Texas abortion ban to take effect Wednesday; pro-aborts seeking last-minute block

The first time a man gets sued for insisting his mistress gets an abortion this law will change.

Lol

a reply to: dawnstar

Not nearly as many as the millions of children that are aborted every year.

a reply to: LSU2018

Ask Ron Johnson. Lol

originally posted by: shooterbrody

originally posted by: bigsnowman

originally posted by: LSU2018

originally posted by: sunkuong
a reply to: Xtrozero

Shouldn't it be that way?

2021 and we still want someone to dictate what other people can and cant do

Is it dictating to tell someone they can't murder a child?

What the hell has this country come to. Damn.I can't believe we're arguing over the right to kill a frickin child.

it seems the basis of your argument lies in confusing a fetus with a child. they are two different things

Says who?
When and Whom defined viability?
You think roe v wade is still medically correct?

We would have better understanding of "when" life begins if the entire historical basis of that research topic weren't tainted by religious beliefs and the persuasion of religious entities. It's hard not to notice how many pro-life, anti-abortion people believe in a creator and an afterlife. This issue likely wouldn't exist if religion didn't continue to hold us back.

originally posted by: loam

originally posted by: Xcalibur254
However, since the overreach is being done in favor of a cause you claim to champion you'll happily goose step down the street.

Yup.

The no compromise ethos of the left has finally pushed many people over the edge.

Congratulations.

Puss response.

a reply to: shooterbrody
There are two ways to define viability.
One is when will the fetus survive out of the womb.
Which certainly isn't 6 weeks.
The other way a fetus could be not viable is it is so badly deformed that it wouldn't survive outside of the womb no matter how long the pregnancy lasted.

originally posted by: SprocketUK

originally posted by: LSU2018
a reply to: Tempter

State's Rights. They can always go to another state if they really feel the need to kill their child.

Except, if you are the one taking her to another state, you can get sued under this law.

You can probably get sued for lending her the bus fare, or your car.

You can't get sued for going to the store the day after, buying a Plan B pill, and taking it back to her just in case there was an accident.

originally posted by: LSU2018

originally posted by: Sookiechacha
a reply to: loam

Please cite another such law, a blue state's law, if you have one, that makes something legal effectively illegal, but offers no state law enforcement authority and no state authority to prosecute, but authorizes private citizens, who otherwise have no legal standing, to personally hunt down and prosecute anyone who they think might have helped someone do something that's constitutionally protected.

Burning a bLM flag.

Enrique Tarrio sentenced for burning stolen black Lives Matter flag

But hey, at least you can still steal an American Flag and burn it without consequence, am I right?

Again. This was a legalistic crime that was enforced and prosecuted by state actors.

Are all you against abortion gonna be lining up to adopt? There will be a lot more severely handicapped children as well.

The thought of an unwanted child is about the saddest thing in the world to me. This disgusts me to no end..

This is the expected outcome in a society that (1) forbids bodily autonomy and (2) has erased all of women's rights at a federal level by replacing the reality of biological sex with the religious belief of "gender identity". This is the most predictable result of the intersections of extreme Left AND Right Wing misogyny.

originally posted by: bigsnowman

originally posted by: shooterbrody

originally posted by: bigsnowman

originally posted by: LSU2018

originally posted by: sunkuong
a reply to: Xtrozero

Shouldn't it be that way?

2021 and we still want someone to dictate what other people can and cant do

Is it dictating to tell someone they can't murder a child?

What the hell has this country come to. Damn.I can't believe we're arguing over the right to kill a frickin child.

it seems the basis of your argument lies in confusing a fetus with a child. they are two different things

Says who?
When and Whom defined viability?
You think roe v wade is still medically correct?

We would have better understanding of "when" life begins if the entire historical basis of that research topic weren't tainted by religious beliefs and the persuasion of religious entities. It's hard not to notice how many pro-life, anti-abortion people believe in a creator and an afterlife. This issue likely wouldn't exist if religion didn't continue to hold us back.

Pffft
Religion was NOT a considered factor in roe v wade.
Or would you be kind enough to point me in the direction of that information.

As far as I can see, roe v wade established "28 weeks" as the benchmark.
Then the born alive infant act of 2002 changed that.

Would you tell those going through invetro fertilization that their growing child is not a child?

Religion wasn't a factor in Roe v Wade but it is a MAJOR factor in the attempts to overturn it.

originally posted by: dawnstar
a reply to: shooterbrody
There are two ways to define viability.
One is when will the fetus survive out of the womb.
Which certainly isn't 6 weeks.
The other way a fetus could be not viable is it is so badly deformed that it wouldn't survive outside of the womb no matter how long the pregnancy lasted.

Uh
The born alive infants protection act lists several benchmarks for viability. As with the Texas law, a hearbeat is one qualifying event to define a living person.

Separating a fetus from a person is the only defense roe v wade has ever had.
Murder is a crime.

originally posted by: bigsnowman

originally posted by: LSU2018

originally posted by: Bunch
a reply to: Tempter

From a political strategy standpoint I’m glad the SCOTUS acted kind this. This would keep the left actively engage for the midterms, specially the younger folks… they will come out and vote in droves again. This decision probably saves the House for the Democrats and probably gives the left additional seats in the Senate.

They didn't come out in droves last time. They sent in millions of mail-in ballots with different names. If you think Joe Biden got 81 millions votes then you're extremely naïve.

What the hell, this is patently falsely and thoroughly disproven through the exhaustion of every investigative method possible. Your opinion isn't even an opinion in this case, it's a known falsehood.

Heh, ok

originally posted by: bigsnowman
Religion wasn't a factor in Roe v Wade but it is a MAJOR factor in the attempts to overturn it.

One has to be religious to oppose abortion?
Really?

originally posted by: dawnstar
a reply to: LSU2018
Wth, how many kids did we murder in Afghanistan and iraq over the years by dropping bombs on their villages?

Not as many as they kill I'm sure, but I'm not an Afghan or Iraqi, I don't know. My concern lies with the people of the country I belong to.

originally posted by: bigsnowman
Religion wasn't a factor in Roe v Wade but it is a MAJOR factor in the attempts to overturn it.

I am as unreligious as you will find. I oppose abortion on ethical grounds, and believe that not only is it murder...the claim of "rights" has zero basis in anything beyond someone laying claim and no one really challenging it.

originally posted by: bigfatfurrytexan
a reply to: Sookiechacha

Yeah...but had no one forced abortion coverage into obamacare,

Well, this law puts health insurers who cover abortion in vigilantes' crosshairs too.

then started talking about allowing abortions up until the 9th month, this wouldnt have likely happened.

That has been the case since Roe V Wade became the law of the land. Plus, this Texas law doesn't do anything to change that. It just makes it harder for the woman who body is succumbing to septic shock, because her non-viable diseased 8 month old fetus is in distress, because of nosy, ignorant, religious nut cases, certain the woman is selfishly murdering her baby.

a reply to: shooterbrody

Show me where in the law.

originally posted by: shooterbrody

originally posted by: LSU2018

originally posted by: sunkuong
a reply to: Xtrozero

Shouldn't it be that way?

2021 and we still want someone to dictate what other people can and cant do

Is it dictating to tell someone they can't murder a child?

What the hell has this country come to. Damn.I can't believe we're arguing over the right to kill a frickin child.

They do not recognize them as children.
It is the actual heart of the roe v wade.
Establishing when life begins appears key.
This Texas bill does that.

As Tom Macdonald so eloquently put it in his song, "People So Stupid",

"Let's talk about abortion, sorry, tell me how this works
Bacteria is life on Mars, but a heartbeat isn't life on Earth? Weird"