Congressman declares abortions never necessary to save womans life.

[Spesh]

Republican Congressman Joe Walsh of Illinois said after his Thursday debate against Democratic rival Tammy Duckworth that abortions are never necessary to save a pregnant woman's life, because modern technology has eliminated the risks of childbearing.

Walsh was defending his position that abortion should be outlawed with no exceptions, which is also the Republican Party's official stance on the issue.

"With modern technology and science, you can't find one instance" of a pregnant woman's life being at risk, he told reporters after the debate. "There is no such exception as life of the mother, and as far as health of the mother, same thing." He added that "advances in science and technology" meant that abortion is never necessary for the health of a mother.

Walsh, a freshman Congressman, is currently trailing Duckworth, a veteran of the Iraq War, in the polls.

To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


Wonder why he's losing in the polls. 10 to 1 he questions why he lost the woman voting block after the election.

[Statler Waldorf]

To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


Wonder why he's losing in the polls. 10 to 1 he questions why he lost the woman voting block after the election.

It’s a shame we live in a country where a person has to support murder in order to get a majority of women to vote for him. Kudos Walsh for standing up for what is right.

[Spesh]

It’s a shame we live in a country where a person has to support murder in order to get a majority of women to vote for him. Kudos Walsh for standing up for what is right.

I to applaud his stance on alienating women. Admittedly, I look forward to great laughs when he loses the election and the right starts whining incoherently about how unfair it was and how the poll numbers were really doctored.

[Dolphins9954]

It’s a shame we live in a country where a person has to support murder in order to get a majority of women to vote for him. Kudos Walsh for standing up for what is right.

Hell yeah Pro-Life!!!! We need to stand together and defend life!!! No wars and death penalty too!!! High Five!!!!

[MoFinz]

To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


Wonder why he's losing in the polls. 10 to 1 he questions why he lost the woman voting block after the election.

Just curious, is he factually incorrect? I dont presume to tell women what they can and cant do, but i'd love to know if his stance can be disproven. I've never heard that one before.

[Locke]

Just curious, is he factually incorrect? I dont presume to tell women what they can and cant do, but i'd love to know if his stance can be disproven. I've never heard that one before.

Sounds like he is stating that women never die during childbirth anymore, which is completely false.


To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


According to that study, the U.S. is actually one of the worst at approximately 17 mothers dying during birth out of every 100,000 births. I hate that these politicians lie like no one's business and no one calls them out on it...

[Gonzo]

Sounds like he is stating that women never die during childbirth anymore, which is completely false.


To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


According to that study, the U.S. is actually one of the worst at approximately 17 mothers dying during birth out of every 100,000 births. I hate that these politicians lie like no one's business and no one calls them out on it...

The rate increased to 21 in every 100,000 live births, putting us "behind Western Europe, Canada and Australia and alongside Iran, Hungary and Turkey," but that's another issue...


To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


But abortions are "never necessary" because modern technology has "eliminated the risks of childbirth."

He lied. If he wants to oppose abortion based on his religious beliefs, fine, that's his right and I can respect that, even though I wholeheartedly disagree. But to flat out lie and to have the audacity to try and use science to defend his position...

[Spesh]

Just curious, is he factually incorrect? I dont presume to tell women what they can and cant do, but i'd love to know if his stance can be disproven. I've never heard that one before.

There are medical conditions that exists that threaten a womans ability to survive a child birth. Declaring "none such exist" is factually incorrect. Medical professionals will undoubtedly side against him.

Medical experts note that there are some cases where the only option in the case of complications sustained during pregnancy is to abort the foetus. PubMed Health, the online medical library funded by the National Center for Biotechnology Information
To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
are life-threatening to the mother. "The developing cells must be removed to save the mother's life," the resource states.

To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


Another article about the remarks but has an example of life threatening conditions.

[KTOWNFINFAN]

There are medical conditions that exists that threaten a womans ability to survive a child birth. Declaring "none such exist" is factually incorrect. Medical professionals will undoubtedly side against him.




To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


Another article about the remarks but has an example of life threatening conditions.

People die when having their tonsels and appendix removed as well, any kind of surgery presents SOME risk. But to use the safety of the mother as a reason to support abortion is not being realistic. Most mothers who are told there is complications and there is a 50% chance you won't survive (which is WAAAAY higher than any I have heard of) would still be willing to take the chance to save their child. Just like fathers and mothers have put their lives in danger when wild animals, armed robberies, machinery, or other forces are threating their children.

[TheWalrus]

People die when having their tonsels and appendix removed as well, any kind of surgery presents SOME risk. But to use the safety of the mother as a reason to support abortion is not being realistic. Most mothers who are told there is complications and there is a 50% chance you won't survive (which is WAAAAY higher than any I have heard of) would still be willing to take the chance to save their child. Just like fathers and mothers have put their lives in danger when wild animals, armed robberies, machinery, or other forces are threating their children.

Research "ectopic pregnancy," then come back and tell me how that's at all similar to a parent protecting their child from a lion.