Supreme Court has voted to overturn abortion rights, draft opinion shows

[Boiler 45,467]

2 minutes ago, Fuerteventura said:

Fine, retirees can travel, that is their choice. I don't want the government telling me I can only get medical treatment in another state, or another  country. 

I had NPR on this afternoon and obviously they have been covering this. They did make the comment that the majority of the US population is in favour with restrictions, Spain seems to be 14 weeks, which to me sounds a bit short.

 

I think every EU country has different laws on this.

 

Part of me thinks what the hell, as living in a State with no restrictions what is the point.

[Redro 4,611]

1 minute ago, Boiler said:

I had NPR on this afternoon and obviously they have been covering this. They did make the comment that the majority of the US population is in favour with restrictions, Spain seems to be 14 weeks, which to me sounds a bit short.

 

I think every EU country has different laws on this.

 

Part of me thinks what the hell, as living in a State with no restrictions what is the point.

What are your reasons for restrictions though? 

[Boiler 45,467]

3 minutes ago, ROK2USA said:

Do you really think it is so easy for women to take several days off to fly to Mexico or Canada or another state for a procedure?

You are aware women are asked if they've ever been pregnant when they go to the doctor, right?

Are women in states with restrictive abortion rights now supposed to lie about their medical history?

"Yep, I was pregnant. Oh, the pregnancy ended but I can't show you any documentation surrounding the event.... "

Come to Colorado

[Redro 4,611]

5 minutes ago, Boiler said:

Come to Colorado

I've heard about the housing prices in Denver. 

I think I'm happier moving to Michigan 😁

 

But, I know Denver did have an IUD program for teens a few years back. 

https://coloradosun.com/2019/10/21/colorado-abortion-rates-keep-declining-free-iuds-and-easier-access-to-the-pill-are-the-reason/

 

Oh wait... I think I read your comment incorrectly? 

You're confused about restrictions because your state has good policies?

Or... you don't agree with the policies in Colorado? 

 

Edited May 10, 2022 by ROK2USA

[TBoneTX 45,267]

10 minutes ago, ROK2USA said:

1.  Do you really think it is so easy for women to take several days off to fly to Mexico or Canada or another state for a procedure?

2.  You are aware women are asked if they've ever been pregnant when they go to the doctor, right?

3.  Are women in states with restrictive abortion rights now supposed to lie about their medical history?  "Yep, I was pregnant. Oh, the pregnancy ended but I can't show you any documentation surrounding the event.... "

1.  Where there's a will or a need, there's a way.  "Ya gotta wanna."

2.  That's a standard question, possibly on intake questionnaires.

3.  Conversations with doctors are covered by HIPAA rules and medical ethics.  Conversations with anyone else can be ended with "I'll thank you to mind your own business."

[Redro 4,611]

2 hours ago, TBoneTX said:

 

3.  Conversations with doctors are covered by HIPAA rules and medical ethics.  Conversations with anyone else can be ended with "I'll thank you to mind your own business."

But if a foetus is defined as a person and abortion as murder in any one state.

Should the doctor not report a possible crime/murder? 

US women are being jailed for having miscarriages

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-59214544

[Dashinka 24,488]

4 hours ago, Boiler said:

I had NPR on this afternoon and obviously they have been covering this. They did make the comment that the majority of the US population is in favour with restrictions, Spain seems to be 14 weeks, which to me sounds a bit short.

 

I think every EU country has different laws on this.

 

Part of me thinks what the hell, as living in a State with no restrictions what is the point.

Switzerland is 12 weeks, I believe most EU countries are around 15 weeks, but you are right it is all over the place, which is what will happen here in the US.

 

On another note, it actually is illegal to protest at the home of a federal judge.

 

https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/1507

[Dashinka 24,488]

1 hour ago, ROK2USA said:

But if a foetus is defined as a person and abortion as murder in any one state.

Should the doctor not report a possible crime/murder? 

US women are being jailed for having miscarriages

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-59214544

So what is a human with respect to an unborn child?  If someone murders a pregnant woman, at what point should the murderer be charged with two murders?  These are the questions that come up when, like Roe, and the upcoming Democrat Bill, the lawmakers or judges start trying to define viability.  If a women consults with her Dr. about an abortion and the Dr. says the fetus is viable, and the women seeks an abortion anyway, should the Dr. report her for a federal crime if this bill is passed?  Personally, I agree, abortion up to the 48th week should be allowed, but the cost should not be put on the taxpayers forcing people that do not agree to pay for this.  Let the Pro-abortion groups use their donations to pay for those that cannot afford it.  

 

 

Senate Bill pertinent wording.

 

In addition, governments may not (1) require patients to make medically unnecessary in-person visits before receiving abortion services or disclose their reasons for obtaining such services, or (2) prohibit abortion services before fetal viability or after fetal viability when a provider determines the pregnancy risks the patient's life or health.

 

https://www.congress.gov/bill/117th-congress/senate-bill/1975 

Edited May 10, 2022 by Dashinka

[yuna628 9,671]

I came across this yesterday. It's a long interview with a woman that had an abortion at her third trimester. For background, this was a very wanted baby, her story is a tragic and painful ordeal. She made a choice to spare that fetus a birth of immense suffering and painful death. The woman's suffering and cost she went through was quite severe. https://jezebel.com/interview-with-a-woman-who-recently-had-an-abortion-at-1781972395 I hope you will consider this person's lengthy story.

 

While we often say that some states thankfully have exceptions in the case of rape or danger to the mother's life, there are questions around late term abortions where the fetus is not viable, and if carried to term has no structure to support life and will experience cruel suffering in labor. I watched a family member go through this, giving birth in hard long labor to a baby that could not survive, and it suffered all the way through it's first and last moments. The trauma the family has is still immense. 

Edited May 10, 2022 by yuna628

[TBoneTX 45,267]

5 hours ago, Dashinka said:

If someone murders a pregnant woman, at what point should the murderer be charged with two murders?

This may vary by state.  In Texas, it appears that most such suspects are charged with two murders.  This needs to be confirmed.

[TBoneTX 45,267]

27 minutes ago, yuna628 said:

The woman's suffering and cost she went through was quite severe.

Just the other day, the Houston Chronicle* published a detailed story about a pregnant woman who was diagnosed with cervical cancer and faces the choice of risking a term pregnancy with severe sequelae.

   *a newspaper in which not to wrap a dead fish, lest the dead fish be insulted

[Nature Boy 2.0 8,370]

Ever notice how libs say that no one gets late term abortions for convenience and anyone that thinks this is a Maga hat wearing idiot.

 

Ever notice how the same liberals scream bloody murder at banning late term abortions for convenience sake,? 

Why would anyone care if we ban something that no one does.

[beloved_dingo 1,976]

31 minutes ago, Nature Boy 2.0 said:

Ever notice how libs say that no one gets late term abortions for convenience and anyone that thinks this is a Maga hat wearing idiot.

 

Ever notice how the same liberals scream bloody murder at banning late term abortions for convenience sake,? 

Why would anyone care if we ban something that no one does.

I mean, you can find every brand of extreme politics and the "loud minority" is very much a thing on both sides of the political spectrum. Every pro-choice person I know (as in, actually know in person) does not believe an abortion should be performed at 8-9 months "for convenience". Hell at that point it would make more sense to just give birth and put the kid up for adoption.

 

Both sides love talking in extremes about this issue, and it is disingenuous to do that imo. Sure, taking the "extreme" into account is one thing, but those talking points shouldn't have any basis in any good-faith discussion on this topic. 

 

The fact is, many things are legal even if they could potentially cause unintended harm or be abused in a way that was not intended. Sure there may be some mentally ill woman that gets pregnant for kicks and then gets abortions performed as late as possible. But should we form our laws based on an extreme possibility? The REALITY is, that without safe and legal abortions, women die. That is a fact. It is not an extreme notion, it is an undeniable reality of life. 

[Boiler 45,467]

So how do they handle it down under?

[yuna628 9,671]

26 minutes ago, beloved_dingo said:

I mean, you can find every brand of extreme politics and the "loud minority" is very much a thing on both sides of the political spectrum. Every pro-choice person I know (as in, actually know in person) does not believe an abortion should be performed at 8-9 months "for convenience". Hell at that point it would make more sense to just give birth and put the kid up for adoption.

 

Both sides love talking in extremes about this issue, and it is disingenuous to do that imo. Sure, taking the "extreme" into account is one thing, but those talking points shouldn't have any basis in any good-faith discussion on this topic. 

 

The fact is, many things are legal even if they could potentially cause unintended harm or be abused in a way that was not intended. Sure there may be some mentally ill woman that gets pregnant for kicks and then gets abortions performed as late as possible. But should we form our laws based on an extreme possibility? The REALITY is, that without safe and legal abortions, women die. That is a fact. It is not an extreme notion, it is an undeniable reality of life. 

Pretty much it in a nutshell. And as you can see in an example of the woman in the previous article that had a late term abortion, she still had to go through hard labor anyway. Late term abortions are complex, difficult, and rarely ever for convenience, and studies show that is also usually the case.

 

1 hour ago, Nature Boy 2.0 said:

Ever notice how libs say that no one gets late term abortions for convenience and anyone that thinks this is a Maga hat wearing idiot.

 

Ever notice how the same liberals scream bloody murder at banning late term abortions for convenience sake,? 

Why would anyone care if we ban something that no one does.

Because we are not banning something that no one does. We are increasingly banning all types and scenarios of abortion, including ones that should always be available and necessary. We are also lumping in birth control and implying eggs have personhood. We are also getting government involved in the regulation of bodily autonomy, liberty, and private sex lives. I do not know anyone that has had an abortion out of 'convenience'. It is doubtful that anyone here does. That does not mean it does not happen. There will be some people that would argue aborting the fetus of a rape victim is convenient or aborting a fetus that is non-viable is convenient. Laws increasingly are not taking into account a variety of scenarios.