Roe v Wade is on deck

[Elixir]

The discussion has been about the states where abortion is legal at any point in the pregnancy, with no restrictions or reasons required (see Emily's statement above). I do have issues with those terms. Don't you?

No.
Wanna know why?

I may regret this, but, OK...go ahead.

Because I believe sentient groups of cells (aka people) have primacy over non-sentient groups of cells (aka blastocysts, fetuses, embryos).
Or rather, used to have, and should have.
The danger posed by abortion laws is 100% to sentient groups aka people.
The “danger” -if there is any, which has never been shown, of no abortion laws, is at least 99.99% to non-sentient groups of cells.

Then, not a driver of my opinion, but related, is the fact that Mrs. E had three ectopic pregnancies, two of which would have killed her if they happened in today’s Texas. So I’d have that emotional/rational fallback if I wasn’t already ideologically opposed to superfluous, harmful legislation.

Fair enough. I think we will just agree to disagree on whether a fetus in the late stages of a pregnancy counts as sentient. But, yeah, I'm not a fan or what's going in Texas either. I have big problems with those on the extreme pro-choice and the extreme pro-life side.

I get what you're saying. I'm very squeamish about third semester abortion also. But here's the deal for me: I believe that women should have bodily control of their body; just like guys do. And I trust women to make better decisions than the government.

I agree with that, but don’t find as compelling as the FACT that currently, thanks to SCOTUS, our government is killing its citizens.

 

[pood]

You must also remember that they are god-besotted busybodies who think fetuses are ensouled at conception and they are doing goddie’s work in saving innocent souls.

Oh GMAFB.
I wish that was the case; we could sue on religious freedom grounds AND Constitutional grounds. I think some people already are trying.

But - The besotted busybodies self identify as CHRISTIANS ffs. Their book, their magic guy(s) (3 of them?) - none of them mentions abortion whatsoever. Their god isn’t shy about forbidding stuff, so if abortion didn’t make the list - any of the lists - the religion excuse doesn’t hold much water.
Killing citizens to “save” zygotes is Hitlerian BS. Nobody is really serious about legislating that superstitious “ensoulment” invention.

Yeah but their con-man pastors tell them that the Big Three hate abortion and most of them have never read their own Magic Book anyway.

 

[thebeave]

The discussion has been about the states where abortion is legal at any point in the pregnancy, with no restrictions or reasons required (see Emily's statement above). I do have issues with those terms. Don't you?

No.
Wanna know why?

I may regret this, but, OK...go ahead.

Because I believe sentient groups of cells (aka people) have primacy over non-sentient groups of cells (aka blastocysts, fetuses, embryos).
Or rather, used to have, and should have.
The danger posed by abortion laws is 100% to sentient groups aka people.
The “danger” -if there is any, which has never been shown, of no abortion laws, is at least 99.99% to non-sentient groups of cells.

Then, not a driver of my opinion, but related, is the fact that Mrs. E had three ectopic pregnancies, two of which would have killed her if they happened in today’s Texas. So I’d have that emotional/rational fallback if I wasn’t already ideologically opposed to superfluous, harmful legislation.

Fair enough. I think we will just agree to disagree on whether a fetus in the late stages of a pregnancy counts as sentient. But, yeah, I'm not a fan or what's going in Texas either. I have big problems with those on the extreme pro-choice and the extreme pro-life side.

I get what you're saying. I'm very squeamish about third semester abortion also. But here's the deal for me: I believe that women should have bodily control of their body; just like guys do. And I trust women to make better decisions than the government.

Yes, to a point. But, if you remember, a lot of anti-vaxxers were chanting, "My body, my choice" during covid. There can be, and should be, exceptions as needed to this rule.

 

[pood]

\

Yes, to a point. But, if you remember, a lot of anti-vaxxers were chanting, "My body, my choice" during covid. There can be, and should be, exceptions as needed to this rule.

An invalid comparison. Nobody made it against the law to refuse a vaccine. They are making it against the law to have an abortion.

 

[pood]

And a lot of the crowd chanting “my body, my choice” to the Covid vaccine are the same busybodies trying to outlaw abortion. Total hypocrites.

 

[Harry Bosch]

The discussion has been about the states where abortion is legal at any point in the pregnancy, with no restrictions or reasons required (see Emily's statement above). I do have issues with those terms. Don't you?

No.
Wanna know why?

I may regret this, but, OK...go ahead.

Because I believe sentient groups of cells (aka people) have primacy over non-sentient groups of cells (aka blastocysts, fetuses, embryos).
Or rather, used to have, and should have.
The danger posed by abortion laws is 100% to sentient groups aka people.
The “danger” -if there is any, which has never been shown, of no abortion laws, is at least 99.99% to non-sentient groups of cells.

Then, not a driver of my opinion, but related, is the fact that Mrs. E had three ectopic pregnancies, two of which would have killed her if they happened in today’s Texas. So I’d have that emotional/rational fallback if I wasn’t already ideologically opposed to superfluous, harmful legislation.

Fair enough. I think we will just agree to disagree on whether a fetus in the late stages of a pregnancy counts as sentient. But, yeah, I'm not a fan or what's going in Texas either. I have big problems with those on the extreme pro-choice and the extreme pro-life side.

I get what you're saying. I'm very squeamish about third semester abortion also. But here's the deal for me: I believe that women should have bodily control of their body; just like guys do. And I trust women to make better decisions than the government.

Yes, to a point. But, if you remember, a lot of anti-vaxxers were chanting, "My body, my choice" during covid. There can be, and should be, exceptions as needed to this rule.

Well, people were required to get vaccines if they were to be around others. If they didn't want to be around others, they didn't have to get a vaccine (please correct me if I'm wrong). I just think that the religious right has gone way way too far. The religious rights obsession with the sex lives of women is creepy. They are now going after IV and the Pill. {Not putting you in that box!}

 

[thebeave]

The discussion has been about the states where abortion is legal at any point in the pregnancy, with no restrictions or reasons required (see Emily's statement above). I do have issues with those terms. Don't you?

No.
Wanna know why?

I may regret this, but, OK...go ahead.

Because I believe sentient groups of cells (aka people) have primacy over non-sentient groups of cells (aka blastocysts, fetuses, embryos).
Or rather, used to have, and should have.
The danger posed by abortion laws is 100% to sentient groups aka people.
The “danger” -if there is any, which has never been shown, of no abortion laws, is at least 99.99% to non-sentient groups of cells.

Then, not a driver of my opinion, but related, is the fact that Mrs. E had three ectopic pregnancies, two of which would have killed her if they happened in today’s Texas. So I’d have that emotional/rational fallback if I wasn’t already ideologically opposed to superfluous, harmful legislation.

Fair enough. I think we will just agree to disagree on whether a fetus in the late stages of a pregnancy counts as sentient. But, yeah, I'm not a fan or what's going in Texas either. I have big problems with those on the extreme pro-choice and the extreme pro-life side.

I get what you're saying. I'm very squeamish about third semester abortion also. But here's the deal for me: I believe that women should have bodily control of their body; just like guys do. And I trust women to make better decisions than the government.

Yes, to a point. But, if you remember, a lot of anti-vaxxers were chanting, "My body, my choice" during covid. There can be, and should be, exceptions as needed to this rule.

Well, people were required to get vaccines if they were to be around others. If they didn't want to be around others, they didn't have to get a vaccine (please correct me if I'm wrong). I just think that the religious right has gone way way too far. The religious rights obsession with the sex lives of women is creepy. They are now going after IV and the Pill. {Not putting you in that box!}

There were a lot of different rules regarding covid vaccine mandates. Many companies, first responders, military, etc were requiring vaccines as I recall. But perhaps covid wasn't the best example of a vaccine mandate. Smallpox, polio, and other highly communicable and deadly diseases that we've generally eliminated make a better point about mandatory vaccinations. We'd probably still be dealing with those diseases at a wide scale if vaccination was made generally optional and unenforced.

 

[pood]

There are vaccination requirements for school children, but that is in order for the child to be in school. They are not forced to be vaccinated — they just won’t be permitted entry to school without it. There were never any Covid-era vaccination requirements. No one anywhere was forced to be vaccinated. What there were, though, were patchworks of state and local laws that required private establishments to refuse admittance to those who could not prove they had been vaccinated. This is no way comparable to abortion restrictions. Failure to vaccinate can harm and kill other people. Abortions harm and kill no one.

 

[Elixir]

Failure to vaccinate can harm and kill other people. Abortions harm and kill no one.

Failure to allow abortions harms and kills other people.

 

[thebeave]

There are vaccination requirements for school children, but that is in order for the child to be in school. They are not forced to be vaccinated — they just won’t be permitted entry to school without it. There were never any Covid-era vaccination requirements. No one anywhere was forced to be vaccinated. What there were, though, were patchworks of state and local laws that required private establishments to refuse admittance to those who could not prove they had been vaccinated. This is no way comparable to abortion restrictions. Failure to vaccinate can harm and kill other people. Abortions harm and kill no one.

...except the fetus/baby when it is well past the point of viability. Which is kind of what this discussion has been focused on.

 

[Elixir]

except when the fetus/baby is well past the point of viability. Which is kind of what this discussion has been focused on.

Can you find, say, a dozen such cases since … forever? B’cuz the horror stories from women in abortion ban States just keep on coming.
“Aborting” a viable healthy baby would be unethical; the doctor would almost certainly lose their license. And probably illegal, without any “abortion ban”. If the baby is viable, it is delivered.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

And a lot of the crowd chanting “my body, my choice” to the Covid vaccine are the same busybodies trying to outlaw abortion. Total hypocrites.

Worse yet, they felt the government couldn't compel them to wear a mask but can compel a woman to endure pregnancy and give birth.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

With the Roberts Court, can't tell if her complete lack of standing will matter.

Makes me ponder who can challenge it? People are literally not harmed by gay marriage.

Yeah, it's basically the ultimate example of a victimless activity.

Insurance companies that are required to provide marital benefits.

If anything a gay marriage means lower costs than a straight marriage because you have fewer kids.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

There are vaccination requirements for school children, but that is in order for the child to be in school. They are not forced to be vaccinated — they just won’t be permitted entry to school without it. There were never any Covid-era vaccination requirements. No one anywhere was forced to be vaccinated. What there were, though, were patchworks of state and local laws that required private establishments to refuse admittance to those who could not prove they had been vaccinated. This is no way comparable to abortion restrictions. Failure to vaccinate can harm and kill other people. Abortions harm and kill no one.

...except the fetus/baby when it is well past the point of viability. Which is kind of what this discussion has been focused on.

Indeed, this situation, like the ticking time bomb, trying to create this generally fictional scenario to gaslight on abortion.

We had a viable system in place to protect the alleged rights of a fetus past viability. And it was near impossible to find someone who'd arbitrarily perform a late third trimester. In general, in the rare cases they were performed, it was a medical necessity for the mother. Today, in Texas, a woman in that situation isn't allowed to abort until she is on verge of death. The Attorney General and state Supreme Court made that much clear.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

I would most certainly be skeptical of a law that criminalizes walking around with a plate of spaghetti on your head. That would set off my spidey senses for sure. Any law having to do with a plate of spaghetti on the head is going to garner my curiousity.

And the recent discussion hasn't been about third trimester abortions where the health of the mother or a non-viable fetus is the issue. I am 100% behind those reasons, as are most reasonable people. The discussion has been about the states where abortion is legal at any point in the pregnancy, with no restrictions or reasons required (see Emily's statement above). I do have issues with those terms. Don't you?

Fundamentally this comes down to trusting the doctors a lot more than we trust the politicians.

The states with no limits we don't see abortions that shouldn't happen. The states with limits we see proper abortions denied.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

The discussion has been about the states where abortion is legal at any point in the pregnancy, with no restrictions or reasons required (see Emily's statement above). I do have issues with those terms. Don't you?

I used to, but I don't anymore.
I'm appalled by the use of abortion as a form of birth control for the irresponsible. I've been for years. I thought RvW was a little too lax.

But the current shit show of "Crueler than thou" political posturing has left me convinced that the government should just shut up and stay out of it. Completely.
Tom

And why is it warranting of state restrictions even if it is for birth control. (Not that it actually is--nobody chooses abortion as the primary method.)

 

[Elixir]

The states with no limits we don't see abortions that shouldn't happen. The states with limits we see proper abortions denied.

Kudos. That's about the minimum number of words to accurately describe "the problem", which is... abortion laws.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

The discussion has been about the states where abortion is legal at any point in the pregnancy, with no restrictions or reasons required (see Emily's statement above). I do have issues with those terms. Don't you?

No.
Wanna know why?

I may regret this, but, OK...go ahead.

Because I believe sentient groups of cells (aka people) have primacy over non-sentient groups of cells (aka blastocysts, fetuses, embryos).
Or rather, used to have, and should have.
The danger posed by abortion laws is 100% to sentient groups aka people.
The “danger” -if there is any, which has never been shown, of no abortion laws, is at least 99.99% to non-sentient groups of cells.

Then, not a driver of my opinion, but related, is the fact that Mrs. E had three ectopic pregnancies, two of which would have killed her if they happened in today’s Texas. So I’d have that emotional/rational fallback if I wasn’t already ideologically opposed to superfluous, harmful legislation.

Fair enough. I think we will just agree to disagree on whether a fetus in the late stages of a pregnancy counts as sentient. But, yeah, I'm not a fan or what's going in Texas either. I have big problems with those on the extreme pro-choice and the extreme pro-life side.

Last couple of months it might. But nobody's aborting such if they're not severely damaged.

 

[Elixir]

Last couple of months it might. But nobody's aborting such if they're not severely damaged.

Exactly. The kind of “abortion” that @thebeave opposes, doesn’t happen.

 

[Elixir]

While its amusing to think the reason for abortion laws is old white men wanting to "punish the sluts"as you and Loren suggest, I can't say I find that reason to be a serious one.

These Alabama guys are serious, and it's just one State.
Every single one of the state senators who voted to ban abortion is white and male.
Not much different from the other abortion-banning States. Check it out.