Culvercreek hunt club
-
Posts
15866 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
97
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Hunting New York - NY Hunting, Deer, Bow Hunting, Fishing, Trapping, Predator News and Forums
Media Demo
Links
Calendar
Store
Everything posted by Culvercreek hunt club
-
More laws by Cuomo
Culvercreek hunt club replied to sbuff's topic in Gun and Hunting Laws and Politics Discussions
He is doing what the folks that elected him want him to do or at least don't mind what he is doing. But we aren't a democracy. Far from it actually. The constitution and amendments were set up to avoid what a true democracy can give you---rule by a majority at the expense of the minority. Seems like we trip over ourselves to protect the rights and interests of minorities in this Country and State unless it doesn't fit the left's narrative. -
did I sin?
Culvercreek hunt club replied to Robhuntandfish's topic in Guns and Rifles and Discussions
But it is still a bigger PITA than it use to be. Use to be a a little fondling and staring and then the exchange of cash and you both go about your own ways. Wait are we still talking about gun sales? -
did I sin?
Culvercreek hunt club replied to Robhuntandfish's topic in Guns and Rifles and Discussions
I have more guns than I need, but I need more guns than I have..... I have a few that I have never squeezed the trigger on. They were something I wanted or the deal was too good to pass up. I think I have only sold 4 guns in my life. 2 of them I was offered more than I thought they were worth so I had to. -
More laws by Cuomo
Culvercreek hunt club replied to sbuff's topic in Gun and Hunting Laws and Politics Discussions
Does that mean you will be texting me back again? lol -
More laws by Cuomo
Culvercreek hunt club replied to sbuff's topic in Gun and Hunting Laws and Politics Discussions
Because there are many many Republicans that have donors and constituents that benefit from illegal immigration. Don't let them sell you snake oil. They never really pushed it because they didn't want it through. They didn't want to vote for it and didn't want anyone to see them vote against it. NOW they have the perfect stage to stand up and beat their chest and say how badly we need it. All the while knowing it will never happen. Let's face it. Even if Trump were to do this by declaring national emergency it likely would get held up in courts by some Liberal Federal Judge. But let's say none of them did that. We still aren't going to see the wall before the 2020 election. It is less than 2 years out. There will not be enough time to design, acquire land through eminent domain, let contracts and start construction in that time frame. I just don't see it happening. Maybe if Trump had done it in his first 6 months in office it could have been pulled off. -
Ok, What would that be medically where the baby couldn't be brought out alive with equal or less danger to the Mother. There very well may be cases, I am asking and not one has an answer. If you are killing the baby and then inducing, isn't that basically giving birth? There are not a lot of states that allow this and in some that do it is stated as risk to life or physical health of the woman. Not just health. I have seen number of 12,000 to 30,000 late term abortions speculated but they said reporting is voluntary and many sates don't report the numbers. NY is one.
-
Thanksgiving is the 28th this year. There will be two full weekends before thanksgiving weekend. and Thanksgiving is always the 4th Thursday in November.
-
Regular - Deer & Bear 23 days long beginning the third Saturday of November.
-
From what I have read there are two main procedures that are used for third trimester abortions. (C-section is almost never used). I am not going to post the step by step of the procedures becasue it is pretty graphic. I'll leave it to anyone that wants to know to Google it on their own. Induction Abortion: Dilation and Extraction:
-
I'm not a Jew and the holocaust still bothered me and I can voice that i believe it to be immoral and evil. I don't get the "men shouldn't have an opinion" stance. I am pretty sure that the mother's situation involved a man at some point. When the woman want to terminate the pregnancy it is a woman's issue and the man is not considered. If the woman decides to keep the child by her own decision the man certainly will be involved then (child support, garnish or dodging the collection). The whole situation and law just sucks in my opinion. I know Steve863 and I have asked this prior in this thread but no one has answered our question either. What medical condition in the last trimester of a pregnancy could be deemed as a hazard to the life and health of the mother where the procedure of actually delivering a live baby is any different than the C-section or induction that would be used as part of the abortion. As far as I can find any of the abortions in the last trimester, especially very late would involve either induction of labor or a c-section to remove the dead baby. The same process to have the baby come out live. SO where is the benefit to the life or health of the mother?
-
With the protecting "health" of the mother whether the fetus is viable or not will never be an issue. It can always be approved based on the lower threshold.
-
I was with you except for the bold. when you say culture of abuse it seems to infer that the abuse is the norm rather than the exception. I don't believe that. I will buy the culture of cover up.
-
Gillette, Hold My Beer!
Culvercreek hunt club replied to DirtTime's topic in Gun and Hunting Laws and Politics Discussions
Boy Scouts pressured to allow girls in. Rochester NY just had a new Troop form. Guess what. All girls Boy Scout Troop. Boys not allowed. Wrap your head around that. -
I heard the Arch bishop make a statement that excommunicating should not be used as a weapon. I guess I don't get that. It wouldn't be a weapon, it would be done based on the actions that were taken. Most would call is a consequence. I thought that procuring an abortion was instant grounds for excommunication. Sure doesn't seem like a stretch to me but I don't practice anymore since I have had my own issues with the Catholic church.
-
What was the need for this change? If a woman did not want the baby it was legal In the first 24 weeks. What was the need for this abomination?
-
can't shoot off of or have a loaded gun on one. Just like an ATV/UTV
-
in bold. Let's say the late term pregnancy was a a risk to the mother' life or health. (as per the law now). I agree with what you said in bold. to abort that late term it would be killing the baby and either inducing labor to have a still birth or a c-section to remove it. Explain to me how either of those procedures was any less of a risk to the mother whether the child was alive or dead? It's the same procedure isn't it? If that is truly the case that it is no different in either instance then the only variable is that the mother just wants the baby dead with the abortion scenario. No?
-
Ok. A woman walks into a doctors office and says that the pregnancy is causing her too much back pain and she can't deal with it any longer. By the new law that would meet the requirements of the law to conduct the abortion. No? How about the Toximea I mentioned earlier. 38 weeks in and the woman wants to abort because of her "health" condition. It is legal now by the law. No? I don't see what the doctor thinks or believes as even being relevant in many of these scenarios. The lawmakers must believe that the law needed to be written o give the woman the ability to basically want it on demand (meaning based on what she wants and not needing a doctor to give the green light). If not they would have left the working that the woman's life was in danger. I would think. Virgil, I know we have been on opposite side of some issues over the years but you are always one that can at least have a conversation about it. Thank you.
-
That's why so many shop for doctors to write scripts that they don't need. You say they don't have the freedom to make illegal or unethical decisions. That is the point exactly. This is no longer illegal or unethical in the State of NY. SO they wouldn't be.
-
Virgil, The procedure is complex and it sure would have massive amounts of documentation becasue I am sure it will involve a hospital stay. BUT the trigger to the entire process is the health care professional's opinion about the mother's view of her health as well as document-able things like Say it's a case of toxemia developed just before a due date. Many times that would trigger an induction of labor to deliver the baby, even if premature. This can happen in 1 out of 10 pregnancies and usually after 20 weeks. Under the "health" clause of this law it would be justification for an abortion. I don't even know how a professional could refuse the mother if the justification was mental or emotional health. I know we can sit here an say "they are professionals, they take an oath, they would never push this over a line" But thin about how many Dr.'s wrote scripts for opiates that may not have been needed. You can shop a Doctor to find one that will do it.
-
I think you are reading him wrong. I think he is talking about shopping for a Dr. that will give justification for the procedure. Not one that will do it out of the back seat of his car. The triggering clause for this to happen after 24 weeks (and right up until he actual birth) is that the procedure is needed to protect the mothers life or health. If you shop doctors there will be some of the "opinion" that health could mean many things. It is just their professional opinion that is needed.
-
Even if they did investigate I have no idea what they would charge someone with since, as part of this law, abortion was removed from all aspect of criminal charges. Since the legal definition of a person was changed to be born and alive not of the abortions (right to wrong) can be prosecuted under these criminal statutes.
-
I totally understand who will be doing them. My issue is the protect the "health" of the mother part. This is not to protect her life in this part becasue that is specifically noted separately. So what is the definition of protection her health in you view?
