ABC News rebuked by pro-life group, asked for correction of abortion claim by debate moderator

[docyabut2]

https://www.foxnews.com/media/abc-news-rebuked-pro-life-group-asked-correction-abortion-claim-debate-moderator

[MrAnderson]

3 minutes ago, docyabut2 said:

https://www.foxnews.com/media/abc-news-rebuked-pro-life-group-asked-correction-abortion-claim-debate-moderator

I can't remember whether Harris answered any questions in relation to abortion. I think she didn't and she dodged the question altogether about whether she will allow late stage abortions.

Edited September 12 by MrAnderson

[Michelle]

Just now, MrAnderson said:

I can't remember whether Harris answered any questions in relation to abortion.

As with most of it she didn't answer that either.

[Setton]

4 minutes ago, docyabut2 said:

https://www.foxnews.com/media/abc-news-rebuked-pro-life-group-asked-correction-abortion-claim-debate-moderator

Nothing in that article or the...ahem..."evidence" provided by the anti-abortion group supports their claims or Trump's.

[MrAnderson]

Just now, Setton said:

Nothing in that article or the...ahem..."evidence" provided by the anti-abortion group supports their claims or Trump's.

Do you remember Harris answering any questions about abortion on this debate? She was asked but nothing was said (I think) from her side.

[Setton]

2 minutes ago, MrAnderson said:

Do you remember Harris answering any questions about abortion on this debate? She was asked but nothing was said (I think) from her side.

She said she supports reinstating to Roe v Wade.

It's in the OP....

[MrAnderson]

12 minutes ago, Setton said:

She said she supports reinstating to Roe v Wade.

It's in the OP....

I know but she dodged everything in relation to the questions made to her by Trump. When they ask you if you support late stage abortions you must be able to say with confidence either yes or no and you should be able to explain why.

[jmccr8]

2 minutes ago, MrAnderson said:

I know but she dodged everything in relation to the questions made to her by Trump. When they ask you if you support late stage abortions you must be able to say with confidence either yes or no and you should be able to explain why.

HI Anderson

I think Roe and Wade was specific in what it covered so yes she said she wanted to re-instate it as is. Seems everyone knew before what it was so what would be the point in  asking other questions about her position when she already made her support clear. 

[Michelle]

11 minutes ago, jmccr8 said:

HI Anderson

I think Roe and Wade was specific in what it covered so yes she said she wanted to re-instate it as is. Seems everyone knew before what it was so what would be the point in  asking other questions about her position when she already made her support clear. 

 Pardon me...Roe vs Wade wasn't a nationwide standard. It was a basis to go on. My county has never allowed abortions. Women have to go to Atlanta to get one. I don't know anywhere in Tennessee to get one. Not saying there isn't a county that allows them I just don't know about them. I know Atlanta is the closest.

Edited September 12 by Michelle

[the13bats]

A womans body is hers to choose what she feels is best for her its not trumps or the governments to decide for the poor little lady who they dont believe can think for herself.

[jmccr8]

5 minutes ago, Michelle said:

 Pardon me...Roe vs Wade wasn't a nationwide standard. It was a basis to go on. My county has never allowed abortions. Women have to go to Atlanta to get one. I don't know anywhere in Tennessee to get one. Not saying there isn't a county that allows them I just don't know about them. I know Atlanta is the closest.

HI Michelle

Not being an American my understanding of the situation based on discussions here was that Roe and Wade was the basis for allowing abortions to exist legally in the country. I did see that when it was struck down that some States became more restrictive and concerns about being incarcerated for getting one. 

My response to Anderson was that Roe and Wade has already been defined so she gave an answer that if read and understood was sufficient to cover the answers to all questions related unless she would have said re-instate and ammend it which she didn't. 

[Michelle]

4 minutes ago, jmccr8 said:

My response to Anderson was that Roe and Wade has already been defined so she gave an answer that if read and understood was sufficient to cover the answers to all questions related unless she would have said re-instate and ammend it which she didn't. 

I think it's better being left to each state. Roe vs Wade was never sufficient.

[Michelle]

This is interesting...

During the 1960s and early 1970s, opposition to abortion was concentrated among members of the political left and the Democratic Party, although feminists within predominately supported legalization. Most liberal Catholics and Mainline Protestants (both of which tended to vote for the Democratic Party) opposed liberalizing laws surrounding abortion while most other Protestants, including evangelicals, supported doing so as a matter of religious liberty, what they saw as a lack of biblical condemnation, and belief in non-intrusive government.^{[22][24][48][49]}

Roe v. Wade - Wikipedia

 

[jmccr8]

Just now, Michelle said:

I think it's better being left to each state. Roe vs Wade was never sufficient.

HI Michelle

Well fortunately it isn't an issue for me but it is for many of your  fellow country women and in my country it is legally accepted in every part of my country equally. Wasn't abortion illegal until Roe and Wade then allowed according to the discretion of each State? 

Removing it on the National level allows individual States to make it illegal and prosecute people even to the extent of going to another State and returning after having one. You are one country that has to have laws on the national interests of the people. I may be wrong but hey it's your kitchen and your the cook I'll just go sit at the table and leave you be. 😄

[+and-then]

1 hour ago, Michelle said:

As with most of it she didn't answer that either.

I doubt she'll do any live interviews before election day, either.  Anyone who would vote for a candidate that doesn't care enough to even explain their stances on issues, is a political party shill.  Nothing more...

[Michelle]

3 minutes ago, jmccr8 said:

Removing it on the National level allows individual States to make it illegal and prosecute people even to the extent of going to another State and returning after having one

That's just fearmongering. The contention is the term limits. That's it.

[+and-then]

2 minutes ago, jmccr8 said:

Wasn't abortion illegal until Roe and Wade then allowed according to the discretion of each State? 

The Roe decision - by nine old men - took the power out of the hands of the State governments and created a one-size for all rule.  We are the United STATES of America.  Our Founders recognized State's rights to be supreme except for limited situations.  Modern America has decayed that premise to its nearly opposite pole where a central government crushes State's rights.  The return of the right of States to make abortion decisions is closer to what the Founders envisioned.  That said, while I support a State government choosing to limit or even to outlaw abortions, I do NOT agree that they should also create penalties for women who leave the State to have it done.  

[Setton]

8 minutes ago, Michelle said:

This is interesting...

During the 1960s and early 1970s, opposition to abortion was concentrated among members of the political left and the Democratic Party, although feminists within predominately supported legalization. Most liberal Catholics and Mainline Protestants (both of which tended to vote for the Democratic Party) opposed liberalizing laws surrounding abortion while most other Protestants, including evangelicals, supported doing so as a matter of religious liberty, what they saw as a lack of biblical condemnation, and belief in non-intrusive government.^{[22][24][48][49]}

Roe v. Wade - Wikipedia

 

Yes, the democratic party has moved forward while the republicans have gone backwards.

That's the point you're trying to make right?

[+Sherapy]

27 minutes ago, and-then said:

I doubt she'll do any live interviews before election day, either.  Anyone who would vote for a candidate that doesn't care enough to even explain their stances on issues, is a political party shill.  Nothing more...

She is asking for another debate, Trump said no. 

Edited September 12 by Sherapy

[jmccr8]

1 hour ago, and-then said:

The Roe decision - by nine old men - took the power out of the hands of the State governments and created a one-size for all rule.  We are the United STATES of America.  Our Founders recognized State's rights to be supreme except for limited situations.  Modern America has decayed that premise to its nearly opposite pole where a central government crushes State's rights.  The return of the right of States to make abortion decisions is closer to what the Founders envisioned.  That said, while I support a State government choosing to limit or even to outlaw abortions, I do NOT agree that they should also create penalties for women who leave the State to have it done.  

HI And Then

So you don't think citizens in all States deserve the same rights across the table, might as well be different countries if you don't all have the same rights and privileges we do in my country. One nation onr people divided as we are. 

[acidhead]

1 hour ago, Sherapy said:

She is asking for another debate, Trump said no. 

He asked for the FOX news debate on September 5. She said no. 

She'll only debate on home turf. 

[+Link of Hyrule]

1 hour ago, acidhead said:

He asked for the FOX news debate on September 5. She said no. 

She'll only debate on home turf. 

Apparently he's chickening out, even though he never agreed to do a third debate. He did float a debate on September 4, Harris chickened out. Of course, I actually said she chickened out of the September 4 debate, and in response I was told so often that she never agreed to debate on September 4 so can't have chickened out. Doesn't the same logic apply now that Trump says no? Why is Trump chickening out but Harris is just fulfilling the commitments her party made for her? 

[Occupational Hubris]

3 hours ago, Michelle said:

That's just fearmongering. The contention is the term limits. That's it.

It's not. Texas is actively suing to to block federal rules that prohibit investigators from viewing the medical records of women who travel out of state to seek abortions where the procedure is legal

[+Sherapy]

1 hour ago, acidhead said:

He asked for the FOX news debate on September 5. She said no. 

She'll only debate on home turf. 

You are in error, look again. 
 

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/trump-harris-second-2024-presidential-debate/

[the13bats]

3 hours ago, Sherapy said:

She is asking for another debate, Trump said no. 

Of course trump chickened out, harris owned him in the first debate from the moment it started until its end, she was stellar trump was his typical self , harris the prosecutor played trump convicted felon like a fiddle.

Trump doesnt want that again.