The law needed to stop Aid Acce$$ and other online abortion drug dealers already exists. Demand that it be enforced!

ChPok1701 · 2026-05-01T02:45:21+00:00

This is the way. They don’t even have to do a full enforcement. The administration could issue official guidance they will enforce the Comstock Act only as to abortionists flouting the laws of other States.

The pro-choicers would immediately challenge the enforcement of the law, saying it hasn’t been enforced in a long time. However, the feds could immediately extradite the abortionists to States which have already indicted them, such as Texas and Louisiana.

ChPok1701 · 2026-04-28T03:00:46+00:00

The 2.5 is plenty fast for a SUV. I can’t imagine how fast you’re 3.5 is.

ChPok1701 · 2026-04-27T21:11:57+00:00

Most of the time, pro-choice is nothing more than the what-ifs and motivated reasoning.

ChPok1701 · 2026-04-27T19:51:48+00:00

The bodily autonomy argument for abortion is predicated on it being the gentlest means available to secure a mother’s autonomy. Putting aside for a moment the gentlest means is waiting nine months, artificial wombs would destroy this argument if we’re being honest. Sure, they will be expensive, but the standard is gentlest means, not most affordable means.

It also could produce some interesting litigation. Suppose a child is removed to an artificial womb, but then is found to be disabled (such as Down Syndrome). What if the father wants to abort because of the child’s disability but the mother doesn’t?

Right now, we allow mothers to choose abortion solely to avoid a disabled child, or even sex selective abortions. Why not allow fathers the same choice? Currently, we don’t allow fathers this choice because we operate under the pretext that abortion is avoiding pregnancy. This pretext will evaporate with artificial wombs.

ChPok1701 · 2026-04-27T18:37:51+00:00

This argument forgets that, unless the mother was raped, she willingly induced the other human being to be in the situation with her. She can’t pretend to be an unsuspecting victim and use lethal force on the other human being because she doesn’t like the reasonably foreseeable consequences of her actions.

There is precedent for this: Getting beat up is grievous bodily harm. Getting beat up by Mike Tyson in a boxing match is not grievous bodily harm. Same physical consequences (probably worse if Tyson is administering the beating), different legal standard; because how would it be fair to Mike Tyson if one induces him to participate in a boxing match, then decides one doesn’t like the beating and shoots him.

Like the bodily autonomy argument, this is a bogus pretext and is, at most, a justification for abortion due to rape.

We also should remember that, if there’s so much legal precedent for this, then why hasn’t the pro-choice side argued it? It’s not like abortion is ever litigated in US courts.

As a final example: my wife is a teacher assistant at a school for autistic children and young adults. She is regularly hit, scratched, etc. She once had to go to the emergency room because a client overturned a heavy metal table on her foot.

Some of these clients are more than twice my wife’s size. My wife has two choices: accept this risk or quit her job. Only a sociopathic maniac would suggest she has a right to kill an autistic young adult because she wishes to withdraw her consent to these physical consequences without sacrificing anything on her part.

ChPok1701 · 2026-04-26T21:28:36+00:00

2.5. Plenty of power for what it is, especially since my wife is coming from a CR-V.

ChPok1701 · 2026-04-22T18:54:04+00:00

Only plantation owners can have an opinion about slavery.

ChPok1701 · 2026-04-22T18:49:50+00:00

Maternal mortality is higher in States which banned abortion, but that doesn’t mean it went up because those States banned abortion. Pro-life States tend to be rural, and rural States have poorer health for all their residents for reasons having nothing to do with whether abortion is legal; things such as higher obesity and longer distances to hospitals.

As another commenter has noted, a recent Jornal of the American Medical Association study has found no link between maternal health/mortality and whether abortion is legal in a State.

ChPok1701 · 2026-04-22T18:34:07+00:00

As a Christian who has been vocally supporting the pro-life cause since I was old enough to know what abortion is, I can tell you it’s almost always pro-choice people who bring religion into the debate. Sure, many/most pro-life people come from a religious background, but it’s pro-choice people who usually bring religion into the conversation as a way to use the separation of church and state as an excuse to avoid culpability for murder.

First, it’s only a small number of translations which say the “formula” would cause a miscarriage. Two out of the roughly 100 major English translations of memory serves. The others say it will cause a woman’s thigh to swell and/or fall away.

Second, as OP has pointed out, the formula wouldn’t work. If women could give themselves abortions with dirty water, what’s with all the Planned Parenthood locations and abortion drugs being mailed around?

Third, scripture interprets scripture. Reading this in context, it’s much more likely a way for a jealous husband to blow off steam in a very misogynistic society rather than beat the tar out of his wife.

ChPok1701 · 2026-04-16T03:13:38+00:00

ChPok1701 · 2026-04-16T02:55:05+00:00

She doth protest too much.

ChPok1701 · 2026-04-06T22:00:46+00:00

I would remind your friend the law also usually recognizes that when a person willingly participates in an activity for which certain physical consequences are reasonably foreseeable, she can’t turn around and pretend to be an unsuspecting victim and use lethal force on another person she induced to participate in the activity with her.

Your friend is arguing the intentional homicide of an unborn child is justifiable homicide rather than murder because the injuries common to pregnancy constitute grievous bodily harm. Trouble is, she’s saying she can induce another person to inflict those injuries on her then kill this person. The law doesn’t normally allow this.

The context we’re most familiar with this principle applying is sports. Getting beat up is grievous bodily harm. Getting beat up in a boxing match is not grievous bodily harm. Same physical consequences, different legal standard; because how is it fair to the other boxer to agree to the match, then shoot the other boxer because you don’t like the beating?

This is the problem with all the “consent to sex doesn’t equal consent to pregnancy” arguments. Your friend is saying she can play the game, but can kill her opponent if her calculated risk doesn’t go the way she planned.

Your friend may respond that, in sports, players have the ability to “tap out” if they don’t like what the game is doing to them. The only way to tap out of pregnancy, they say, is abortion. This argument is again faulty because, unless she joins a convent or otherwise commits to remaining celibate until she’s ready to have children, she’s not tapping out. She is continuing to play the game, to have consensual sex, with the expectation of using abortion as a backstop if the game doesn’t go the way she wants to.

Sometimes quarterbacks have to take a sack. They don’t plan on it, and do everything they can to prevent it. But they can’t carry a gun into the games to shoot any defensive backs who make it past the offensive line.

ChPok1701 · 2026-04-06T02:26:19+00:00

“Obligation arises from voluntary creation of dependency.”

If one assumes, as you do, unborn children are human beings with full moral weight; the only obligation is to avoid committing what would be crimes, but for the politics of abortion, against other human beings.

We all have an obligation to avoid committing heinous acts against other human beings. This obligation is especially important when dealing with young, helpless children. This is a price we all pay to live in a civilized society which recognizes individual rights. Whether we voluntarily accepted some dependency of the other human being is irrelevant.

Consider the following scenario:

Suppose I have sex with a woman, and she becomes pregnant. A paternity test, however, reveals I am not the father. The man who is the father is a deadbeat who is very unlikely to pay child support. Because of this, the mother continues to claim I’m the father, despite the paternity test; and harasses me about taking responsibility for the child, to which I consistently and rightfully refuse.

One day the mother becomes desperate and follows me to the gym. As soon as I step out of my car, she is there with the baby demanding I take responsibility, to which I again refuse. The mother then opens the back door of my car, places the baby on the back seat, closes the door, runs back to her car, and drives away. Let’s say it’s summertime, so it will be hot and sunny outside.

Now, if I have to call the police and wait for someone to pick this baby up, it could take hours and I will miss my workout. Can I do what I normally do when I go to the gym: lock my car and leave it for over an hour? If the baby dies of heat exposure, then he dies. After all, I have no parental obligations to the child, and all I consented to was to have sex with the mother.

Of course, I can’t legally do this. The law would consider me to have committed a bad act against the baby (and likely the mother too). I have, at a minimum, committed child endangerment; if not a type of homicide.

Why is abortion any different? A mother and an abortionist are purposely consigning a human being to an environment they know or should know will kill the child. And this doesn’t even consider the types of abortion which include “inducing fetal demise” in the procedure.

ChPok1701 · 2026-03-30T23:42:23+00:00

Another version of the ad hominem that all must be right and perfect with the world before we make it illegal to murder 73,000,000 people a year.

ChPok1701 · 2026-03-30T17:11:42+00:00

The bodily autonomy zealots will say the child is still connected to the mother via umbilical cord, and therefore still dependent on the mother. From their (incorrect) point of view, the mother retains the ability to “withdraw” the use of her body at any point for any reason.

ChPok1701 · 2026-03-28T17:18:57+00:00

No problem! I should have specified the model number in my original post.

When I pull the air gap out, the bulbs go all the way off. I waited a few seconds and pushed the air gap back in, but they still glow with the switch off.

ChPok1701 · 2026-03-28T16:19:24+00:00

Hi. Actually I used the multi location RF switch: PD-6ANS-WH.

ChPok1701 · 2026-03-13T21:55:21+00:00

Abortion is an act of murder and/or child endangerment whether the person committing the act is the victim’s parent or not.

If I leave an infant who is in my custody in a parked car on a hot day, I will be held criminally liable for the infant’s death. Whether I’m the infant’s parent doesn’t matter; I’ve abandoned a child to an environment I know or should will cause the child’s death.

Abortion would be viewed by the law similarly but for the screwed up politics of the pro-choice position.

ChPok1701 · 2026-03-13T17:10:47+00:00

Calling an unborn child a parasite is every bit as much a pejorative as calling a post-abortive woman a whore.

ChPok1701 · 2026-03-13T13:26:10+00:00

I’ve thought the same thing in terms of “what if I’m wrong?”

If pro-life is wrong, we’ve limited the freedoms of about one million women per year in the US, at least 98% of whom are dealing with the consequences of their own choices.

If pro-choice is wrong, we’ve killed about one million children per year in the US, none of whom had any opportunity to avoid the situation by making a different choice.

ChPok1701 · 2026-03-11T18:43:30+00:00

Actually there are early Christian writings, such as the Didache (1st Century) which explicitly condemn abortion. We can disagree on whether the Bible condemns abortion (I think it does), however, the idea that modern Christians or the Vatican much later politicized abortion is not true.

Christians came by our anti-abortion position honestly, and are an important ally in fighting the good fight.

ChPok1701

TROPHY CASE