Alabama abortion ban: Republican senate

[acidhead]

55 minutes ago, susieice said:

Roe vs Wade will never be overturned. 

Just curious...

Who's Roe?

[+susieice]

1 minute ago, acidhead said:

Just curious...

Who's Roe?

Here you go. This woman actually changed her mind about abortion after her landmark case was determined by the SCOTUS and regretted her involvement.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Norma_McCorvey

[+and-then]

1 hour ago, Kismit said:

I know it is designed to contest Roe verses Wade. That doesn’t actually make it any better.

Your opinion is acknowledged.  Many share it.  It may be that it does no good at all but some in this country feel an overwhelming duty to stand against the horrors in this industry that seem to become more acceptable by the day.  What was done by the legislature in Virginia and New York, to name but a couple, has pushed this nation to the edge and if no one attempts to stand against this trend then this nation is lost.  All who agree with the idea of a woman being able to simply CHOOSE to have a fully viable baby that can be born alive snuffed out by her choice and for no other real reason, are EVIL, and deserve whatever curse falls on them.  This contagion has been spreading for years in this country and now it has reached the point where there are NO innocents any longer.  The time has come for people to stand and be heard.  If this right is as sacrosanct as so many like to believe then putting it to a vote in the several states can do no harm.  I have no issue with women having a right to choose to abort their child in the first Trimester if that is what she feels she has or even just WANTS to do.  That's between her and her own conscience.  Taking the life of a baby that can survive outside the womb is as EVIL as any other murder.  Standing behind the words in a given law and ignoring the practical application of these statutes is nothing but a lie and it's disgusting.  

[+and-then]

46 minutes ago, susieice said:

It's been a long time since I looked at PA's abortion laws. Apparently they have changed since 1989 if this site is correct. It is up to 24 wks but I was unaware of parental or spousal consent. There is a part of the law saying a woman must have counseling and wait for 24 hours before she has the procedure.

https://statelaws.findlaw.com/pennsylvania-law/pennsylvania-abortion-laws.html

And when each state comes to such agreements among the citizens of that state then that should be respected - so long as the practical effect isn't the snuffing out of a viable infant.  That is a HORROR, IMO.  I'd even be willing to take on a tax increase to fund transportation for women in my state that had decided they wanted these services, should our rules become too restrictive for them to have it done here.  The states should have the right to make the will of the majority known.  Roe was a Liberal power grab that has never been revisited.  The time for a review is here, IMO.  What the majority decides will determine what our nation will become in the years ahead but the majority should be heard on this.

[+susieice]

28 minutes ago, and then said:

And when each state comes to such agreements among the citizens of that state then that should be respected - so long as the practical effect isn't the snuffing out of a viable infant.  That is a HORROR, IMO.  I'd even be willing to take on a tax increase to fund transportation for women in my state that had decided they wanted these services, should our rules become too restrictive for them to have it done here.  The states should have the right to make the will of the majority known.  Roe was a Liberal power grab that has never been revisited.  The time for a review is here, IMO.  What the majority decides will determine what our nation will become in the years ahead but the majority should be heard on this.

I've been looking at various states and what their laws are. My time of such worries passed many years ago. California doesn't allow late term abortions unless the mother's life is in danger. No woman should be waiting that long. I don't agree with late term abortion unless something happens late in the pregnancy that could endanger your life or the baby will not be able to survive outside of the womb.

By the first 3 months your decision should be made. The procedure will be much easier and safer for you if you don't procrastinate if that's what you really decided you want. You are not going to stop people from being sexually active. Rape and Incest shouldn't even be in question here. If Roe vs Wade was to be overturned women will still seek out abortions. They'll just be done in basements with no sanitation, no proper equipment and probably not a lot of medical knowledge. I would not like to see that happen more than to say this is your decision.

Edited May 17, 2019 by susieice

[darkmoonlady]

4 hours ago, susieice said:

Remember honey, and I'm not saying this to be contradictory, but each time a woman has an abortion she is putting her reproductive organ through stress that can do damage and create scar tissue. That's why an obstetrician will ask you if you ever had one. It could inhibit her ability to conceive and give birth safely when she is ready. It needs to remain a safe procedure under medical supervision and in a safe environment as things can go wrong. It is an invasive procedure. 

Completely untrue. Abortion doesn't affect later fertility. And pregnancy carries a number of risks to the woman's health. Obstetricians can't ask if you've had an abortion it's against HYPPA rules, you may disclose it on your intake chart and just as easily not include it and no doctor can tell you've had one just by looking at you or your uterus. It's a D and C procedure which for some women they have when they aren't pregnant for other medical reasons. 

[Princess Bride]

8 hours ago, bec99 said:

Sure you can. I  am conservative but also pro choice. To me it means any women including myself, makes the choice. I made a choice not to but sister did. Honestly believe pro life tougher stance to take. Though I have respect for their “choice” also..

I never addressed you and your statement is out of context. To get this into context do you think your sister did something wrong or made a bad choice? Do you think you are superior to your sister because your choices were different? If not then have a good day; if so then you are what I was talking about. 

 

Michelle says she thinks she's better than women that had abortions, especially if they were too many or not approved of by her. That's who I was talking to.

[Princess Bride]

5 hours ago, acidhead said:

Just curious...

Who's Roe?

https://www.cnn.com/2013/11/04/us/roe-v-wade-fast-facts/index.html

1971 - The case is filed by Norma McCorvey, known in court documents as Jane Roe, against Henry Wade, the district attorney of Dallas County, who enforced a Texas law that prohibited abortion, except to save a woman's life.

[Michelle]

1 hour ago, Princess Bride said:

Michelle says she thinks she's better than women that had abortions, especially if they were too many or not approved of by her. That's who I was talking to.

I never said any such thing. I will not have a conversation with someone who can't understand plain English. Good day...

[Jerry Gallo]

1 hour ago, darkmoonlady said:

Compared to the rate of birth defects 8300 is a small number meaning parents often choose to go through with a pregnancy with liveable, survivable issues and are only choosing abortion for ones that aren't. Ask me how I know? I was born with a profound birth defect disability and have done the research. People who decide to abort for Down syndrome (it's not Down's) do so for a myriad of reasons and it's a personal choice for parents who will have to care for a disabled child their whole lives. Not everyone is capable of doing that. I have a distant relative who found out early enough to terminate their child had profound disabilities. They chose not to terminate. He will need care his whole life, is non verbal and has had to go through numerous painful surgeries and has a string of more surgeries as he grows. They made the choice to keep him and he is here and they love him. He also suffers pain and seizures and his quality of life no matter how hard they work is not good. Some parents make a choice to terminate and some don't, it's personal. Are you capable of caring for a profoundly disabled child yourself? 

The 19/20 week scan is the standard for diagnosing IF there is a possible issue it isn't the only test, it's just the first during crucial development where they can see if a problem exists, did you not bother to read the article I posted? 

Women aren't talked into abortions at that stage, they are freaking out and begging for more tests to make absolutely sure there isn't a chance. Imagine looking at test results that say your wanted baby has no brain stem, or their organs are all outside their body? The absolute horror and you think doctors are what twirling their mustache and figuring out how to trick women? Learn about fetal development and birth defects and the awful things that can happen. Stop perpetuating fear mongering and listen to women who went through it. There are numerous stories online written by the parents it happened to. 

I won't waste a lot of time since you responded to very little of what I posted, just continued to rant and sell your position.

I didn't read the article and have no real interest in anecdotal stories. For every story of woe and despair, there are just as many of perseverance, triumph, and inspiration. Children can have many issues that are difficult for them and/or the parents to deal with: learning disability, deafness, blindness, spina bifida, addictions (some created by actions of the mother), bipolar disorder, some even become sociopaths. No one can predict absolute outcomes, they are best guesses based on medical likelihoods. So, no, I won't sanction laws or court rulings that allow anyone to take a life after mid-term based on best guesses or sad stories. You may not choose to kill a child late in a pregnancy in the 35th week due to fear of outcomes, but you get the right combination of a mother who takes fear of "defect" to the next level and a militant activist/feminist doctor with no laws on the books to define parameters on late term abortion, there is a possibility to abuse the law at the expense of the child within. You, for whatever reason, don't want to guarantee those never happen.

As for the silly question you asked, who knows what we are capable of beforehand? Was I willing to assume full responsibility for any child I might father, no matter the circumstance? Absolutely I was. And I made sure any women I might get pregnant was of the same mind. Perhaps you are on to something, perhaps your anger and hostility on this issue would be better served to reach every girl and woman on Earth and ask her that question before conception rather than in the second half of her pregnancy. Unringing the bell, especially when it involves terminating a life within the womb, is literally the worst aspect feminism has brought to the world. The hypocrisy of not protecting females in the womb (i.e. picking grown females over developing ones) is a close second. The really sad thing is, I think the majority of America is willing to accept the majority of what you want, but it isn't enough. YOU are making this an all or nothing for the other side, YOU are the reason Alabama men (elected by plenty of Alabama women to be their chosen advocates) are pushing back.  

[docyabut2]

 Abortions are sad that Doctors have to kill lives, when their job is to save lives , and the nurses had to care for the babies until they die.  It should only be a choice for a women if its affects her health. It should  never be used just for birth control  

 

 , the International Planned Parenthood Federation (IPPF) reported that they killed 964,325 babies in 2015. That’s nearly a million children worldwide.

https://www.redstate.com/brandon_morse/2016/07/14/nearly-1-million-babies-killed-planned-parenthood-last-year-according-abortion-giant/

[Jerry Gallo]

10 hours ago, Agent0range said:

You say that in a thread where the people DID NOT vote on this bill.  This is a thread where MALE representatives voted on this bill.  Where MALE representatives voted to leave RAPE and INCEST out of exemptions for the bill.  People don't vote for every bill brought forth to the representatives.  Representatives do.  I'd have to imagine that the people of Alabama would not vote against RAPE and INCEST not being grounds for an abortion.  Although, it is Alabama, so you never know.

Really?  It's between her and her conscience?  What the hell kind of conscience do you have that you would allow a pre-teen girl who was raped by her father be forced to have a child, and ruin HER life?  

Why do folks play this game? You know full well that if this was 25 Conservative women who took this action, you'd find a way to insult them too. Conservative women elected these men, their option is to vote them out next election if they disagree with their methods. And if they don't, will you accept that gender has no bearing and that women are as much a part of this decision as the men speaking for them? Also, why are you incapable of acknowledging the purpose of this bill which has been plainly stated by the author from the get go?

[Jerry Gallo]

10 hours ago, Tatetopa said:

 

OK 75% of people support pro life, that is great.  How many unwanted children have you personally  fostered?  How much money have you contributed to the long term care of disabled infants?  Or once they are born has your duty been done?  Do you turn your backs and say that is the parent's responsibility?  If an infant dies of neglect or abuse or disease or starvation before they are six months old does it matter in the slightest to you that if concerned people had intervened that child might have lived?  It is a wonderful and honorable thing to be pro-life .  I hope you realize infants and children could also use some aid once they are born.   Why is it I see signs and anti-abortion protests but never a demonstration by the same people supporting handicapped or malnourished infants?  Is it mostly Democrats working in social services and Children's charities.

There he is, I wondered where this Tatetopa went. If this is what you see, you need to open your eyes or expand your circle sir. Conservatives run or staff many of the children's charities you refer to, the church has taken in many mothers and children in dire circumstance for generations. Many do so quietly, without fanfare, appreciation, or media coverage. I appreciate your passion, but it often goes a step too far into inaccurate pontification.

[Jerry Gallo]

8 hours ago, Kismit said:

I know it is designed to contest Roe verses Wade. That doesn’t actually make it any better.

The fact we are having this debate proves that Roe v Wade is flawed in many ways. So, to some, it is an attempt to make it better.

Imagine if arbitrarily our SCOTUS decided to review Roe v Wade and said it addresses only first trimester abortion and thus, from this day forward, all abortion after the 13th week will be more restrictive than it's been the last decade. Wouldn't you then want people at the table to negotiate less restrictions? I would imagine a competent lawyer could make the case Roe was intended solely for first trimester only, so that possibility exists, especially as the court may swing to the right. Wouldn't you rather see pragmatic, carved in stone, unimpeachable law rather than consistent argument, especially with the potential of losing some of what we already have?

The risk to abortion rights isn't in losing those rights altogether, it's in stoking the opposition with the "all or nothing" approach and them choosing nothing. In other words, if folks cavalierly dismiss or mock the concerns of the opposition, they create the bigger fight that can only work against what they ultimately want. 

 

[Jerry Gallo]

8 hours ago, susieice said:

Here you go. This woman actually changed her mind about abortion after her landmark case was determined by the SCOTUS and regretted her involvement.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Norma_McCorvey

If folks know McCorvey's story in full context, they should worry that Roe has similarities to the FISA warrant issue. A decision based on flawed precursors. The dissent in Roe foreshadowed that a bit, if Roe is ever truly re-litigated, I would imagine some of those details will be part of the case.

[Jerry Gallo]

5 hours ago, darkmoonlady said:

Completely untrue. Abortion doesn't affect later fertility. And pregnancy carries a number of risks to the woman's health. Obstetricians can't ask if you've had an abortion it's against HYPPA rules, you may disclose it on your intake chart and just as easily not include it and no doctor can tell you've had one just by looking at you or your uterus. It's a D and C procedure which for some women they have when they aren't pregnant for other medical reasons. 

Not completely, there is risk of trauma to the cervix, infection that damages the uterus or Fallopian tubes, and a few other minor problems including some caused by physician error. The risk is small, but to say completely non-existent as you indicate is a fallacy. Hence, you've just illustrated why some are concerned with advice given to women about abortion when it is tainted by activism.

And by the way, it's HIPAA, not HYPPA. Figured you were a stickler for accuracy based on a prior post.  

[aztek]

of course there is a risk every time any surgical procedure is performed, to think otherwise is pretty naive, or dumb if you are old enough

[deusex]

Good.  We dont live in medieval times anymore to kill innocent babys.

[Earl.Of.Trumps]

1 hour ago, Jerry Gallo said:

will you accept that gender has no bearing and that women are as much a part of this decision as the men speaking for them?

 

Best I recall, it was a lot of white men that ended the slavery of Afro-Americans.  Hmmmmm    

[Jerry Gallo]

15 minutes ago, Earl.Of.Trumps said:

 

Best I recall, it was a lot of white men that ended the slavery of Afro-Americans.  Hmmmmm    

It's all rhetoric Earl, glad you are keenly aware sir! We know that in all things, it's simply a war on Conservatives who don't think like liberals do. We've come full circle, we're being asked to return to what we fled. I guess we could all threaten to move to another country, but then who would take the blame for all the chaos that remained? THAT would be an interesting discussion to lurk upon, wouldn't it?

[Sir Smoke aLot]

Not sure if this is the right place to refer a song, especially the song by 2Pac but he was more than ''gangsta hip-hop'' and ''Brenda's got a baby'' really portrait how hard life can get. I can not blame her i just feel compassion and try to understand. Anyhow, it's only ''Brenda'' who feels the pain ripping her chest because she had to do the only thing she felt was left to be done.

Only difference that in a song she had baby but got rid of her after the birth. But situation speaks for itself and choice about abortion also fits the story.

As i said already, choice is hers and hers only, especially if she has no support. She takes the risk and has to live the rest of her life knowing what happened. Who has the right to influence her decision? No one except family or a man who is ready to support them both.

[Gromdor]

17 hours ago, aztek said:

nope, very bad idea,  that would open floodgate to overturn pretty much anything else,  i also see no  valid reason to overturn it,  it will do more harm than good. and why should they? cuz some liberals want to kill babies??? hell no

I was thinking the same thing.  Over turning Roe vs Wade would open up the floodgates to overturning things like second amendment rulings and the like every time the political leanings of the Supreme Court changed.  It would change the court into a much more political position and the very basis of our laws would regularly change depending on who was on it at the time.

Right now lawmakers can make laws already knowing if they are constitutional or not.  Once we start elininating precedent, that is no longer the case. 

With that in mind, it is pretty safe to say these recent spate of laws will be struck down.  Conservatives will choose the second amendment over someone else's abortion an day.

[Myles]

16 hours ago, darkmoonlady said:

Once more til it sinks in..infanticide is illegal in all states. Abortions are not performed right before or after birth. It's complete horse puckey.

Most states limit it to a bit after 6 months,  so it is just killing these.

I'm really not a big pro life person, but I can understand why many people are.   I think 6 months is a bit too late for abortions.   I would go with a 4 month limit myself.   

If I had a sea turtle egg and held it up to a bright light where we could see a baby turtle in there, and then put it on the floor and squished it, would pro abortion folks care?

 

https://youtu.be/FeUycQp7198

Edited May 17, 2019 by Myles

[aztek]

i now see many MSM articles, saying look who are those people who voted, all white men,  yet they completely ignore that a governor who is a female had power to veto it, did not. 

not that i'm surprised,  libs are dividing population. pretty much at every issue they find fault of white men, oh well,  never mind that white men split on that as much as black men or women of any color, 

[docyabut2]

2 hours ago, docyabut2 said:

 Abortions are sad that Doctors have to kill lives, when their job is to save lives , and the nurses had to care for the babies until they die.  It should only be a choice for a women if its affects her health. It should  never be used just for birth control  

 

 , the International Planned Parenthood Federation (IPPF) reported that they killed 964,325 babies in 2015. That’s nearly a million children worldwide.

https://www.redstate.com/brandon_morse/2016/07/14/nearly-1-million-babies-killed-planned-parenthood-last-year-according-abortion-giant/

 killed 964,325 babies in 2015:(