Roe vs. Wade overturned

[Alli]

What pisses me off about this whole thing is that Lindsey Graham, and think of him what you wish because it could have been any Republican member, introduced a bill that would have capped abortions at 15 weeks. Nationwide. And all the left could focus on was the 15-week limit completely ignoring it would legalize it up to 15 weeks Nationwide.

This could have been the stepping stone to a compromise that could have ended at 20 or 24 weeks. Something that 70-80% of the country would have been happy with. But no, the left is too afraid of agreeing to ANY limits. Who or what are they afraid of? Are there that many rabid abortion supporters that want abortion up until her water breaks that they need to appease them?

It was never about the 15 weeks. There cannot be a time limit. You can’t even do amniocentesis until 18 weeks, Assuming a problem is found early, it could be another 4 weeks before doctors and parents can make an informed decision.

Of course, the other issue is that once a national ban is placed, it’s very easy to start pushing back that arbitrary gestation limit and doing away with exceptions, specifically the health and safety of the mother. This is simply not a choice for politicians to be making, it is one that should be up to physicians, parents, and their god. Period.

 

[GermanSuplex]

What pisses me off about this whole thing is that Lindsey Graham, and think of him what you wish because it could have been any Republican member, introduced a bill that would have capped abortions at 15 weeks. Nationwide. And all the left could focus on was the 15-week limit completely ignoring it would legalize it up to 15 weeks Nationwide.

This could have been the stepping stone to a compromise that could have ended at 20 or 24 weeks. Something that 70-80% of the country would have been happy with. But no, the left is too afraid of agreeing to ANY limits. Who or what are they afraid of? Are there that many rabid abortion supporters that want abortion up until her water breaks that they need to appease them?

If someone offers me lemonade before kicking me in the nuts, the lemonade is not what I'll remember.

I guess the flaw in your logic is that we should get to "negotiate" women's health.

 

[Yoused]

I guess the flaw in your logic is that we should get to "negotiate" women's health.

No, the logical flaw is what the fuck business is it of yours???

 

[lizkat]

What pisses me off about this whole thing is that Lindsey Graham, and think of him what you wish because it could have been any Republican member, introduced a bill that would have capped abortions at 15 weeks. Nationwide. And all the left could focus on was the 15-week limit completely ignoring it would legalize it up to 15 weeks Nationwide.

This could have been the stepping stone to a compromise that could have ended at 20 or 24 weeks. Something that 70-80% of the country would have been happy with. But no, the left is too afraid of agreeing to ANY limits. Who or what are they afraid of? Are there that many rabid abortion supporters that want abortion up until her water breaks that they need to appease them?

The problem is that some Americans say that they regard all abortion as murder, so insist there cannot be any exception, and that whatever suffering may ensue in denial of abortion services is part of God's plan or some such... if they even get that far in thinking through the real world impact of a "no abortions whatsoever" law.

Do these dolts in the GOP not understand how revolting it is for politicians to renounce legal abortion publicly and yet somehow become a pretzel when it's their girlfriend inconveniently gets knocked up or their wife turns up with an ectopic pregnancy?​

​

None of this is anyone's business except for concerns of a woman, a couple, their physician. And when the chips are down, that is how it plays out, too, regardless of the law... If one has the money and contacts.​

So long as that "zero abortions" fantasy view persists to some extent, even in the face of all scientific reason --and lack of simple compassion-- there would remain a public litmus test for Republican candidates: they'd have to provide at least lip service to a "pro-life" platform that would NOT line up with the 70-80% of Americans who might agree on some national measure with a viability limit.

Sure if there was a national law, the Republican candidates would have the leeway they take now in trying to assess local views on abortion and avoid alienating any potential voters. Some might not even mention abortion rights as an issue, but some definitely would, and it would be about making it ever harder to terminate a pregnancy no matter the reason. A 15-week national limit would be the equivalent of the rabbit in a greyhound race: Oh we're so close now, let's go for a national "no abortion if there's a heartbeat" law.

 

[Herdfan]

No, the logical flaw is what the fuck business is it of yours???

Because past some limit of viability, you are killing a baby. Are you really OK with that?

 

[quagmire]

Because past some limit of viability, you are killing a baby. Are you really OK with that?

If it leads to threatening the life of the mother or no realistic path for a safe birth, absolutely if that is a decision based on being informed by their doctors given the situation.

You're arguing like what we are wanting is a situation where the couple just decides they don't want a kid anymore 3 weeks prior to due date and aborts it. No one here supports elective abortions past-viability.

 

[lizkat]

Because past some limit of viability, you are killing a baby. Are you really OK with that?

I'm ok with a woman or couple making a choice with the physician.

The GOP still seems to fall back on accusations of "killing babies" when confronted with the impossible choices that restrictions on abortions can and do in reality place on a woman.

Too bad men are never faced intimately, physically with the choice that some of them will readily deny all women.

There's no call for legislators to write hundred- or thousand-page documents trying to turn reasonable medical exceptions for either pre-viability or third-trimester terminations into murder. Leave the choice of pregnancy termination up to the doctor and woman or couple. It is the most just way to deal with unforeseeable situations.

Yes there can be irresponsible actors. That is true in all human situations. Shall we go back to 2A discussions?

 

[Roller]

Because past some limit of viability, you are killing a baby. Are you really OK with that?

California permits abortion up to "viability," which is generally considered to be 24 weeks. Termination of pregnancy after that time is permitted if continuing the pregnancy would endanger the life of the mother.

A 15-week cut-off sounds attractive until you realize that gathering all the information for a woman (and her partner, if appropriate) to make a reasoned decision takes weeks, especially in cases where there is a problem with the fetus. Low and even middle income woman may not have ready access to ultrasound or other diagnostic tests. Unfortunately, many legislators, mostly Republicans, believe abortion shouldn't be legal at any point post conception, including prior to 24 weeks, and don't want to permit any exceptions. In states with abortion bans, doctors are withholding care to women because they're afraid of being sued or jailed. And that doesn't include the women who are putting their lives in jeopardy because they're being forced to have abortions in unsafe conditions, as it was before Roe.

The hypocrisy of legislators who pass abortion bans is that they only seem to care about life before birth for vulnerable populations. But expand Medicaid or provide food, healthcare, and other services to children and parents? Not so much.

 

[Herdfan]

If it leads to threatening the life of the mother or no realistic path for a safe birth, absolutely if that is a decision based on being informed by their doctors given the situation.

You're arguing like what we are wanting is a situation where the couple just decides they don't want a kid anymore 3 weeks prior to due date and aborts it. No one here supports elective abortions past-viability.

Health of the mother is a separate issue. Do what ever is medically needed.

But there are some people who do want elective abortions past viability. Maybe it is because they see a slippery slope of "if they can ban at 30 weeks, then they can ban at 15 weeks.

I guess the best example is KJP refused to answer two different reporters questions on what is a good limit.

California permits abortion up to "viability," which is generally considered to be 24 weeks. Termination of pregnancy after that time is permitted if continuing the pregnancy would endanger the life of the mother.

Ok, now do:

Alaska - No Limits
Colorado - No Limits
New Jersey - No Limits
New Mexico - No Limits
Oregon - No Limits
Vermont - No Limits
Washington DC - No Limits

States with Gestational Limits for Abortion

The Kaiser Family Foundation website provides in-depth information on key health policy issues including Medicaid, Medicare, health reform, global health, HIV/AIDS, health insurance, the uninsured …

www.kff.org

A 15-week cut-off sounds attractive until you realize that gathering all the information for a woman (and her partner, if appropriate) to make a reasoned decision takes weeks, especially in cases where there is a problem with the fetus.

I agree: 15 weeks is too short a period. But it is a starting point for negotiations. Like the ways things used to happen. But just like the 2A supporters, many abortion supporters want no limits because of the slippery slope argument. I think 24 weeks or even end of Second Trimester would be an appropriate limit. Again, health of the mother is fully excepted.

 

[rdrr]

Because past some limit of viability, you are killing a baby. Are you really OK with that?

What about the health/safety of the forced birth child once it is born? Republican currently do not give one ounce of care to children now, I cannot imagine a world in which we have 100s of at risk children born because the mother was forced to.

Where is the free healthcare for mother and child?
Where is the child support from the absentee fathers?
Where is the education system that isn't run by rules of helicopter parents forcing their religious views on the rest of us.
Where is the safety from gun violence at schools because, you know... 2A rights!?

 

[mollyc]

Health of the mother is a separate issue. Do what ever is medically needed.

The problem is that we have seen already in just a couple of months, that the mother's health is not considered with the new bans. The "life" of an unviable fetus is taking priority over an actual live woman.

I'm conservative, but nobody but my doctor and I should have any say over what happens to my body. Do you want a doctor to legislate whether or not you should have prostate surgery? Or heart surgery? I won't limit your medical options and you should not limit mine.

 

[Herdfan]

The problem is that we have seen already in just a couple of months, that the mother's health is not considered with the new bans. The "life" of an unviable fetus is taking priority over an actual live woman.

I'm conservative, but nobody but my doctor and I should have any say over what happens to my body. Do you want a doctor to legislate whether or not you should have prostate surgery? Or heart surgery? I won't limit your medical options and you should not limit mine.

It definitely needs to be.

There are lots of things the government prevents Dr.'s from doing that could help patients. Abortion is just one of them.

 

[Yoused]

There are lots of things the government prevents Dr.'s from doing that could help patients.

Huh. Like what?

(I mean, things that are literally illegal, not things that are merely enjoined by medical ethics boards.)

 

[Herdfan]

Huh. Like what?

(I mean, things that are literally illegal, not things that are merely enjoined by medical ethics boards.)

LSD to treat PTSD for one.

 

[mollyc]

LSD to treat PTSD for one.

I'm not sure it's fair to compare a drug regimen where there are other potential treatments to actual life-saving emergency treatments for half the population. Women are literally being denied medical care because they are pregnant. When just six months ago, those treatments were legal.

 

[GermanSuplex]

Because past some limit of viability, you are killing a baby. Are you really OK with that?

I guess where we are divided is that I don't believe its up to me to regardless of what I'm ok with or not.

People aren't putting Graham down because he's morally opposed to abortion, but because he wants to inflict his beliefs and standards onto others. But not just on a moral issue, but a health issue as well. And its always men legislating the hell out of these things. Why is unmarried, childless Lindsey Graham drafting legislation that affects women's health?

 

[Huntn]

What pisses me off about this whole thing is that Lindsey Graham, and think of him what you wish because it could have been any Republican member, introduced a bill that would have capped abortions at 15 weeks. Nationwide. And all the left could focus on was the 15-week limit completely ignoring it would legalize it up to 15 weeks Nationwide.

This could have been the stepping stone to a compromise that could have ended at 20 or 24 weeks. Something that 70-80% of the country would have been happy with. But no, the left is too afraid of agreeing to ANY limits. Who or what are they afraid of? Are there that many rabid abortion supporters that want abortion up until her water breaks that they need to appease them?

That proposal was dead in the water with the GOP the day it was mentioned. Think of it as a a foole-ya gimmick, oh gee I should vote for this Republican who wants to legalize abortion.

 

[Alli]

Because past some limit of viability, you are killing a baby. Are you really OK with that?

Health of the mother is a separate issue. Do what ever is medically needed.

These two statements are incompatible. I’ve already read about pregnant women being denied life-saving chemo treatments because the baby is more important. Health of the mother is not a separate issue. They are inextricably combined.

 

[lizkat]

Big mic drop here from MIchigan Dem Rep. Elissa Slotkin. Video of her remarks included. Watch it.

Democratic Rep Blasts GOP Anti-Abortion Colleagues: 'Shame On You!'

The Democratic House member from Michigan accused Republicans of "a cold, heartless, violent approach to women’s health" in a debate over a veterans bill.

www.huffpost.com

Slotkin, who is seeking a third term against Republican challenger Tom Barrett in November, reacted viscerally to GOP pushback to the Solid Start Act, which would help veterans transition to civilian life.

Republicans objected to the requirement that the Department of Veterans Affairs provide female veterans with information “tailored to their specific health care” needs, which would adhere to a new VA policy providing abortion access for women vets who are victims of rape, incest or whose life is jeopardized.

“If you can’t state it, then be clear you believe in no exceptions for women — a cold heartless, violent approach to women’s health,” said Slotkin, whose stepdaughter is a female Army officer. “You want to ban all abortions. That is your goal. Many of you have been open about that, and if you flip the House, we know that you will put forward a full ban on all abortion for all states.”

Slotkin excoriated Republicans for holding up a bill that she said should have unmitigated bipartisan support.

“We are all, on this floor, elected officials and not medical professionals,” she said. “If it was your wife, your daughter who was suffering through a miscarriage, are you gonna tell her she can’t until her fever gets high enough and until she’s bleeding harder?”

“If that’s what you want for veterans, shame on you! Shame on you!” she added.

 

[Roller]

Big mic drop here from MIchigan Dem Rep. Elissa Slotkin. Video of her remarks included. Watch it.

“We are all, on this floor, elected officials and not medical professionals,” she said. “If it was your wife, your daughter who was suffering through a miscarriage, are you gonna tell her she can’t until her fever gets high enough and until she’s bleeding harder?”

I know what Rep. Slotkin means, but there are 13 representatives in the current congress who are physicians. Not that their medical degrees mean they're more thoughtful or competent at lawmaking than anyone else. I'm also sure Paul Gosar would point out that as a dentist, he's highly qualified to deal with such matters because, you know, he can read body language.