The PokéCommunity Forums

The PokéCommunity Forums (https://www.pokecommunity.com/index.php)
-   Off-Topic (https://www.pokecommunity.com/forumdisplay.php?f=23)
-   -   Serious Alabama passes strictest abortion law in the United States (https://www.pokecommunity.com/showthread.php?t=421117)

Her May 14th, 2019 8:27 PM

Alabama passes strictest abortion law in the United States
 
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2019/may/14/abortion-bill-alabama-passes-ban-six-weeks-us-no-exemptions-vote-latest

Quote:

Alabama’s Republican-controlled state senate passed a bill Tuesday to outlaw abortion, making it a crime to perform the procedure at any stage of pregnancy.

The strictest-in-the-nation abortion ban allows an exception only when the woman’s health is at serious risk, and sets up a legal battle that supporters hope will lead to the supreme court overturning its landmark ruling that legalized abortion nationwide.

The measure contains no exception for rape and incest, after lawmakers voted down an amendment Tuesday that would have added such an exception.

The legislation, which passed by a vote of 25-6, makes it a class A felony for a doctor to perform an abortion, punishable by 10 to 99 years in prison. Women would not face criminal penalties for getting an abortion.

It goes further than any other state has to restrict abortion. Other states, including neighboring Georgia, have instituted bans on abortion after about six weeks into pregnancy.

The vote came after a battle broke out over whether to allow legal abortions for women who become pregnant due to rape or incest, an issue that divided Republicans who otherwise supported outlawing abortion.

Last week, chaos erupted on the floor when Republican leaders stripped out the rape exception without a roll call vote, leading the final vote to be postponed. It got a full vote on Tuesday, but ultimately failed.


Which states are seeking to make abortion illegal and who is behind it?
Read more
Lawmakers approved the legislation after a debate that stretched more than four hours, where minority Democrats introduced a slew of amendments in an attempt to block it.

“You don’t have to raise that child. You don’t have to carry that child. You don’t have to provide for that child. You don’t have to do anything for that child, but yet you want to make the decision for that woman,” the state senator Vivian Davis Figures told the bill’s proponents.

She introduced amendments that would require the state to expand Medicaid, force legislators who vote for the measure to pay the state’s legal bills, or make it a crime for men to get vasectomies. All failed.

Figures questioned the backers’ resistance to adding an exception for rape and incest. “Do you know what it’s like to be raped?” she said. “Why would you not want a woman to at least have that exception for such a horrific act?”

The bill has already passed the house. It must now be signed by the state’s governor, Kay Ivey.

The legislation is poised for an immediate legal challenge and to be overturned at least by the lower courts.
more in link

Alabama has passed the first realistic threat to Roe vs. Wade, via designing an overtly draconian law crafted solely to get booted up to the Supreme Court. What do you think?

EnglishALT May 14th, 2019 8:36 PM

Good preview of a post Roe v Wade US, the states will decide how far they want their abortion laws to go and the people will either support such a thing or vote the lawmakers out.

professor plum May 14th, 2019 9:00 PM

This is embarrassing for the state of Alabama. If a woman wants to terminate her pregnancy enough, she’ll do it through whatever means necessary. God forbid it occurs in a safe, controlled environment, right?

gimmepie May 14th, 2019 10:00 PM

I generally don't consider myself either pro-life or pro-choice, I believe that abortion should absolutely be well-regulated and not treated as a "contraceptive" option, but I think there are definitely times when it becomes a potentially valid option. I'm okay with the existence of a bill in this manner that creates heavier regulation - I am not okay with the total lack of nuance and flexibility in the bill.

Sothis May 14th, 2019 10:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by erik destler (Post 10019129)
This is embarrassing for the state of Alabama. If a woman wants to terminate her pregnancy enough, she’ll do it through whatever means necessary. God forbid it occurs in a safe, controlled environment, right?

Yeah, this will only lead to more "back alley" abortions and preventable deaths/health issues.
Also you can tell these laws are made by people who have no idea how women's bodies work. Periods are not always definite, it may take more than 6 weeks to find out if you are pregnant. I myself have PCOS so I haven't had a period in a year but I'm not pregnant, it's just my body.

Emilia May 14th, 2019 11:32 PM

Personally, I think something like this shouldn't be up to politicians. It should be up to the pregnant woman if she wants to get an abortion or not. It's their choice.
I definitely agree that life is precious and such but if people are gonna worry about that then just make birth control and such easier to get, promote people to use it. Or y'know.. don't have intercourse at all if you don't want a kid, but that would be waaay too much to ask people.. -_-

Sothis May 15th, 2019 12:10 AM

Yeah, the politicians making this do have the same experiences as the women who are likely seeking the abortion. Also I think proper sex ed in schools and more access to contraceptives and making them more available would help but, being blunt, there are unfortunate a lot of people out there who see women as baby making machines.

Tsutarja May 15th, 2019 3:10 AM

I can't wait to see the lawsuits about this in federal court, and I'm sure that and competent judge would overturn this if it does get challenged.

However, it's ultimately the president's job to uphold federal decisions above state decisions, which I do not foresee the current executive branch holding these up.

EnglishALT May 15th, 2019 3:41 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tsutarja (Post 10019228)
I can't wait to see the lawsuits about this in federal court, and I'm sure that and competent judge would overturn this if it does get challenged.

However, it's ultimately the president's job to uphold federal decisions above state decisions, which I do not foresee the current executive branch holding these up.

It's not entirely unheard of for an administration to not defend a law they disagree with in court. Obama did it with the Defense of Marriage Act in 2011, and Trump did it with Obamacare in 2017. That all being said this seems to be heading to the Supreme Court one way or another.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Marth (Post 10019154)
Yeah, this will only lead to more "back alley" abortions and preventable deaths/health issues.
Also you can tell these laws are made by people who have no idea how women's bodies work. Periods are not always definite, it may take more than 6 weeks to find out if you are pregnant. I myself have PCOS so I haven't had a period in a year but I'm not pregnant, it's just my body.

Just to note, the bill was sponsored in the lower chamber by Representative Terri Collins, and if signed, will be signed by Governor Kay Ivey. So it's not like the bill is being written and passed by only men.

Nah May 15th, 2019 5:25 AM

Trump has outright said that he wants to see Roe v. Wade overturned and has deliberately appointed justices that are anti-abortion, so I really doubt that he'll do anything other than defend the states passing these sorts of laws.

Given the composition of the current Supreme Court, I'm not optimistic about the direction this is all going.

Miss Wendighost May 15th, 2019 6:22 AM

This wouldn't survive a challenge in court. It seems that the law as it currently is in the state, it would violate the ruling of Roe V. Wade. If anything is to be said of the current state of the Supreme Court, I don't see it going in a positive direction.

Sothis May 16th, 2019 1:08 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by EnglishALT (Post 10019235)


Just to note, the bill was sponsored in the lower chamber by Representative Terri Collins, and if signed, will be signed by Governor Kay Ivey. So it's not like the bill is being written and passed by only men.

I didn't mention men, I just said people, because sadly there are a lot of women out there who hate themselves. I mean, can they not put them themselves in another persons shoes and empathize with fellow women?

Maedar May 16th, 2019 7:39 AM

Here, Pat Robinson's take on it:

https://www.rawstory.com/2019/05/this-onell-lose-even-christian-fundamentalist-pat-robertson-is-against-alabamas-extreme-anti-abortion-bill/

Yep, even he says this one goes too far.

moon May 16th, 2019 7:55 AM

I guess in Alabama they look down on sex before marriage, and marriage means that the woman agrees to become a baby making machine? Since, you know, no birth control measure sans abstaining or sterilization is 100% effective.

It's depressing to see how social development goes backwards in some parts of the world.

pastelspectre May 16th, 2019 1:40 PM

catch me uhhh ashamed to live here. dont get me wrong i was ashamed to live here before but now i am even more so.

i honestly think this is a horrible decision. women are just going to resort to back alley ways of abortion and it's going to cause so much chaos everywhere. women have the right to do what they want with their bodies. i'm so disgusted that this bill managed to get passed.

then again alabama seems to be full of conservatives and it's in the bible belt, so..

Sirfetch’d May 16th, 2019 1:41 PM

I really am ashamed of my state. We cannot even afford to take care of the children that we already have and rank 50th in education. This has nothing to do with caring about unborn babies but the men who run this state just want to have complete power over women. It's disgusting. Abortion is a fucking right and it is being yanked away in so many states by old white men.

Palamon May 16th, 2019 5:07 PM

This is absolutely appalling and disgusting. It's not up to the government what a woman wants/does w/her body. It's a woman's choice if she wants to carry a baby or not. What's worse is that more states are trying to ban abortion or already have. Why the fuck should cishet rich white men get to decide abortion isn't allowed? This is literally a violation of human rights.

Hermione Granger May 16th, 2019 6:30 PM

To be frank abortion has taught irresponsibility, women should know having unprotected sex can lead to pregnancy. If said women didn't want a child or couldn't afford having a child then why are they having sex in the first place? Mainly because even if your using protection it could fail, so why take the risk? The only exception to me is if it is rape, incest, or a legit threat to a womens physical health. Also I think we need to try to mandate some sort of birth control measure.

I also don't get the my body arguments when that developing human being is not your body, but somebody elses even if it is in a womens womb.

If I was a governor of a state I would definitely be demanding sex-ed courses be mandatory in school for all students and ensure that birth control was reachable by all women in a aid to attempt to prevent unwanted pregnancies, but I would also put out there that not having sex is the best form of birth control that there is.

Would I go out of the way to insult a women who had a abortion? No. I am actually a christian, but I wouldn't dislike anyone for a mistake an women made. I know some religions despise birth control, but I don't know why as I don't see it as being against a religion.

As for this bill it went to far because it didn't include exceptions for rape, incest, or physical health for a women.

While some of you support abortion, I simply can't for the reasons I said above minus my exceptions. That is my opinion on this matter, and while not all of you will agree with my thoughts I think women need to learn to take measures to not risk pregnancy.

CodeHelmet May 16th, 2019 6:56 PM

I'm Libertarian so the Libertarian in me says that Government needs to just get the hell out of the way when it comes to issues such as this. That said, I have a few statements I'd like to get off my chest. Firstly, Abortion is not explicitly mentioned in the USA Constitution so when Elected officials or anyone says that its a "Constitutional Right" are either lying or are blatantly ignorant. Secondly, the biggest provider of Abortions is Planned Parenthood. Rather ironic name when you think about it since the name implies support and advice on reproducing and not doing the exact opposite(which is what Abortion is). Third, one of the root causes of this whole debate that doesn't get enough attention is the $$$$$$$$$$$$$. Planned Parenthood gets gobs of Federal and State cash to run their operations, some of which they funnel back into Lobbyists and Elected Officials to keep the $$$$$ train coming. I don't know about you but that reeks of Corruption(Taxpayer funded may I add). Four, the bill that Alabama passed went over the line because it left little time(6 weeks? Fuck that... even the Catholic in me knows that's too short) or flexibility with respect to exceptions. I know that if I were female and I was raped that I would not want the baby as it would give me a daily reminder of what happened to me.

Maedar May 17th, 2019 3:59 AM

Has anyone been watching the polls?

Even among Evangelicals, support for this law does not even exceed 30%.

IMOHO, this will only hurt the Republican Party. Badly.

Watch:

https://www.rawstory.com/2019/05/gop-extremism-is-scaring-the-hell-out-of-americans-msnbcs-morning-joe-drops-the-hammer-on-former-party/?utm_source=push_notifications

Edit: Btw, speaking of Evangelicals, one guy who supports this bill gave what is, IMOHO, the lamest pro-life argument I have EVER heard:

https://www.rawstory.com/2019/05/twitter-eviscerates-christian-blogger-for-his-idiotic-argument-why-12-year-old-rape-victims-shouldnt-be-allowed-abortions/

professor plum May 17th, 2019 6:53 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Paige (Post 10020026)
To be frank abortion has taught irresponsibility, women should know having unprotected sex can lead to pregnancy.

Irresponsibility?! Why do you say that?
Quote:

If said women didn't want a child or couldn't afford having a child then why are they having sex in the first place? Mainly because even if your using protection it could fail, so why take the risk?
Come now. It's 2019. Sex between two consenting adults is not a big deal/should not be a huge risk.
Quote:

Also I think we need to try to mandate some sort of birth control measure.
Do you mind clarifying?
Quote:

I also don't get the my body arguments when that developing human being is not your body, but somebody elses even if it is in a womens womb.
I think this type of argument comes down to the timeline of when is a fetus considered a human/etc. Typically, the latest someone is allowed to have an abortion is somewhere between 25-27 weeks, but most abortions don't even happen that late. According to the CDC, in 2015:
Quote:

The majority of abortions in 2015 took place early in gestation:
  • 91.1% of abortions were performed at ≤13 weeks’ gestation; a smaller number of abortions
  • (7.6%) were performed at 14–20 weeks’ gestation
  • (1.3%) were performed at ≥21 weeks’ gestation.
In 2015, 24.6% of all abortions were early medical abortions (a non-surgical abortion at ≤8 weeks’ gestation).
So, when a majority of these abortions are happening, typically the fetus is not barely formed.
Quote:

If I was a governor of a state I would definitely be demanding sex-ed courses be mandatory in school for all students and ensure that birth control was reachable by all women in a aid to attempt to prevent unwanted pregnancies, but I would also put out there that not having sex is the best form of birth control that there is.
Abstinence-only education is incredibly ineffective. Source (Article re: a recent study into Abstinence-only education). It also kinda goes without saying - obviously the only way to not get pregnant 100% is to not have sex.
Quote:

Originally Posted by CodeHelmet (Post 10020041)
Firstly, Abortion is not explicitly mentioned in the USA Constitution so when Elected officials or anyone says that its a "Constitutional Right" are either lying or are blatantly ignorant.

Ok, but in Roe v Wade, the Supreme Court ruled that the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution provides a fundamental "right to privacy" that protects a pregnant woman's liberty to choose whether or not to have an abortion.

So, while it's not explicitly in the constitution, the 14th Amendment is why it was made legal.
Quote:

Secondly, the biggest provider of Abortions is Planned Parenthood. Rather ironic name when you think about it since the name implies support and advice on reproducing and not doing the exact opposite(which is what Abortion is). Third, one of the root causes of this whole debate that doesn't get enough attention is the $$$$$$$$$$$$$. Planned Parenthood gets gobs of Federal and State cash to run their operations, some of which they funnel back into Lobbyists and Elected Officials to keep the $$$$$ train coming. I don't know about you but that reeks of Corruption(Taxpayer funded may I add).
Okay......

Also, "(while Planned Parenthood) does receive federal funding, but the money cannot be used for abortions by law. Fun rant though.

In related news, Missouri Senate Advances Fetal Heartbeat Abortion Bill. Big yikes on that.

twocows May 17th, 2019 4:29 PM

If you ask me, passing obviously illegal laws should come with mandatory restitution to those harmed when they're overturned. For extra fun, take the funding out of the paychecks of everyone who voted for the malignant bill. It'd be a good lesson in civics for the people responsible for the abuse.

Can you imagine if state legislatures just started passing bills every few years that restrict e.g. freedom of the press? It wouldn't matter what the constitution said because it takes time for the laws to get challenged in the courts. In the meantime, the press isn't allowed to report on the abuse of the system or, worse, is shut down, either by corrupt officials or due to inability to profit in an environment where they can't report anything meaningful. Maybe they can sue for damages afterward... if they still have the resources to do so. What's the purpose of even having a court if the legislature just ignores its decisions and the courts can't undo the damage those invalid laws have done?

That's similar to what's happening here. Abortion clinics take significant resources to operate. Did Alabama pass this bill to try and test Roe v Wade given the new makeup of the court? Probably, but that's not the only reason. A large part of the reason they, and others, pass bills like these is because it forces abortion clinics to shut down. They don't even care if it gets overturned because it accomplishes their goal of shutting down abortion clinics either way, although I'm sure they'd like it to get overturned. It doesn't matter to them whether their law is legitimate or not, their primary goal is to cause abortion clinics to close and prevent abortions.

What we have here is elected officials, people who swore an oath to uphold the Constitution, abusing their station to pass laws that (in the best reading of the situation) suit their moral viewpoint. That this is being done by people who wrap themselves in the flag and call themselves patriots is even more disgusting to me. Regardless of my personal thoughts on abortion and how it should be handled by the law, deliberate abuse of the legal system is unacceptable; our social order relies on peoples' belief in the legitimacy of our systems. If you swear an oath to uphold the law of the land and then break that oath, you don't get to call yourself a patriot.

This is why I think we need some kind of punitive measures for laws that are obviously and deliberately passed in the face of existing legal precedent if it can be proven that such a law causes direct harm to existing people, businesses, or organizations. The Alabama legislature here is acting in blatant conempt of court, and if the courts can't undo the damage these invalid laws do, they should at least hold responsible those passing the laws. If Alabama disagrees with Roe v Wade, they can bring a case against it if they can argue from some unique legal perspective that hasn't already been explored; otherwise, the correct path for the legislature to override a judicial decision is through a constitutional amendment. "Just keep passing laws that fly in the face of precedent and see if something sticks" is not (or at least should not) be a valid tactic and should come with real consequences.

As far as the issue of abortion itself, I think abortions should only be permitted if it can be argued that there is a strong case that it would improve the wellbeing of the mother (or potentially some other kind of mitigating circumstance). However, this is less important to me than the abuse of the law, because while abortion does affect a lot of people, it doesn't threaten the integrity of the legal system itself. Its potential impact is, therefore, comparatively limited.

Quote:

Originally Posted by CodeHelmet (Post 10020041)
Abortion is not explicitly mentioned in the USA Constitution so when Elected officials or anyone says that its a "Constitutional Right" are either lying or are blatantly ignorant.

You are correct that it is not a right explicitly guaranteed by the Constitution. However, the US Supreme Court is empowered by the Constitution in its station to pass binding decisions regarding the constitutionality of laws. In Roe v Wade, it ruled that abortion violates a woman's constitutionally implied right to privacy. The right to privacy is also not a constitutionally enumerated right, and yet it is a right that our courts have recognized. You may wish to reread the Bill of Rights, as you will stumble upon a certain amendment which states the following:
Quote:

Originally Posted by Ninth Amendment to the United States Constitution
The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.

A right does not need to be explicitly stated in the Constitution to be retained by the people; this is guaranteed by the Constitution itself. So while you are, again, largely correct that it is not a "Constitutionally [stated] right," the right to privacy has been found by the US Supreme Court to be a right implicitly granted by the Constitution. Moreover, the US Supreme court is empowered in its station by the Constitution itself to determine what is or is not meant by the Constitution. Therefore, the right to privacy is a right guaranteed by the Constitution, even if it is not explicitly guaranteed, as are all rights recognized by the US Supreme Court.

The oath to office varies from state to state, but I believe that all of them swear to uphold both the State and United States Constitutions. The exact text of the Alabama oath of office specifically is as follows:
Quote:

Originally Posted by Alabama Oath of Office
I, [name], do solemnly swear (or affirm as the case may be) that I will support the Constitution of the United States and Constitution of Alabama, so long as I continue a citizen thereof, and that I will faithfully and honestly discharge the duties of the office [office] upon which I am about to enter, to the best of my ability. So help me God.

So, to pass a law knowing full well it violates a right recognized as constitutionally guaranteed by the courts is most certainly a violation of this oath. Moreover, the blatant disrespect for the decisions of past courts and the authority they carry appears to me to be contempt of court, and I believe it should be recognized and enforced as such.

gimmepie May 18th, 2019 3:14 AM

Alright, so I have been clear that for the most part I don't support this bill, but something keeps coming up in response to it that I think isn't the best argument. That being "the government can't tell women what to do with their bodies". Yes it can. A rather large portion of laws out there are specifically telling you what you can and cannot do with your bodies. You can't expose it publicly, you can't drink at a certain age, you can't risk your life in the army until a certain age, you can't put certain substances in your body etc. etc. Just because this is something that is largely directed at women doesn't change the fact that laws are telling us what we can and cannot do with our bodies all the time.

Personally, I think there has to be a limit to that somewhere, but that's another discussion entirely. My thoughts on this bill going too far remain the same and of course, it's illegal too. Hadn't even thought about that.

EnglishALT May 18th, 2019 3:28 AM

As a compromise on abortion as there seems to be two extremes going in the US. I was wondering what people would think if the US were to implement something more akin to Europe, in that Abortions for the first trimester ( 12 weeks ) are paid for by the Government, after that Abortion is illegal unless it endangers the woman. It has things in there both sides would want, and both sides would hate, but it would give some uniformity to the laws.

BronzeHeart92 May 18th, 2019 7:39 AM

Honestly, this debate has to stop. So, who care if someone does an abortion? Does it affect YOU personally? The fact is, abortion is a completely voluntary procedure. It's time for these so-called 'pro-life' people to accept that simple fact. Don't want any abortions in your household? Well, that's your choice plain and simple.

Ninetales May 18th, 2019 11:56 PM

I personally consider abortion immoral because I believe that life begins at the moment of conception. However, this is my own personal belief and not everyone holds the same belief and therefore I think abortion should be legal and I do not support this bill whatsoever. Making abortion completely illegal won't stop abortions from happening, which is something that people fail to acknowledge. Instead, women will resort to potentially dangerous methods to terminate their pregnancies.

We live in a democratic society and I think that people have a right to establish their own values, morals and should be able to make their own decisions. If a woman is incapable of raising a child in a safe, loving environment, if her general health and well being is at risk, or if she has been raped then I can completely understand why she would choose to get an abortion and I don't think that politicians should deny a woman the right to do so.

Miss Wendighost May 19th, 2019 9:44 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MysticalNinetales (Post 10021027)
I personally consider abortion immoral because I believe that life begins at the moment of conception. However, this is my own personal belief and not everyone holds the same belief and therefore I think abortion should be legal and I do not support this bill whatsoever. Making abortion completely illegal won't stop abortions from happening, which is something that people fail to acknowledge. Instead, women will resort to potentially dangerous methods to terminate their pregnancies.

We live in a democratic society and I think that people have a right to establish their own values, morals and should be able to make their own decisions. If a woman is incapable of raising a child in a safe, loving environment, if her general health and well being is at risk, or if she has been raped then I can completely understand why she would choose to get an abortion and I don't think that politicians should deny a woman the right to do so.

Same. I wouldn't do it myself unless there was some kind of underlying circumstances that would make it difficult if not impossible to raise a child. However, I'm not a busybody that tells everyone how to live. We're all humans, and we all have free will. Whether we base our ideas on a belief in some higher power or on secular (neutral on religion) ideas on right and wrong, we shouldn't pressure anybody to conform to a set of beliefs without a thought to how the other person thinks of the ideas.

Hiroshi Sotomura May 19th, 2019 3:35 PM

A quote from my favourite science blogger:
Quote:

We need to stop framing the abortion debate purely as a woman's issue. We really need to start addressing the men who impregnate them.

Abortion will always be the woman's choice, it's her body after all. However, since so many men are calling for women to "take responsibility" for their actions and not have an abortion, I propose men do the same thing. After all, it was their ejaculate that helped fertiliser the egg.

If women can't have abortions from 6 weeks onwards, men should pay mandatory child support from 6 weeks onwards.

Take responsibility for your dick, dudes.

EnglishALT May 19th, 2019 5:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Laslow (Post 10021401)
A quote from my favourite science blogger:

Seems fair to have men chip in for various medical care needed for the health of the child. Sonograms, maybe food aid for cravings, etc. However if the child support is not going to actually support the child, then I don’t see how this would stand up in court.

Taemin May 20th, 2019 10:09 AM

I think the banning is disgusting. I know there's other ways to get an abortion if you really need one. Take a trip and do it privately, for one thing.
Though, the fact that they really voted to take that choice away from women disgusts me.
If men had to carry children to term, you know that law would change back into giving people the choice.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Laslow (Post 10021401)
A quote from my favourite science blogger:

I love this, and I think would actually help more people think twice about the matter.

Maedar May 23rd, 2019 4:21 AM

The lawmakers who support laws like these (who are almost always male, white, rich, and Republican) claim to be the "party of family values and the "moral guardians."

And then they publicly say horrible things like this:

https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/personal-foul/

It seriously causes me to question their true motives. I'm just glad all the folks on this page are no longer in office.


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 12:33 AM.


Like our Facebook Page Follow us on Twitter © 2002 - 2018 The PokéCommunity™, pokecommunity.com.
Pokémon characters and images belong to The Pokémon Company International and Nintendo. This website is in no way affiliated with or endorsed by Nintendo, Creatures, GAMEFREAK, The Pokémon Company or The Pokémon Company International. We just love Pokémon.
All forum styles, their images (unless noted otherwise) and site designs are © 2002 - 2016 The PokéCommunity / PokéCommunity.com.
PokéCommunity™ is a trademark of The PokéCommunity. All rights reserved. Sponsor advertisements do not imply our endorsement of that product or service. User generated content remains the property of its creator.

Acknowledgements
Use of PokéCommunity Assets
vB Optimise by DragonByte Technologies Ltd © 2023.