable" - language that Democrats wanted removed. > The Democratic bill sought to allow for late-term abortions if the mother's physical or mental safety were at risk . > The procedure would also have required sign-off by only one doctor, rather than the three required under existing law. This isn't "let anyone have an abortion at any time", like you're implying.

freedomben 3y ago
> This isn't "let anyone have an abortion at any time", like you're implying. I implied nothing of the sort. I'm disappointed that you inferred that, and that tells me that I could do better in the future (although I'm not entirely sure how, see below), but it's still on you for making assumptions about what you think I believe based on my comment. If you read my entire comment you'll see stuff like: > Individual people often have considerable more nuance, but that nuance is not allowed in the political discussions in both major parties. Please, show me where a major Democratic party discussion has taken place where they drew a line. I've shown you one already. > On the left, if you try to draw a line at some point, if you are a man, you will be dismissed immediately and told that you have no right to tell women what to do with their bodies. Either gender, you will quickly end up in a position where you are trying to get between a woman and her doctor and trying to have the government make medical decisions. And that's the most charitable take they will have for you. Sometimes it can get much, much worse. Have you really never seen this?
- baseballdork 3y ago
  > I implied nothing of the sort. You're right, you outright stated it, instead of implying it: > On the other side you argue for no restrictions, typically until the day before birth. > Please, show me where a major Democratic party discussion has taken place where they drew a line. I've shown you one already. I'm not sure what this is supposed to mean. You just provided a link to a bbc article where the democrats draw a line.
  - freedomben 3y ago
    > You're right, you outright stated it, instead of implying it: >> On the other side you argue for no restrictions, typically until the day before birth. Thank you, fair enough. I didn't intend for the language to be that harsh/hyperbolic, but reading it again as you pointed out it certainly did come out that way. I withdraw the statement. My anecdotal experience discussing this has mostly been as I said, but that cannot be fairly extrapolated and applied so broadly. (I would still standby that IME there are plenty of extremists on both sides in the US though. Though there's probably some selection bias at play here because the extremists are probably more likely to discuss it in the first place)

freedomben 3y ago

> This isn't "let anyone have an abortion at any time", like you're implying. I implied nothing of the sort. I'm disappointed that you inferred that, and that tells me that I could do better in the future (although I'm not entirely sure how, see below), but it's still on you for making assumptions about what you think I believe based on my comment. If you read my entire comment you'll see stuff like: > Individual people often have considerable more nuance, but that nuance is not allowed in the political discussions in both major parties. Please, show me where a major Democratic party discussion has taken place where they drew a line. I've shown you one already. > On the left, if you try to draw a line at some point, if you are a man, you will be dismissed immediately and told that you have no right to tell women what to do with their bodies. Either gender, you will quickly end up in a position where you are trying to get between a woman and her doctor and trying to have the government make medical decisions. And that's the most charitable take they will have for you. Sometimes it can get much, much worse. Have you really never seen this?

baseballdork 3y ago
> I implied nothing of the sort. You're right, you outright stated it, instead of implying it: > On the other side you argue for no restrictions, typically until the day before birth. > Please, show me where a major Democratic party discussion has taken place where they drew a line. I've shown you one already. I'm not sure what this is supposed to mean. You just provided a link to a bbc article where the democrats draw a line.
- freedomben 3y ago
  > You're right, you outright stated it, instead of implying it: >> On the other side you argue for no restrictions, typically until the day before birth. Thank you, fair enough. I didn't intend for the language to be that harsh/hyperbolic, but reading it again as you pointed out it certainly did come out that way. I withdraw the statement. My anecdotal experience discussing this has mostly been as I said, but that cannot be fairly extrapolated and applied so broadly. (I would still standby that IME there are plenty of extremists on both sides in the US though. Though there's probably some selection bias at play here because the extremists are probably more likely to discuss it in the first place)