I'm not clutching my pearls, I'm asking what you think. Let me make it easier for you: what does Roe say about third trimester abortions?
A law that prevents camels from being driven on the highway is acceptable to you, then? Thought you were against “big government”?
A law that says "third-trimester abortions are banned unless A, B and C are true" opens up the door for overzealous prosecutors to intimidate women and doctors by issuing subpoenas on every abortion they possibly can, making sure women know that if they need an abortion late in pregnancy, they will be subject to legal harassment and their medical information will be paraded in front of the world. Also, it's nobody's fucking business.
I've heard women say they don't want to be pregnant any more in the 7th or 8th month of pregnancy... But that's because it's rather uncomfortable to have a 6 pound pumpkin growing in your belly that sometimes dances on your bladder... Doesn't mean they want to have a doctor rip out the baby, or induce labour or perform a c-section so the baby is born premature... Though for some people a c-section at 9 months is definitely more for comfort, not for health reasons like saving both the mom and the baby...
Yup. Doesn’t mean you should, but does mean you shouldn’t be prosecutable if you do. Fine with it? Of course not. They’re assholes to do that. But I wouldn’t want the state to be able to hang the captain for it either. No one is invited in. Consent cannot be given to a person who doesn’t exist. Everyone is entitled to just treatment. Not life. Not to everyone around them being a Good Samaritan. Sometimes that means tossing out a trespasser who will die as a result, and the person who does that not being forced to go through the criminal justice system to clear their name. No one performs them electively. They’re performed. And I don’t want any Talibama prosecutors making life even more miserable for women who have just been forced to terminate a pregnancy she wanted (see tafkats’ post for how) because his paranoid delusions make for good electoral campaign fodder. If you don’t think that’ll happen, why the hell are you so quick to want an unnecessary regulation on the books? Cruelty that isn’t happening.
I've met some people who THINK a C-section will be easier than vaginal birth. It won't be, not by any means. There's a minimum six week recovery period and you may or may not have bladder control issues afterwards. That said, it's worth pointing out that a lot of American doctors will push people into C-Sections who may not need them. One woman was told to get one cuz her doc didn't want to miss his 4:30 tee time, even. but often gets pushed for because an otherwise normal sized baby is a week past the due date which they just waited it out to two weeks with kids in my generation. I'm sure the insurance industry is responsible somehow.
On the one hand you have your insistence on legislating something that isn't happening in any numbers that would be affected by such a law, on the other hand you have the numerous real world examples of how such laws are actively harmful to women as it makes medical stuff reluctant to get involved, including them letting the woman die rather than potentially get prosecuted. Seems like an easy choice, unless you're a FYGM manchild.
They're really fucking precious until they grow up into a trans, or a reproductive doctor, or just a liberal.
No, fuck you, it's not your place to make such judgements. Let he who is without sin cast the first stone.
It's a much harder reach, the 14th amendment is pretty explicit. I'm sure conservatives want them to go after it, but I'm much more worried about Griswold v Connecticut (right to contraception), Obergefell v Hodges (same sex marriage), and even Lawerence v Texas (right to private sexual relations with a partner of their choice). We could see these fall in the next few years. What's particularly egregious is how much the right has been captured by its extremist base. Roe was decided with a majority conservative court - four of the justices were appointed by Nixon, one by Eisenhower. Of course, the Right To Privacy was first brought forward in Pierce v Society of Sisters, when the Supreme Court ruled that a state didn't have the right to force children into school if their parents wanted to send them to a religious alternative. But as we've seen they won't let something as overtly specific as rank hypocrisy stop them. They'll overturn the rights conservatives hate while expanding their religious rights because that's as Alito put it 'long based in history.' Another hypocrisy as that has absolutely nothing to do with textualism.
I'm not passing judgment on anyone. I need redemption as much as every single person on Earth does. I'm no better than anyone.
Winning and losing are part of life, Matty, despite what your 14th place kickball medal means to you.
Sure, Lonely. Luckily my life doesn't require ball skills, unlike yours. Now get back to gargling them.
Ideally, no. Right now they are a necessity of how our world is set up, but hopefully one day people will be able to move around the world as easily as you can move from town to town.
He thinks he's saved, which gives him license to be vicious and dehumanize anyone who isn't. You know, because imaginary sky daddy tells the priests that take his money to make him feel OK about being an asshole.
Sorry, taking part in the immoral delusions of the left isn't required of Christians. But hey, it'll only feel like an eternity.
Who knows. Even in our modern countries it is useful to have localised governments for states and provinces and the like, so it's quite possible that even if we get to a world where it's possible for borders to not put restrictions on human movement it might still be useful for countries as a concept to exist.
Being good Christians isn't even required of Christians. But it doesn't matter, imaginary sky daddy still loves you. And you can hate the evil losers all the better. Just bend the knee and pass the collection plate.
idiot... let me repeat this for you. in cases where a fetus must be aborted after 6 months, it's probably not going to survive (if it isn't already all but dead) anyway. so you can "kill" something that isn't going to live, or you can also harm (and maybe kill) the woman it's inside of by forcing her to carry it to term (and all the associated complications that'd cause)
If Jesus Christ exists as described in the New Testament, TLS is going to hell. So, continue to give him as much rope as he needs to hang himself.
