Mississippi speaker: No abortions for 12-year-old incest victims Asked whether a 12-year-old child molested by a family member should carry a pregnancy to term, Philip Gunn replied, “That is my personal belief.” Of course it is. It's Mississippi. That's probably indicative of his family tree.
We knew these people were unhinged and disconnected from reality, but JFC. An Abortion Is Not An Abortion If A 10-Year-Old Gets One, Says Anti-Abortion Leader Americans United for Life's CEO told Rep. Eric Swalwell (D-Calif.) that a child rape victim ending her pregnancy is “not an abortion.” Huh?
This is what you get when you allow republicans into the discussion. This two sides bullshit does not work when you try to include the village idiots.
can @TheLonelySquire please explain something to me that I fail to u8nderstand. The anti-abortion crowd is clearly also worried about children getting HRT because according to them no child can make such a decision for themselves, has enough experience to make a decision like that, and supposedly their bodies will be damaged in a way they will not like because of their decision to take gender blocking hormones during puberty. However, your side is also saying a 10 year old victim of rape is physically and mentally able to have a child without adverse effects. I woulod think that an abortion at an early point in pregnancy for a 10 year old would be the best idea for everyone, and that the physical strain on a 10 year old's body would cause damage into the adult years with a pregnancy. Why do your people say a 10 year old is ready to give birth but not able to delay their puberty for a while until they decide what gender they want to develop as? How is it that your people even deny that a rape happened when a 10 year old is pregnant? Are you saying there is some way for a 10 year old to become pregnant in a consensual, ethical, moral, or legal way? I get you are often concerned with chomos, but didn't your people just try to excuse sex with a 10 year old because there was no rape charge at the time? They were clearly not concerned that there was a 10 year old pregnant and no one was charged. They were trying to say there was no rape because there were no charges. You seem to be cool with that shit?
Hey bro, First of all, I'm pro "don't slaughter unborn children". Next, I'm not in agreement with the view that a 10-year old rape victims won't suffer adverse affects of carrying a baby. I'm conflicted as there's no good solution, but I understand the argument in this case. I really do. I have no idea what you're talking about "no rape, no charges". If there's a rape...charge the shit out of them.
So in other words you will have no standards for your people and will completely excuse them for trying to pretend there is a consensual way to impregnate a ten year old. I was just wondering how that sat with you.
Same woman: https://twitter.com/RBraceySherman/status/1527316962040172547?s=20&t=G3MnTci6hhXgwXeity5UcQ
I had an ectopic pregnancy that was terminated with methotrexate. Today my attorney general sued because he thinks Texas should have had the right to make me just die instead. It literally hasn’t been three weeks since Dobbs. https://twitter.com/alisongrinter/status/1547747322229993472?s=21&t=UHE_cI4Jhtdod2feRePyUQ
If you think most abortions should be banned but do believe in reasonable exceptions for, say, to save the life of the mother...? The Republicans disagree with you. https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1548430872071639044.html
GOP Push for Nationwide Abortion Ban (newsweek.com) Republican members of the House of Representatives expressed support for federal legislation on Thursday that would ban abortions after a fetal heartbeat is detected. That comes three weeks after many Republicans said abortion was now an issue for the states and the people to decide following the U.S. Supreme Court's decision to overturn the landmark 1973 abortion rights ruling Roe v. Wade on June 24. The Heartbeat Protection Act was originally introduced by Representative Mike Kelly in February, 2021. Justice Samuel Alito, in his majority opinion in Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization, wrote that the Court's decision would allow "each State to regulate abortion as its citizens wish." The argument was also made by several Republicans in the wake of the June 24 decision, but reports quickly emerged that members of the House GOP were mulling federal action if they can retake control of the chamber in the November midterm elections. Federal legislation would supersede state laws but there is little realistic prospect that President Joe Biden would sign a national abortion ban. The president on July 8 signed an executive order that the White House said is aimed at protecting access to reproductive health care services. On Thursday, Representative Kelly spoke from the House floor in favor of his heartbeat bill and was joined by several of his Republican colleagues. The legislation, if passed by the House and Senate and signed by the president, would "prohibit abortions when an unborn child's heartbeat is detected" except where necessary to save the life of pregnant woman. ------------------------------- IT'S NOT EVEN A GODDAMN ACTUAL HEARTBEAT!
Abortion bans create confusion around miscarriage, ectopic pregnancies - The Washington Post Welcome to Federalist Society Gilead: In Wisconsin, a woman bled for more than 10 days from an incomplete miscarriage after emergency room staff would not remove the fetal tissue A woman with a life-threatening ectopic pregnancy sought emergency care at the University of Michigan Hospital after a doctor in her home state worried that the presence of a fetal heartbeat meant treating her might run afoul of new abortion restrictions. (again, an ectopic can't HAVE a heart, and no heartbeat, it's just electrical signals interpreted by the machine as a sound) The Texas Medical Association has asked regulators to step in after several hospitals allegedly prevented doctors from treating patients with serious pregnancy complications for fear of violating the state’s abortion ban. https://t.co/jMj5yE0q9u “In the past week, an Ohio abortion clinic received calls from two women with ectopic pregnancies — when an embryo grows outside the uterus and can’t be saved — who said their doctors wouldn’t treat them. Ectopic pregnancies often become life-threatening emergencies and abortion clinics aren’t set up to treat them.” https://t.co/oAIxmoNm0w Dr. Jessian Munoz, an OB-GYN in San Antonio, Texas, who treats high-risk pregnancies, said medical decisions used to be clear cut. “It was like, the mom’s life is in danger, we must evacuate the uterus by whatever means that may be,” he said. “Whether it’s surgical or medical — that’s the treatment.” Now, he said, doctors whose patients develop pregnancy complications are struggling to determine whether a woman is “sick enough” to justify an abortion. With the fall of Roe v. Wade, “the art of medicine is lost and actually has been replaced by fear,” Munoz said. Munoz said he faced an awful predicament with a recent patient who had started to miscarry and developed a dangerous womb infection. The fetus still had signs of a heartbeat, so an immediate abortion — the usual standard of care — would have been illegal under Texas law. “We physically watched her get sicker and sicker and sicker” until the fetal heartbeat stopped the next day, “and then we could intervene,” he said. The patient developed complications, required surgery, lost multiple liters of blood and had to be put on a breathing machine “all because we were essentially 24 hours behind.’’ In a study published this month in the American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology, doctors at two Texas hospitals cited the cases of 28 women less than 23 weeks pregnant who were treated for dangerous pregnancies. The doctors noted that all of the women had recommended abortions delayed by nine days because fetal heart activity was detected. Of those, nearly 60% developed severe complications — nearly double the number of complications experienced by patients in other states who had immediate therapeutic abortions. Of eight live births among the Texas cases, seven died within hours. The eighth, born at 24 weeks, had severe complications including brain bleeding, a heart defect, lung disease and intestinal and liver problems. Before it overturned Roe v. Wade, the Supreme Court never allowed states to ban abortion before the point when a fetus can survive outside the womb — roughly 24 weeks. Julie Ann Nitsch, a sexual assault survivor and community college trustee in Austin, Texas, is among many women in states with restrictive abortion laws who are taking drastic steps. Nitsch says she chose sterilization at age 36 rather than risk getting pregnant by another rapist. “I ripped my organs out” to avoid that, she said. Nitsch said she “saw the writing on the wall” after Texas enacted a law last year banning most abortions after six weeks, even in cases of rape or incest. She said she sensed that Roe v. Wade would be overturned, so she had surgery to remove her fallopian tubes in February. “It’s sad to think that I can’t have kids, but it’s better than being forced to have children,” Nitsch said. Dr. Tyler Handcock, an Austin OB-GYN, said his clinic has heard from hundreds of patients seeking sterilization since the Supreme Court’s June 24 decision. Many choose this route because they fear long-acting birth control or other contraceptives could also become targets, he said. His clinic scheduled a July 9 group counseling session to handle the surge, and every one of the 20 patients who showed up to hear about the risks and ramifications of fallopian tube-removal made an appointment to have the surgery. Some physicians are reluctant to perform the surgery on young women with many reproductive years left, fearing they will change their minds later. Handcock said he heard from one 28-year-old woman who said six OB-GYNs declined to sterilize her. Handcock said the choice should be up to patients. “I will protect my patients and their rights however I can,” he said.
Hey @Federal Farmer another beautiful story of the state fucking up the health of a woman because those Federal swamp dwellers can't protect her rights anymore.
Democrats have the house and senate and have had almost two years to codify abortion rights, they didn’t. Not my problem.
Oh please. Like Manchin or Sinema would let it pass. (But to be fair, yeah, you do have a small point. Kinda.)
"Sure, you got punched in the face, but don't blame the person who punched you ... blame that guy over there who didn't do enough to stop him!"
For something not your problem you have a whole lot of posts celebrating how it's a good thing. No need to stop now, heck maybe one of these women will die soon so you can really celebrate those states rights over their bodies.
If a woman dies in the process of murdering her own child, I'm all for it. It might serve as a deterrent to others.
Folks, you're never gonna get FF or TLS to give a shit about women who want kids, but have complications. Or their widowers. Or rape victims. They're just gonna twist reality in their heads to "they're lying" or "these stories are made up" or whatever they have to to victim blame. Conservatism is all about victim blaming. "They deserve it!" should be the motto on the Republican seal.
