Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 84 (8915 total)
Current session began: 
Page Loaded: 07-17-2019 8:44 AM
28 online now:
dwise1, Heathen, Percy (Admin), Son Goku (4 members, 24 visitors)
Chatting now:  Chat room empty
Newest Member: 4petdinos
Happy Birthday: lopezeast0211
Post Volume:
Total: 856,853 Year: 11,889/19,786 Month: 1,670/2,641 Week: 179/708 Day: 6/40 Hour: 1/1


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
RewPrev1
...
1314
15
16171819Next
Author Topic:   Some states protect women's rights
Chiroptera
Member
Posts: 6692
From: Oklahoma
Joined: 09-28-2003
Member Rating: 5.8


Message 211 of 283 (856270)
06-29-2019 8:52 AM


SCOTUS declines to hear abortion case
From The New York Times:

Supreme Court Will Not Hear Bid to Revive Alabama Abortion Ban

In 2016 Alabama enacted a law that would have prohibited the dilation and extraction method of abortion. Lower courts have struck the law down, and the case was appealed to the Supreme Court.

The Supreme Court has announced it will not hear the case, allowing the lower courts ruling to stand.

What is interesting is that, if I understand the rules correctly, it would have taken only four members of the Court to hear the case. Could be that the Court is waiting for the best, most definitive case to come up; could be that Roberts and one of the conservative justices feel that Roe v Wade is settled law.


It says something about the qualities of our current president that the best argument anyone has made in his defense is that he didn’t know what he was talking about. -- Paul Krugman

  
Faith
Member
Posts: 32133
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001
Member Rating: 1.1


Message 212 of 283 (856361)
06-30-2019 6:24 AM
Reply to: Message 205 by Theodoric
06-25-2019 5:07 PM


Law, Bill promoting late term abortions
I finally found a few references to the laws I was talking about.

I know y'all don't think there's any ********** on Google but I certainly do. It's almost impossible to find a conservative viewpoint even on subjects where they used to show up at the top of a Google page. Finding the kind of information I had in mind took some work, but Wikipedia does have information on the law in New York and the bill in Virginia though it's pretty short shrift in my opinion.

So I was referring to a law recently passed in New York for one, and a bill that I guess didn't pass in Virginia, expanding abortion rights through the third trimester if necessary according to medical standards.

This is the one passed in New York City (From Wikipedia):

The RHA legalized abortion at any time "when necessary to protect a woman's **** or health"

"At any time."

Here's an ****/virginia-abortion-bill-proposed-by-kathy-tran-third-trimester-today-2019-01-30/] --> --> article about the Virginia bill this one proposed in Virginia was more or less based on the New York law. There was a lot of conservative backlash to this bill.

the Virginia bill has provoked a swift backlash from conservatives. But that response was compounded by comments Northam made on WTOP radio Wednesday when asked about the bill.
"When we talk about third-trimester abortions, these are done with the consent of obviously the mother, with the consent of the physicians, more than one physician, by the way," Northam said. "And it's done in cases where there amy be severe deformities, there may be a fetus that's non-viable. So in this particular example, if a mother is in labor, I can tell you exactly what would happen. The infant would be delivered. The infant would be kept comfortable. The infant would be resuscitated if that's what the mother and the family desired, and then a discussion would ensue between the physicians and the mother. So I think this was really blown out of proportion."

Which prompted a further conservative backlash of course.

He certainly has the idea that we're talking about aborting a completely viable living baby, whatever number of weeks is involved. The bill allows for abortion at any time as the New York law does but of course babies can **** outside the womb weeks earlier than full term.

I don't know what's happening to the URL, maybe something connected to the **********?

Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

Edited by Faith, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 205 by Theodoric, posted 06-25-2019 5:07 PM Theodoric has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 213 by AZPaul3, posted 06-30-2019 1:49 PM Faith has responded

    
AZPaul3
Member
Posts: 4258
From: Phoenix
Joined: 11-06-2006
Member Rating: 3.7


(2)
Message 213 of 283 (856388)
06-30-2019 1:49 PM
Reply to: Message 212 by Faith
06-30-2019 6:24 AM


Re: Law, Bill promoting late term abortions
Good. You found a law in NY that allows late term abortion when the mother’s health is gravely affected. You found another in VA to further give such rights to women.

Fact. All states allow late term abortions.

Half of the states have no restrictions on abortion late term or any other time. As it should be. The other half restrict abortions after 20+- weeks to cases of medical need.

You oppose this why?

Now the next step in your emotional straw man.

Show me the 39-week abortion. Show me why it was done. Show me a 39-week abortion contrary to medical necessity.

Do you expect/require a woman to carry the fetus to her own death? Do you expect/require a woman to carry a fetus that is already dead? Does a woman need your permission or the permission of a bunch of religiously inspired old white republicans in the legislature before she can abort under these conditions?

I see it as the essence of human dignity that we should be free in our own bodies. It is at the very core of how we will allow governments of law to treat human beings. A woman’s right, as anyone’s right for their own body, should be seen as absolute.

If we cannot protect a woman’s rights in this most basic of moments then protections exist for no one. She must be allowed to decide in her own way free from the interference of government just as we all demand for our own bodies. The government has no right to any part of my body or anyone’s body. That concept needs to be set as a corner stone of modern law. And we set that precedent for all of us by acknowledging, in law and in court, a woman’s right to her own.

Edited by AZPaul3, : No reason given.


Eschew obfuscation. Habituate elucidation.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 212 by Faith, posted 06-30-2019 6:24 AM Faith has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 221 by Faith, posted 06-30-2019 9:31 PM AZPaul3 has responded

  
Sarah Bellum
Member
Posts: 224
Joined: 05-04-2019
Member Rating: 2.4


Message 214 of 283 (856406)
06-30-2019 3:53 PM
Reply to: Message 89 by ringo
05-29-2019 3:17 PM


Re: Is the fetus a human being? Is it a living creature that we allow you to kill?
But we have all kinds of laws regulating medical practice.

To say such laws are "dictating" is an abuse of language.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 89 by ringo, posted 05-29-2019 3:17 PM ringo has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 224 by ringo, posted 07-01-2019 9:56 AM Sarah Bellum has responded

    
Sarah Bellum
Member
Posts: 224
Joined: 05-04-2019
Member Rating: 2.4


Message 215 of 283 (856407)
06-30-2019 3:55 PM
Reply to: Message 126 by AZPaul3
06-02-2019 1:05 PM


Re: Is the fetus a human being? Is it a living creature that we allow you to kill?
But not entirely bodily integrity issues. Absolutes are tricky.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 126 by AZPaul3, posted 06-02-2019 1:05 PM AZPaul3 has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 219 by AZPaul3, posted 06-30-2019 5:35 PM Sarah Bellum has acknowledged this reply

    
Sarah Bellum
Member
Posts: 224
Joined: 05-04-2019
Member Rating: 2.4


(1)
Message 216 of 283 (856414)
06-30-2019 4:09 PM
Reply to: Message 165 by Theodoric
06-08-2019 3:39 PM


Re: No obligation to let others use your body.
From across the pond
quote:
https://www.express.co.uk/...-MP-outrage-at-39-week-abortion

EXCLUSIVE: MP outrage at 39-week abortion

SHOCKED MPs have called for a change to Britain’s “medieval and cruel” abortion laws after a termination was carried out on a baby only days before it was due to be born By Caroline Wheeler PUBLISHED: 00:00, Sun, Jul 13, 2014

It was aborted 39 weeks into pregnancy under guidelines that allow termination where there is a “significant risk” the child will be disabled.

Department of Health figures show that last year a further three abortions were carried out on mothers who were 38 weeks pregnant and two more on women 37 weeks into pregnancy.

Conservative MP Fiona Bruce, co-chair of the All-Party Parliamentary Pro-life Group, said: “I do not understand how we can have a law which allows the life of a baby with a disability to be ended at full term. It is a graphic illustration of society’s inconsistency on disability.

“After birth we work hard to ensure equality, but before birth we have laws to prevent the disabled taking their first breath. This medieval, cruel, discriminatory law must change.”

Labour MP Rob Flello added: “We have a Jekyll and Hyde approach to disability. One one hand the entire country can be united in praise of paralympians. On the other we can permit the abortion of children at nine months simply for the crime of having a disability.

NHS guidelines consider a baby is full-term at 37 weeks, though most women go into labour between 38 and 42 weeks into their pregnancy.

Abortion beyond 24 weeks can only legally be carried out if there is a grave risk to the life of the mother or there is severe foetal abnormality.

Such a procedure routinely involves giving the baby an injection, usually of potassium, into its heart so it dies before the process starts.

Last year there were 190 abortions beyond the 24-week limit, almost 20 per cent up on the previous year.

Most were carried out under a legal definition known as Ground E, where there is “substantial risk that if the child were born it would suffer from such physical or mental abnormalities as to be seriously handicapped”.

Last year a parliamentary commission called for change in the law after hearing rules even allowed abortions at 40 weeks on grounds of disability.

It learned that abortions can be carried out on babies with a cleft lip or club foot, conditions that can be rectified after birth. One doctor reported that on some occasions a wrong diagnosis had been given and the dead foetus was found to have no disability.

So far there has been no official Government response to the report.
IPSO Regulated Copyright ©2019 Express Newspapers. "Daily Express" is a registered trademark. All rights reserved.



This message is a reply to:
 Message 165 by Theodoric, posted 06-08-2019 3:39 PM Theodoric has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 255 by Theodoric, posted 07-01-2019 9:14 PM Sarah Bellum has responded

    
Sarah Bellum
Member
Posts: 224
Joined: 05-04-2019
Member Rating: 2.4


Message 217 of 283 (856417)
06-30-2019 4:12 PM
Reply to: Message 188 by Theodoric
06-18-2019 7:32 PM


Re: Partial birth abortion is not an accurate term
You asked for the definition of the term. I gave you the definition of the term. If you don't like that definition, you're free to dispute it!
This message is a reply to:
 Message 188 by Theodoric, posted 06-18-2019 7:32 PM Theodoric has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 256 by Theodoric, posted 07-01-2019 9:14 PM Sarah Bellum has responded

    
Sarah Bellum
Member
Posts: 224
Joined: 05-04-2019
Member Rating: 2.4


Message 218 of 283 (856418)
06-30-2019 4:15 PM
Reply to: Message 195 by Chiroptera
06-18-2019 9:39 PM


Re: No obligation to let others use your body.
Purely as a matter of opinion polling, yes, there are many people who consider regulations to prevent abortion of a 1-week gestation fetus to be unduly intrusive but on the other hand consider an abortion performed at 39 weeks gestation to be extraordinarily crass.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 195 by Chiroptera, posted 06-18-2019 9:39 PM Chiroptera has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 220 by Chiroptera, posted 06-30-2019 5:41 PM Sarah Bellum has acknowledged this reply

    
AZPaul3
Member
Posts: 4258
From: Phoenix
Joined: 11-06-2006
Member Rating: 3.7


Message 219 of 283 (856428)
06-30-2019 5:35 PM
Reply to: Message 215 by Sarah Bellum
06-30-2019 3:55 PM


Re: Is the fetus a human being? Is it a living creature that we allow you to kill?
But not entirely bodily integrity issues. Absolutes are tricky.

That's what courts are for.


Eschew obfuscation. Habituate elucidation.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 215 by Sarah Bellum, posted 06-30-2019 3:55 PM Sarah Bellum has acknowledged this reply

  
Chiroptera
Member
Posts: 6692
From: Oklahoma
Joined: 09-28-2003
Member Rating: 5.8


Message 220 of 283 (856429)
06-30-2019 5:41 PM
Reply to: Message 218 by Sarah Bellum
06-30-2019 4:15 PM


Re: No obligation to let others use your body.
Ok, but you were asking what I thought. I hope your question has been answered.

It says something about the qualities of our current president that the best argument anyone has made in his defense is that he didn’t know what he was talking about. -- Paul Krugman

This message is a reply to:
 Message 218 by Sarah Bellum, posted 06-30-2019 4:15 PM Sarah Bellum has acknowledged this reply

  
Faith
Member
Posts: 32133
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001
Member Rating: 1.1


Message 221 of 283 (856448)
06-30-2019 9:31 PM
Reply to: Message 213 by AZPaul3
06-30-2019 1:49 PM


Re: Law, Bill promoting late term abortions
Why do I oppose late term abortion? Something about feeling sik to my stomach at the thought of killing a fully formed baby.

No, of course I'm not for the woman to carry a dead child, what a ridiculous idea. And I've always said a threat to the mother's life always has highest pririoty. However that situation is extremely rare.

I think the post (Message 216) about the UK's report on actual 39, 38, 37 week abortions and the schizophrenia toward disabled babies is particularly interesting.

Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

Edited by Faith, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 213 by AZPaul3, posted 06-30-2019 1:49 PM AZPaul3 has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 222 by AZPaul3, posted 06-30-2019 10:33 PM Faith has responded
 Message 225 by Chiroptera, posted 07-01-2019 11:16 AM Faith has not yet responded

    
AZPaul3
Member
Posts: 4258
From: Phoenix
Joined: 11-06-2006
Member Rating: 3.7


Message 222 of 283 (856451)
06-30-2019 10:33 PM
Reply to: Message 221 by Faith
06-30-2019 9:31 PM


Re: Law, Bill promoting late term abortions
Except we're not talking the UK but a 39-week abortion outside of medical necessity here in the USofA. The UK health law recognizing sever fetal handicap as sufficient to request such a late termination is not the topic here.

I suspect around these parts any such incident would have a justification that we all might look at and say, "Oh, Ok."

You know they have to be out there. So let's see one.


Eschew obfuscation. Habituate elucidation.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 221 by Faith, posted 06-30-2019 9:31 PM Faith has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 223 by Faith, posted 07-01-2019 7:52 AM AZPaul3 has responded

  
Faith
Member
Posts: 32133
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001
Member Rating: 1.1


Message 223 of 283 (856469)
07-01-2019 7:52 AM
Reply to: Message 222 by AZPaul3
06-30-2019 10:33 PM


Re: Law, Bill promoting late term abortions
What I said in Message 204 is

I believe the point is not that an abortion has yet been performed at birth but that the law now specifically accepts it and it's been discussed as acceptable.

...the point is not that an abortion has yet been performed at birth but that the law now specifically accepts it....

But although we are not the UK I do think it's interesting that they actually have a record of such abortions being performed

Edited by Faith, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 222 by AZPaul3, posted 06-30-2019 10:33 PM AZPaul3 has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 232 by AZPaul3, posted 07-01-2019 2:30 PM Faith has responded

    
ringo
Member
Posts: 16806
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005
Member Rating: 3.4


Message 224 of 283 (856481)
07-01-2019 9:56 AM
Reply to: Message 214 by Sarah Bellum
06-30-2019 3:53 PM


Re: Is the fetus a human being? Is it a living creature that we allow you to kill?
Sarah Bellum writes:

But we have all kinds of laws regulating medical practice.
To say such laws are "dictating" is an abuse of language.


Do we have laws that force people to walk around with a gangrenous limb? Or with a tumour? I have no problem at all with calling that dictating.

All that are in Hell, choose it. -- CS Lewis
That's just egregiously stupid. -- ringo

This message is a reply to:
 Message 214 by Sarah Bellum, posted 06-30-2019 3:53 PM Sarah Bellum has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 230 by Sarah Bellum, posted 07-01-2019 11:57 AM ringo has responded

  
Chiroptera
Member
Posts: 6692
From: Oklahoma
Joined: 09-28-2003
Member Rating: 5.8


Message 225 of 283 (856491)
07-01-2019 11:16 AM
Reply to: Message 221 by Faith
06-30-2019 9:31 PM


Re: Law, Bill promoting late term abortions
I noticed that article is five years old. What is the followup? Did the law get changed?

They also don't specify the disability. Was it as treatable as a cleft palate? Or would it have been a far more serious, quality of life issue for the child as well as for those who would have had to raised it?


It says something about the qualities of our current president that the best argument anyone has made in his defense is that he didn’t know what he was talking about. -- Paul Krugman

This message is a reply to:
 Message 221 by Faith, posted 06-30-2019 9:31 PM Faith has not yet responded

  
RewPrev1
...
1314
15
16171819Next
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2018 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2019