Texas woman, 26, charged with murder over ‘self-induced abortion’

originally posted by: DBCowboy
a reply to: Xcalibur254

It's a sad state of affairs when the pursuit of basic human rights for unborn humans is called Nazi-esque.

I would think they were protected by the Constitution as well .
Liberals do not understand the Constitution nor laws , and want neither .

From a once "well known Progressive Liberal"

I say let abortions fly everywhere. I'll even let my taxes pay for it.

Better than recirculating murders into the gene pool if you ask me.

Might be tough for a little while, but at least my way encourages a solution. Laws won't stop it, that's for sure.

New Mexico borders Texas and offers full term abortion.

originally posted by: TzarChasm

originally posted by: DBCowboy
a reply to: Xcalibur254

It's a sad state of affairs when the pursuit of basic human rights for unborn humans is called Nazi-esque.

Would you report your neighbor for receiving or self operating on their abortion for the bounty or do it for free?

I consider abortion as the deliberate and intentional ending of a human life.

originally posted by: Gothmog

originally posted by: DBCowboy
a reply to: Xcalibur254

It's a sad state of affairs when the pursuit of basic human rights for unborn humans is called Nazi-esque.

I would think they were protected by the Constitution as well .
Liberals do not understand the Constitution nor laws , and want neither .

From a once "well known Progressive Liberal"

Blacks were once considered less than human.

Jews were once considered less than human.

Apparently unborn humans are considered less than human and undeserving of the most basic of human rights.

originally posted by: Sookiechacha
a reply to: Xcalibur254

Hospital staff reported her.

"What is alleged is that she was in the hospital and had a miscarriage and divulged some information to hospital staff, who then reported her to the police."

www.salon.com...

It's hard to understand how this happened, especially given HIPAA laws, unless the fetus was viable and therefore she was not under the protection of Roe V Wade.

I'll need to wait until I have more information before I can have an opinion on this one.

on this issue i find the two of us AGREEING (dont laugh people it can happen).

given that the press under (please this isnt trying to go off topic people) the "cant say gay" law where what they are reporting is outright bantha dung we cant make a RATIONAL , LEGAL or even logical decision based on what is reported.

Hell what the law REALLY SAYS/DOES has been so spun (and i am understated it) in the press as to be unrecognizable to presume the reporting may be wrong is logical

along with even if (and thats a big IF) we get the whole unvarnished facts people supporting abortion on demand wont believe it

how many today still believe "hands up dont shoot"

scrounger

originally posted by: Xcalibur254
To end this post, I just want to point out the fact that current estimates say 25% of women will have an abortion in their lifetime. If you support what is happening to this woman, do you also believe that 1/4 of all women should be charged with murder?

Well, it's what they did. Legalize rape, see how often it happens, then you can ask if the large number of people should be charged.

Murder is murder. Even if it is an unborn child.

originally posted by: Xcalibur254
To end this post, I just want to point out the fact that current estimates say 25% of women will have an abortion in their lifetime. If you support what is happening to this woman, do you also believe that 1/4 of all women should be charged with murder?

Yes.

Along with the abortionists who murder unborn babies and the facilitators and accomplices who help to make murder happen.

originally posted by: TzarChasm

originally posted by: carewemust
a reply to: Xcalibur254

Killed a child owned by god. Tisk tisk tisk

Owned? In what sense? Do we still own people in this country?

You didn't understand what you read. That's OK. It happens.

originally posted by: marg6043
As a female...

There are no more "women". Just "females". Sad isn't it?

a reply to: Xcalibur254

It's getting ridiculous. Sorry to the pro-choice in this case, but states rights is way more important then the enforcement of a federal ruling that can be revised. Letting states do there own thing is the path to keeping it legal in states that allow it.

I'm smoking legal cannabis I can buy from a farm inspected by a state agency for quality and safety. No paraquat sprayed crap to hurt my lungs anymore.

States rights cut both ways. Texas has a right to impose however strict laws they want IMO.

And on that, she could have done it legally and safely for under $1200, including airfare and hotel by coming to California.

Where the out-of-pocket average cost is $308 for pills and $880 for surgical.

Using Texas' own Southwest Airlines "Wanna Get An Abortion" rates you can pull it off for relatively cheap. The governor has stated California will be the sanctuary state for abortions. Even slashed the cost to encourage out-of-state patronage.

In any case, the purposes of these laws are simple, to get a case to the supreme court and use a 6-3 advantage to revisit Roe V. Wade.

And when that happens I guarentee the USA goes into the meltdowen after Trump won 10 fold. The worst fears of the liberal arts college campus realized. The hatred of the militant pro-choice towards Christian morals dictating their rights will likely be followed by California openly defying the decision and endless protest.

And if forced it may even result in the world having a new member in Global Top 5 GDP. The Republic of California as an Independent nation may be best for everyone.

And I know there would be support for such a move if Roe V. Wade was overturned. At least symbolically.

I just see that trending towards the great gender Armageddon.

a reply to: Degradation33

You do realize 60% of women both Dem and Republican support this right? With much higher numbers in cases of rape or medical conditions.

The melt down you speak of would be women in general. This is not a Dem/Repub issue. This does not even mean because you support the right of women to have it available as a safe option, that you yourself would get one.

You also realize, it can be declared illegal, yet as they have for 1000s of years, women will still try to end pregnancy, it will not go away, it will just become unsafe.

a reply to: frogs453

This is what "Make America Great Again" is all about, regressing to the 1960's when women were barefoot and pregnant, and they liked it, colored people weren't uppity and queer people stayed in the closet or were arrested.

MAGA!

a reply to: Sookiechacha

Sure seems that way. I think they watch Handmaids Tale as more of a "how to" manual.

a reply to: frogs453

So do I. I support the right to choose. Which includes a states right to collectively do so.

Enlisting lawyers just plays into the purpose. To force the Supreme Court to review a states laws forces a review of Roe V. Wade, which doesn't stand a chance on the current court.

Unfortunately, trying to end Texas' law forces a supreme ruling that might take it away from everyone.

The side effect of the law is also to divide people just as it's doing. While really unjust for the pro-life Texas woman coming to her AID on a federal level is EXACTLY the purpose.

A better way to combat it, if compelled to do so, is to start a non-profit fund to pay for it for those who can't afford it. There are tons of Melinda Gates and Hollywood folk to do it on liberal charitable donations alone.

Sorry for the frankness of the statement but the laws being passed are tail wagging dogs of knowing when you have the supreme court majority.

originally posted by: Sookiechacha
a reply to: frogs453

This is what "Make America Great Again" is all about, regressing to the 1960's when women were barefoot and pregnant, and they liked it, colored people weren't uppity and queer people stayed in the closet or were arrested.

MAGA!

For sure. I'm old enough to remember gender roles.

And it was only 48 years ago that women were allowed to have their own credit.

This "going backwards" is frightening to me.

originally posted by: frogs453
This does seem outrageous and scary. The only problem right now is that we don't have any detail or context. Was it 30 weeks and would have been viable outside the womb? That's different than 6-10 weeks with no possible viability.

This whole attack on womens rights and removal of protections for rape and in some cases medical reasons is scary. I certainly don't want to live in some sort of evangelical taliban type country.

It is no scarier or more extreme than what democrats do. It is just in direct opposition to democrat ideology. Republicans have been shocked and appalled at what democrats have done too. Extremism begets extremism. I am not saying two wrongs make a right. But I am saying that if people do not understand when you speak to them in your own words, speak to them in theirs. Then they have no excuses. If extremism is all you understand - this should make perfect sense to you. If you can honestly say both sides are too extreme, then you are one of the normals and you have been cancelled for not being extreme enough.

a reply to: Vroomfondel

Maybe there is a comparison, I am unsure at this time, can you tell me what health care laws are
Dems enacting that will remove the rights to procedures that if not performed could cause death to a male or cause extreme mental trauma if the man, or young boy is raped? That if a male has a certain medical procedure done he can be sued and have to pay out large sums of money or potentially be arrested and spend time in jail?

originally posted by: marg6043
The Texas women should have gone to California for her abortion, now she will think twice next time.

I guess it's asking too much that she'd think twice before engaging in sexual activity that leads to pregnancy...?