Updated: Roe v. Wade overturned

[AU9377 4,931]

On 5/8/2022 at 8:57 AM, aubiefifty said:

a friend that is a british nurse posted this on her views and many in the medical field think about abortion. i just read it so i need to over think it like i do everything else. here it is and feel free to discuss and cuss. um best not cuss.................

 

Insufferably Intolerant Science Nerd

pnser77u l2 1h,990438u221y0J74  ·

"Here’s the thing, guys.

It doesn’t matter.

It doesn’t matter when life begins.

It doesn’t matter whether a fetus is a human being or not.

That entire argument is a red herring, a distraction, a subjective and unwinnable argument that could not matter less.

It doesn’t matter whether we’re talking about a fertilized egg, or a fetus, or a baby, or a five year old, or a Nobel Prize winning paediatric oncologist.

NOBODY has the right to use your body, against your will, even to save their life, or the life of another person.

That’s it.

That’s the argument.

You cannot be forced to donate blood, or marrow, or organs, even though thousands die every year, on waiting lists.

They cannot even harvest your organs after your death without your explicit, written, pre-mortem permission.

Denying women the right to abortion means we have less bodily autonomy than a corpse."

 

 

She isn't wrong.

[AU9377 4,931]

On 5/8/2022 at 9:32 AM, DKW 86 said:

Question: Why was there no Amendment made in the 49 years since Roe was made? 49 years and not even an attempt?

There was no need for an amendment if someone was pro-choice.  If pro-life, there were multiple attempts made, however, amendments are incredibly difficult to pass and have ratified.

[CoffeeTiger 5,108]

On 5/8/2022 at 8:31 AM, DKW 86 said:

What if you read this from the Babies' Perspectives? It would read the same way. The baby has completely different DNA than the Mom. You have a chance to correct mess ups in Birth Control. You have 0 to 20 or 24 weeks to address that. 

Coming soon to Republican states near you....no you wont have that. 

[jj3jordan 2,053]

28 minutes ago, AU9377 said:

She isn't wrong.

The baby would beg to differ. Since they are sharing some consideration should be given. 

[CoffeeTiger 5,108]

17 minutes ago, AU9377 said:

There was no need for an amendment if someone was pro-choice.  If pro-life, there were multiple attempts made, however, amendments are incredibly difficult to pass and have ratified.

I'd take "incredibly hard" and change it to "basically impossible" in todays political climate.

 

[GoAU 1,600]

1 hour ago, CoffeeTiger said:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2022/05/08/abortion-tate-reeves-mississippi-contraception/

 

Some on the Right and in the "Middle" are going to look silly when Republican's actually start trying to ban contraception's and traveling out of state for pregnancy care. 

 

"Republicans just want to to stop abortions in their own state's. they wont go farther than that." 

 

yeah...sure. 

 

Miss. governor doesn’t rule out banning contraception if Roe falls

 

Mississippi Gov. Tate Reeves (R) on Sunday refused to rule out the possibility that his state would ban certain forms of contraception, sidestepping questions about what would happen next if Roe v. Wade is overturned.

 

On CNN’s “State of the Union,” Reeves confirmed that, if the Supreme Court overturns Roe v. Wade, a trigger law passed in Mississippi in 2007 would go into effect that essentially outlaws abortions in the state, although it makes exceptions for rape and for the life of the mother.

When asked if Mississippi might next target the use of contraceptives such as the Plan B pill or intrauterine devices, Reeves demurred, saying that was not what the state was focused on “at this time.”

 

“My view is that the next phase of the pro-life movement is focusing on helping those moms that maybe have an unexpected and unwanted pregnancy,” Reeves said. “And while I’m sure there will be conversations around America regarding [contraceptives], it’s not something that we have spent a lot of time focused on.”

On Sunday, Reeves said he thinks “life begins at conception” but repeatedly avoided answering whether he meant at the moment of an egg’s fertilization or when an embryo attaches to the womb.

He didn’t “rule it out” but the same case could be made saying “he didn’t say he would” ban them.  He also said “life begins at conception” so there would be no reason for banning contraception and preventing the pregnancy from occurring. 
 

If something stupid like that happens, I’ll absolutely agree with you, until then I  will relegate it to fear mongering and hysteria inducement.  

[DKW 86 7,424]

Biden ran on codifying Roe. For those that have the memory as good as Joe’s.  

[DKW 86 7,424]

1 hour ago, CoffeeTiger said:

Coming soon to Republican states near you....no you wont have that. 

You mean like Republican MS, the source for the law in question that allows for 15 weeks viability?

[CoffeeTiger 5,108]

8 minutes ago, DKW 86 said:

You mean like Republican MS, the source for the law in question that allows for 15 weeks viability?

I mean like Republican Alabama where the second RoeVWade is done away with then AL's trigger law will activate which will ban Abortions at any stage of pregnancy, including cases of rape and incest. AL doctors who perform an illegal abortion would be charged with the equivalent of murder.  

 

I would also expect Mississippi to reverse it's law to ban abortions similarly within the next few years. 

[AUDub 11,148]

10 minutes ago, CoffeeTiger said:

I mean like Republican Alabama where the second RoeVWade is done away with then AL's trigger law will activate which will ban Abortions at any stage of pregnancy, including cases of rape and incest. AL doctors who perform an illegal abortion would be charged with the equivalent of murder.  

 

I would also expect Mississippi to reverse it's law to ban abortions similarly within the next few years. 

Their exception for rape requires a police report to have been filed. Only about a third of rapes are reported to authorities.

[AU9377 4,931]

34 minutes ago, AUDub said:

Their exception for rape requires a police report to have been filed. Only about a third of rapes are reported to authorities.

Correct.  You must submit to public shaming in order to claim the exception.

[AU9377 4,931]

2 hours ago, jj3jordan said:

The baby would beg to differ. Since they are sharing some consideration should be given. 

I could see someone making the argument, but nonetheless, it was a clever way to point out the marshaling of the woman's body by the state for a particular purpose.

[homersapien 11,373]

On 5/8/2022 at 9:45 AM, TexasTiger said:

 

It’s not a final decision and can change, but you totally disregard the relevance. 

David is just focused on projecting himself as the iconoclast he imagines himself to be.

Edited May 9, 2022 by homersapien

[homersapien 11,373]

19 hours ago, GoAU said:

..... I also feel that without a national law permitting it, it clearly falls within states rights and the initial RvW was attempting to legislate from the courtroom, and isn’t really on solid legal footing.  Should a federal law with “reasonable” (I hate that term from a political standpoint, but only used it for brevity) limits be proposed, I could get behind it  

 

It is if you think the right to privacy - in this case, a women's right of autonomy over her own body - is an unenumerated constitutional right.

That's what is at stake.

Edited May 9, 2022 by homersapien

[homersapien 11,373]

2 hours ago, GoAU said:

He didn’t “rule it out” but the same case could be made saying “he didn’t say he would” ban them.  He also said “life begins at conception” so there would be no reason for banning contraception and preventing the pregnancy from occurring.

 

Depends.

If one defines a fertilized egg (zygote) as "conception" there are several birth control methods including many drugs and natural herbs that could be considered as abortifacients.

[autigeremt 6,630]

On 5/6/2022 at 1:20 PM, icanthearyou said:

Excellent point.  This will ONLY affect the poor and disadvantaged.

Government intervention usually does.....

[icanthearyou 4,463]

33 minutes ago, autigeremt said:

Government intervention usually does.....

I do not believe that is necessarily true, particularly in a society that offers more corporate welfare than social welfare.

[DKW 86 7,424]

4 hours ago, AU9377 said:

Correct.  You must submit to public shaming in order to claim the exception.

And who would be the one shaming anyone? I swear y’all are off your meds. If they have to file a report that doesn’t mean that they will be named publicly. I do not buy this logic at all. 

Edited May 9, 2022 by DKW 86

[DKW 86 7,424]

2 hours ago, homersapien said:

David is just focused on projecting himself as the iconoclast he imagines himself to be.

Leaving the screaming loon in your capable hands. 

[AU9377 4,931]

1 hour ago, DKW 86 said:

And who would be the one shaming anyone? I swear y’all are off your meds. If they have to file a report that doesn’t mean that they will be named publicly. I do not buy this logic at all. 

If you file a police report, and you are an adult, unless the law is written so that your name can be shielded, there is a high probability that everyone you know will be aware that you were raped. That makes a lot of victims very uncomfortable.

[DKW 86 7,424]

There is only about 10 pages worth of links on Rape Shield Laws. 

The Law only asked for a report and nothing more. No testifying, no conviction of the rapist, etc. A simple report was all.

Rape Shield Laws: Protecting Sex-Crime Victims | Nolo

 

Edited May 9, 2022 by DKW 86

[icanthearyou 4,463]

1 hour ago, DKW 86 said:

And who would be the one shaming anyone? I swear y’all are off your meds. If they have to file a report that doesn’t mean that they will be named publicly. I do not buy this logic at all. 

Have you ever been raped?

[AUDub 11,148]

1 hour ago, DKW 86 said:

And who would be the one shaming anyone? I swear y’all are off your meds. If they have to file a report that doesn’t mean that they will be named publicly. I do not buy this logic at all. 

Are you seriously so off your meds you don't realize why women often don't report rape? 

Edited May 9, 2022 by AUDub

[DKW 86 7,424]

6 minutes ago, AUDub said:

Are you seriously so off your meds you don't realize why women often don't report rape? 

No s***....That the best you got? 

There is no way some of you even want to put the fire in your hair out, so feel free to s*** all over yourselves.

Not one person on this board KNOWS how this is going to play out. I do know that some of you are so outraged that babies wont be killed because the vast majority of the parents are simply too stupid to use birth control. 

So, I am signing off in hopes that some of yall will put your hair out and settle down. Or maybe we will be trerated to another 4 years or more bat s*** crazy posts assuming things that arent facts are true and screaming like banshees and howler monkeys over nothing, just like the last four years...

Adios...

[AUDub 11,148]

21 minutes ago, DKW 86 said:

No s***....That the best you got? 

There is no way some of you even want to put the fire in your hair out, so feel free to s*** all over yourselves.

Not one person on this board KNOWS how this is going to play out. I do know that some of you are so outraged that babies wont be killed because the vast majority of the parents are simply too stupid to use birth control. 

So, I am signing off in hopes that some of yall will put your hair out and settle down. Or maybe we will be trerated to another 4 years or more bat s*** crazy posts assuming things that arent facts are true and screaming like banshees and howler monkeys over nothing, just like the last four years...

Adios...

Stubborn iconoclasm as a personality,  everyone.