• Welcome to the new Internet Infidels Discussion Board, formerly Talk Freethought.

Roe v Wade is on deck

One of the US Founders gave us instructions on do-it-yourself abortion:
From the slate.com link:
But Franklin’s choice to get Tennent’s pamphlet into the hands of readers all over the colonies meant that anyone learning to read, write, and calculate with his book would also have access to the leading available treatment for ending a pregnancy. Tennent’s handbook prescribes angelica, an herb known to be an effective abortifacient in the early stages of pregnancy for thousands of years, and which was frequently recommended across early modern herbal books.* Moreover, the recipe refers to several herbal abortifacients known at the time:

For this Misfortune, you must purge with Highland Flagg, (commonly called Bellyach Root) a Week before you expect to be out of Order; and repeat the same two Days after; the next Morning drink a Quarter of Pint of Pennyroyal Water, or Decoction, with 12 Drops of Spirits of Harts-horn, and as much again at Night, when you go to Bed. Continue this 9 Days running; and after resting 3 Days, go on with it for 9 more.

The entry combines attention to potent herbs with careful accounting of dosage to treat the “misfortune.” Here the entry recommends acting early before someone might “expect to be out of order” with their next period. This is consistent with the timing for maximum efficacy for angelica, aka “Bellyach Root,” a plant member of the carrot family. Likewise, pennyroyal was known even to the ancient Greeks as a form of birth control; “Harts-horn,” or century plant, was also commonly recommended at the time as part of concoctions for abortions and expelling afterbirth. The entry concludes by advising that the patients “shou’d be cautious of taking Opiates too often, or Jesuits-Bark”—a remedy for malaria sometimes mistakenly thought to be an abortifacient—and just in case anyone was not clear on what caused this malady, “nor must they long for pretty Fellows, or any other Trash whatsoever.” So: avoid sex.
Click to expand...
Such herbal remedies were rather dangerous, though we continue the principle with abortion pills.
 
That the members of the North Carolina Legislature imagine themselves arbiters of what is an “indisputable scientific fact” is a lovely bit of absurdity. Somebody should point out to them that science is defined by the absence of indisputable facts.

Legislation that begins by establishing that it’s entire basis is an absurd and laughably erroneous claim that any educated nine year old should be able to identify as fallacious, probably isn’t good legislation.

And that’s before we even examine the claim itself, which epically fails to live up to its introduction. According to this bill, it’s an “indisputable scientific fact” that human chimerism, which despite being difficult to detect has been documented dozens of times, doesn’t exist. Or perhaps that chimeras are legally defined as two “distinct and separate” human individuals.

I would like to see a rush to genetic testing by North Carolina citizens hoping to find that they are chimeras, so they can cast two votes, claim double wages, and generally get the benefits of being two different people that, until now, North Carolina law has unjustly and unlawfully denied them. :rolleyesa:
 
ZiprHead said:
Click to expand...

Here's hoping that they take after Steve Bannon who fucked around and found out.

On one hand, I absolutely understand why some people would feel that specifying medical procedures individually as constitutionally guaranteed is the wrong way to handle the issue, I do think that it should absolutely be codified that people have the right to make medical decisions for themselves (or their guardians, on their behalf) as advised by their medical provider. I admit that I am heavily relying upon the medical community and the AMA to determine what is and what is not ethical. For example: If I should decide that I disliked my perfectly healthy left leg and wanted it removed, I would hope that no surgeon would accommodate me and would instead refer me to a psychiatrist.
 
I'll note that the whole topic here is that some assholes wish to use "indisputable fact" (doctrine against which no question is permitted; religion) in place of scientific doubt and best knowledge, so to answer on abortion rights.
 
www.texastribune.org

Texas officials celebrated end of abortion rights after cutting back postpartum Medicaid extension

Greg Abbott claimed Texas provides expectant mothers “necessary resources so that they can choose life for their child,” but it is now one of a dwindling number of states not to offer Medicaid coverage for a full year after residents give birth.
www.texastribune.org www.texastribune.org
Among the measures he touted was a law that extended Medicaid health care coverage for pregnant women until six months after they give birth or miscarry, exceeding the federal government’s requirement that states provide at least two months of the benefit.


“Texas is a pro-life state, and we have taken significant action to protect the sanctity of life,” the Republican governor said in a June 24 statement. “Texas has also prioritized supporting women’s healthcare and expectant mothers in need to give them the necessary resources so that they can choose life for their child.”

Abbott’s statement neglected to mention that Texas lags behind at least 33 states, including 11 led by Republican governors, as well as the District of Columbia, all of which have already expanded or are working with the federal government to extend postpartum Medicaid benefits for a full year after giving birth. In 2021, the Texas House passed a measure that would have lengthened that coverage to 12 months, but during the waning days of the legislative session one of the senators who co-authored the state’s restrictive abortion law halved the time period.
Click to expand...

Had the state’s lawmakers heeded recommendations to extend the eligibility period beyond six months, Texas could have led the nation in expanding postpartum Medicaid for pregnant people instead of trailing behind, said Diana Forester, director of health care policy at Texans Care for Children, an advocacy group.

“Why wouldn’t we want to manage those chronic conditions for that first year postpartum so that they can focus on getting healthy and getting back to work and ensuring their kid has what they need to succeed? It just seems like a no-brainer,” Forester said.

A spokesperson for Abbott did not respond to questions about the Legislature’s decision or whether the governor supports the longer coverage period.
Click to expand...
 
www.tallahassee.com

Florida congressman Matt Gaetz to abortion rights protesters: 'Nobody wants to impregnate you'

Rep. Matt Gaetz spoke at the Turning Point USA Student Action Summit in Tampa, where former President Donald Trump also spoke Saturday.
www.tallahassee.com
"Why is it that the women with the least likelihood of getting pregnant are the ones most worried about having abortions?" Gaetz said. "Nobody wants to impregnate you if you look like a thumb."

Gaetz went on to say that "these people are odious on the inside and out. They're like 5'2, 350 pounds and they're like 'give me my abortions or I'll get up and march and protest' and I'm thinking: 'March? You look like you got ankles weaker than the legal reasoning behind Roe vs Wade.' A few of them need to get up and march. They need to get up and march for like an hour a day, swing those arms, get the blood pumping, maybe mix in a salad."
Click to expand...
Where's Will Smith when you need him.
 
Jarhyn said:
Make MAGA great.
Click to expand...
Ha ha...
That was the first thing that popped into my mind. Mothers Against Greg Abbott!

The second was designing a new hat.

Imagine this,
Back half red. Front half white. Across the front a blue field. In the field is a big white star followed by the letters MAGA in white.

Texas State Flag
images.jpeg

Tom
 
Last edited:

An Indiana doctor says she has faced harassment after the story of one of her patients — a 10-year-old Ohio girl who became pregnant as a result of rape — captured the nation's attention as a flashpoint in the debate over abortion rights.

In the weeks since Roe v. Wade was overturned, Dr. Caitlin Bernard has become a household name, with her face shown on right-wing television and her work criticized by public officials, including Indiana's attorney general, Todd Rokita.

She has worried about her own safety and the safety of her family, Bernard said Tuesday in an interview with NPR's Sarah McCammon.

And she said the actions of Rokita, an anti-abortion Republican who has called for an investigation into Bernard and suggested without providing evidence that she neglected to follow Indiana state reporting requirements for abortion providers, amounted to "harassment."
Click to expand...
 
lawandcrime.com

Justice Thomas Is Suddenly 'Unavailable' to Teach at D.C. Law School After Students Petitioned for His Firing

Justice Clarence Thomas will not be teaching at George Washington University School of Law in Washington D.C. this fall.
lawandcrime.com lawandcrime.com
U.S. Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas will not be teaching at George Washington University School of Law in Washington D.C. this fall.

Thomas, 74, has co-taught a Constitutional Law seminar at GW Law since 2011 with his former clerk, Judge Gregory Maggs of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces. Now, Thomas is no longer listed as an instructor on the school’s online course catalog.

According to the law school’s online publication the GW Hatchet, Maggs sent an email that said, “Unfortunately, I am writing with some sad news: Justice Thomas has informed me that he is unavailable to co-teach the seminar this fall.”

The change comes just weeks after an online petition was circulated demanding Thomas’ removal from the faculty. The petition, started in direct response to Thomas’ vote to overrule Roe v. Wade in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization, and launched by an undergraduate student at GWU, now has more than 11,000 signatures.
Click to expand...
Breaks my heart.
 
And Kansas steps up to the plate (gifted).

article said:
Kansans head to the polls Tuesday to decide whether the state’s constitution protects the right to abortion, the first electoral test of abortion rights since the Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade in June.

Polling is scant, but interest in the referendum appears high. Signs that say “Vote Yes — Value Them Both” and “Vote No — Value Her Choice” can be seen on green summer lawns, and the airwaves and social media have been inundated with more than $11 million in advertising spending by interest groups this year, according to reports filed with the Kansas Governmental Ethics Commission.
Click to expand...
Of all the places one would expect the first battle to wage, Kansas was likely low on people's lists. But Kansas actually had abortion enshrined in the state's constitution by their Supreme Court in 2019. So an amendment is needed to remove that right and allow the state legislature to legislate a woman's reproductive system.

Of course, the pro-forced birth side wants to make it seem like this referendum is nuanced.
article said:
Value Them Both has argued that the amendment doesn’t mean a total ban on abortion and is necessary to protect laws that were rendered unconstitutional by a 2019 Kansas Supreme Court decision that enshrined abortion rights in the state constitution.
Click to expand...
Yeah, fuck you. While Kansas isn't known for being overly liberal, they do have women, and women will likely be voting. It is likely to provide us a watermark for how anti-abortion bans will carry via public vote in conservative states. It'll also be a watermark to see how bans can be sold on TV as well.

Polling is limited, but it shows favor towards allowing the state legislature to ban abortion.
article said:
As things stand in the Co/efficient poll shared with FiveThirtyEight, 47% of the more than 1,500 voters sampled support the so-called “Value Them Both” amendment, and 43% are against it. The remaining 10% are undecided.
Click to expand...
It'll come down to one thing, as with most elections. TURNOUT!
article said:
Of voters ages 18 to 34 strongly, 75% oppose the amendment and 52% Kansans ages 35 to 44 also opposed it. The majority of those ages 45 to 54 55 to 64 and 65 and up supported the amendment, with 52%, 51% and 50% in support respectively.
Click to expand...
If there is any hope of this referendum failing, it is women under the age of 34 will be much more likely to vote than men, and much more likely to vote in a primary than usual. And while young men likely support abortion rights in good numbers, young women likely support them in higher totals. When the young mobilize, that is bad for conservative outcomes.

A defeat of the referendum tonight will be much less a jubilant celebration, but a massive sigh of relief, that maybe the people might have a say after all. Victory of the referendum will pretty much start carving up the US into two Americas, the Christian Dominion and Free States.
 
Just saw this for the Kansas vote. These are the two statements.
First statement said:
A vote for the Value Them Both Amendment would affirm there is no Kansas constitutional right to abortion or to require the government funding of abortion, and would reserve to the people of Kansas, through their elected state legislators, the right to pass laws to regulate abortion.
Click to expand...
Second Part said:
A vote against the Value Them Both Amendment would make no changes to the constitution of the state of Kansas, and could restrict the people, through their elected state legislators, from regulating abortion by leaving in place the recently recognized right to abortion.
Click to expand...
How in the heck is that legal? They are lying. Kansas isn't not allowed to "regulate" abortion.

Voting yes would restrict the people, voting no would not restrict the people... but apparently lying and confusing text is allowed in Kansas.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom