Roe v. Wade Potentially Dead

[SeekingUnderstanding]

1 hour ago, Calm said:

Missouri dropped that from their abortion bill, right?  So what states currently are or appear to be making tubal pregnancies illegal.  Ohio supposed requiring them to be implanted (which is currently medically impossible)?

I find it hard to believe legislators would be this uneducated to pass this stuff, but no time to fact check.  Are these just false headlines or for real?

https://www.chron.com/politics/amp/Texas-abortion-law-ectopic-pregnancies-legal-16691817.php

[SeekingUnderstanding]

31 minutes ago, BlueDreams said:

like TX) but a nearby state doesn’t

Define nearby

[BlueDreams]

39 minutes ago, provoman said:

If the 14th Amendment does not allow for abortion because  abortion is not mentioned in the Constitution AND the history of the US is anti-abortion; then the 14th Amendment does not protect marriage period - no mixed race/ethnic marriage, no same sex marriage.

What other rights are lost due to “not mentioned in the Constitution AND the history of the US has been against that claimed “right”.  Terrible unofficial opinion for the fall-out …. 

Interracial marriage laws were not consistently anti-interracial marriage through our history. Several states had no official law (though likely plenty of cultural stigma) others repealed their laws. By loving v Virginia all but the southern states allowed interracial marriages. Similarly for Ssm, though the history is far shorter, several states Had already passed laws allowing for SSM. So though more tentative, there’s still some (short) historical precedent. 
 

what i don’t get is how they can distinguish between this and abortion. Which also has a lengthy legal history that has included some form of legality in the US, including It being generally legal until the mid 1800’s and at least somewhat legal in 17 states in the 1960’s pre roe. 
https://www.guttmacher.org/gpr/2003/03/lessons-roe-will-past-be-prologue

 

that is the bigger problem IMHO.

 

with luv, 

BD 

 

[BlueDreams]

4 minutes ago, SeekingUnderstanding said:

Define nearby

Within the main land US or Canada 😅

hawaii ain’t passing super restrictive abortion laws any time soon. 
 

*I’m still not saying this won’t be price restrictive and privilege people wealthy enough to afford time off work, airline tickets, or a long drive. It will be. 

Edited May 3, 2022 by BlueDreams

[pogi]

44 minutes ago, sunstoned said:

I am truly weeping for my country right now.  The political system has been hijacked by a minorly element.  They have destroyed the republican party, have legitimized deception and lies in political discourse, and have trampled upon precedent.  The hypocrisy that has now become common place is a cancer to democracy.  Case in point.  Vaccines - you can't tell me what to do.  It is my body my choice.  Abortion - you lose the right to your body's reproductive system, because we say so.

I agree.

But to be fair, the hypocrisy runs deep both ways.  Vaccines - Pro life, not choice. When your choice places the lives of others at risk, you loose certain rights to choose.   Abortion - pro choice, not life.  It's my body, my choice - even if it is guaranteed to kill human life.

Nuance is a thing of the past. 

Edited May 3, 2022 by pogi

[pogi]

1 hour ago, BlueDreams said:

the problem i see with this is that it will likely make the above statement the deflacto experience within the states as people either move to super restrictive or super open abortion policies. We do not have the political environment right now to make a more common sense middle ground policy similar to most European countries right now. 

I agree that is likely what is going to happen in this hardcore partyism and extremist climate we are in, where one party fights for the extreme opposite of the other party just to spite them and not give them any satisfaction of being right on any level.  People are fighting for power rather than principles.  That is the problem.  

[LoudmouthMormon]

1 hour ago, sunstoned said:

The political system has been hijacked by a minorly element.  They have destroyed the republican party, have legitimized deception and lies in political discourse, and have trampled upon precedent.  The hypocrisy that has now become common place is a cancer to democracy.  Case in point.  Vaccines - you can't tell me what to do.  It is my body my choice.  Abortion - you lose the right to your body's reproductive system, because we say so.

It's always fascinating to see how incorrect opinions can persevere across decades and generations. 

@sunstoned, SCOTUS isn't ending abortion.  SCOTUS is saying that SCOTUS shouldn't be deciding abortion for the entire country - the people, and their elected state representatives should decide.   It's been the main argument against roe since the beginning.  

"You lose the right to your body's reproductive system because we say so" is a silly notion.  Women get to chose for themselves, what their state's abortion laws should be.  For example: In Mississippi, women (51.5% of the population) cast 55.5% of the votes in Nov'20.  The women in Mississippi will elect who they wanna elect, and if Roe goes away, they'll have the abortion laws they want.  Stop denying them their voice, just because you happen to like Roe.  If Roe ends, you don't get to disenfranchise women any more on this topic.

Edited May 3, 2022 by LoudmouthMormon

[BlueDreams]

47 minutes ago, Meadowchik said:

I've listened to women including those who've had abortions, and it's not as if most take it likely or consider abortion a matter of convenience. Even an otherwise healthy pregnancy can present indirect risks to the health and safety of the mother and her other family members. 

Yup. My last pregnancy ended in a miscarriage that took a 1/3 of my blood, left me with anemia that was then poorly treated by the ob, and left me half a person for several months due to extremely low energy, constant migraines, and sprinkled with mild PTSD symptoms to boot. The likelihood of me having these complications this early in pregnancy were fairly small from what I could find (not much ftr). But exceptions add up. However one writes it, pregnancy and birth still play russian roulette with a women's mental and physical health, and increase in risk when you have more risk factors. My circumstance was ideal (I'm healthy, still in prime baby making age, well off financially, well prepared to manage my mental health, and with a support system/flexible work situation).

This didn't really move the needle for me on being either pro-life or pro-choice. I see both as book ends to a problem that keeps us from focusing our energies on not just abortion but other laws/policies that would likely dramatically reduce both the demand for abortion as well as greater health outcomes for both women and children. I'm still pragmatic and balancing both my belief that all life should be seen as a sacred responsibility with recognizing that I don't feel comfortable forcing someone to remain pregnant at an early stage especially...particularly when as a society we devalue and ignore our societal responsibilities to the poor and marginalized and struggling (those most likely to get an abortion) all the time.

 

With luv,

BD 

Edited May 3, 2022 by BlueDreams

[ttribe]

Welcome to Gilead.

[OGHoosier]

1 hour ago, sunstoned said:

I am truly weeping for my country right now.  The political system has been hijacked by a minorly element.  They have destroyed the republican party, have legitimized deception and lies in political discourse, and have trampled upon precedent.  The hypocrisy that has now become common place is a cancer to democracy.  Case in point.  Vaccines - you can't tell me what to do.  It is my body my choice.  Abortion - you lose the right to your body's reproductive system, because we say so.

Do you want to get this thread locked? Ah, what the heck, it probably will be anyways. 

The idea that all of this is one-sided or that the "hijacking minority element" is only to be found on the right is ludicrous.

And in any case, the fall of Roe v. Wade merely returns the issue to be decided by the elected representatives of the people, as was originally comprehended by the Constitution. This whole idea that our rights ought to be decided by an unelected 9-person tribunal is a gross historical deviation from the ideals upon which this republic was founded, and I can only hope that the traumatic experiences of this reversal will cause many to rethink their reliance on it. 

May Norma McCorvey's spirit finally rest. 

[BlueDreams]

22 minutes ago, pogi said:

I agree that is likely what is going to happen in this hardcore partyism and extremist climate we are in, where one party fights for the extreme opposite of the other party just to spite them and not give them any satisfaction of being right on any level.  People are fighting for power rather than principles.  That is the problem.  

I see it as both. Leaders may be vying for power and shoring up that they remain in power no matter what. But the people voting them in office via primaries are usually doing so in the name of absolutism towards principles that leave them unwilling to see compromise in what they believe in for fear the world will end if it doesn't meet their purist assumptions. 

 

Ain't healthy, that.

 

With luv,

BD

[Raingirl]

1 hour ago, Meadowchik said:

Please be more careful about calling people liars.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.catholicnewsagency.com/amp/news/41307/pro-life-doctors-despite-ohio-bill-there-is-no-procedure-to-save-ectopic-pregnancies

Your posts make no sense. A pregnancy in the Fallopian tube cannot survive. That’s a fact. Even the article you linked states “there is no procedure to save ectopic pregnancies”. A very few states have attempted to call removing an ectopic pregnancy an abortion by attempting to pass idiotic laws not based in science. Ignoring facts to try to pass an “abortion” law that will endanger lives is lying.  
 

CFR. Provide documentation of cases whereby women were denied treatment for ectopic pregnancies. 

Edited May 3, 2022 by Raingirl

[provoman]

11 minutes ago, LoudmouthMormon said:

It's always fascinating to see how incorrect opinions can persevere across decades and generations. 

@sunstoned, SCOTUS isn't ending abortion.  SCOTUS is saying that SCOTUS shouldn't be deciding abortion for the entire country - the people, and their elected state representatives should decide.   It's been the main argument against roe since the beginning.  

"You lose the right to your body's reproductive system because we say so" is a silly notion.  Women get to chose for themselves, what their state's abortion laws should be.  For example: In Mississippi, women (51.5% of the population) cast 55.5% of the votes in Nov'20.  The women in Mississippi will elect who they wanna elect, and if Roe goes away, they'll have the abortion laws they want.  Stop denying them their voice, just because you happen to like Roe.  If Roe ends, you don't get to disenfranchise women any more on this topic.

How people voted does not seem relevant….as SCOTUS overturned laws voted on by respective citizens that targeted homosexuals.

[LoudmouthMormon]

I like some of the reasoning I'm seeing in this leaked draft.  To paraphrase: 

A Pro choice position: Without abortion, women are forced back into inequality (examples: single mother stigma, less able to compete with men in the workplace).

Pro life responses:
- States can chose, and nobody is "forcing" women to do anything any more.  For example: In Mississippi, women (51.5% of the population) cast 55.5% of the votes.
- No longer social stigma around single parenthood. 
- Fed/state laws ban discrimination on basis of pregnancy. 
- Maternal leave laws in growing numbers of states. 
- "Safe haven" laws allowing anonymous placing for adoption.  No more reason to fear a baby placed for adoption won't find a suitable home.  Women have more equitable representation, and vote more, than when Roe was decided.

SCOTUS conclusion: Both sides have merit, the people (meaning the states) should decide for their own people.

[SteveO]

1 hour ago, Meadowchik said:

FTR I gave the example of ectopic pregnancy because it is one that I knew of through my sister. But I did not rely on that rare exception for the formation of my argument. 

I've listened to women including those who've had abortions, and it's not as if most take it likely or consider abortion a matter of convenience. Even an otherwise healthy pregnancy can present indirect risks to the health and safety of the mother and her other family members. 

Keep instances of risk of health to mother, rape/incest, and non viability outside the womb (as most pro life supporters do). In our fallen world, I would even reluctantly support allowances for termination under 12 weeks (like every other western nation).

 

Can we agree all the other ones are bad?

[provoman]

11 minutes ago, OGHoosier said:

Do you want to get this thread locked? Ah, what the heck, it probably will be anyways. 

The idea that all of this is one-sided or that the "hijacking minority element" is only to be found on the right is ludicrous.

And in any case, the fall of Roe v. Wade merely returns the issue to be decided by the elected representatives of the people, as was originally comprehended by the Constitution. This whole idea that our rights ought to be decided by an unelected 9-person tribunal is a gross historical deviation from the ideals upon which this republic was founded, and I can only hope that the traumatic experiences of this reversal will cause many to rethink their reliance on it. 

May Norma McCorvey's spirit finally rest. 

Chief Justice John Marshall might disagree, Marbury v Madison, 1803

 

 

[Meadowchik]

14 minutes ago, Raingirl said:

Your posts make no sense. A pregnancy in the Fallopian tube cannot survive. That’s a fact. Even the article you linked states “there is no procedure to save ectopic pregnancies”. A very few states have attempted to call removing an ectopic pregnancy an abortion by attempting to pass idiotic laws not based in science. Ignoring facts to try to pass an “abortion” law that will endanger lives is lying.  
 

CFR. Provide documentation of cases whereby women were denied treatment for ectopic pregnancies. 

CFR that I lied.

I said my sister could have died if abortion had been criminalised then. This is absolutely true under some possible versions of abortion criminalisation.

I do not need to provide a CFR for something that didn't happen yet.

[LoudmouthMormon]

35 years ago I started paying attention to the abortion debate.  We were all yellin' at each other and calling each other liars and saying things like "if you don't like it move to another country". 

If Roe is overruled, we'll be able to say "if you don't like it, move to another state", and that will truly be the ONLY thing that will change in 35 years of debating the issue. 

[SkyRock]

Good thing conservative justices are not activists like the liberals.   The decision could be not just to return abortion to the states but to ban it entirely.  

[jkwilliams]

6 minutes ago, Meadowchik said:

CFR that I lied.

I said my sister could have died if abortion had been criminalised then. This is absolutely true under some possible versions of abortion criminalisation.

I do not need to provide a CFR for something that didn't happen yet.

Yesterday it was “enemies with an agenda” who pretend not to understand symbolism. Today it’s “liars.” Tomorrow it will be something else. 

[Meadowchik]

24 minutes ago, BlueDreams said:

Yup. My last pregnancy ended in a miscarriage that took a 1/3 of my blood, left me with anemia that was then poorly treated by the ob, and left me half a person for several months due to extremely low energy, constant migraines, and sprinkled with mild PTSD symptoms to boot. The likelihood of me having these complications this early in pregnancy were fairly small from what I could find (not much ftr). But exceptions add up. However one writes it, pregnancy and birth still play russian roulette with a women's mental and physical health, and increase in risk when you have more risk factors. My circumstance was ideal (I'm healthy, still in prime baby making age, well off financially, well prepared to manage my mental health, and with a support system/flexible work situation).

This didn't really move the needle for me on being either pro-life or pro-choice. I see both as book ends to a problem that keeps us from focusing our energies on not just abortion but other laws/policies that would likely dramatically reduce both the demand for abortion as well as greater health outcomes for both women and children. I'm still pragmatic and balancing both my belief that all life should be seen as a sacred responsibility with recognizing that I don't feel comfortable forcing someone to remain pregnant at an early stage especially...particularly when as a society we devalue and ignore our societal responsibilities to the poor and marginalized and struggling (those most likely to get an abortion) all the time.

 

With luv,

BD 

I agree that the abortion debate is a diversion from more effective promotion of public health. Imagine if the material resources, political will, and social energies spent on the abortion debate had been channelled to directly help women and children instead.

[Duncan]

Great, now Canada will have the wives, girlfriends and mistresses of US conservative politicians showing up to get an abortion. 

[Danzo]

8 minutes ago, jkwilliams said:

Yesterday it was “enemies with an agenda” who pretend not to understand symbolism. Today it’s “liars.” Tomorrow it will be something else. 

Using the word "liar" seems to be quite popular today.  Being a "Liar" is much different than being wrong, or making a weak argument.  That is sad.

However, I am unaware of anyone who has been criminally prosecuted, ever, for having an ectopic pregnancy treated.

Also, many people on this thread are talking about "criminal" like they know what that actually means.   A criminal statute is often enforced less than a civil statute, due to the enhanced burden of proof.

Also, with the abundance of criminal laws these days and how vague they are often written, its likely that we are all criminals.

 

[LoudmouthMormon]

4 minutes ago, Duncan said:

Great, now Canada will have the wives, girlfriends and mistresses of US conservative politicians showing up to get an abortion. 

Yeah, it'll be more lucrative to head to California for such things.

https://www.lamag.com/citythinkblog/california-to-become-abortion-sanctuary-state-if-leaders-have-their-way/

Quote

Governor Newsom and his allies in the legislature hope to use state funds to pay for the procedures, transportation, lodging for women across the U.S.

 

[strappinglad]

I just googled " reasons why women have abortions." While one can argue about the quality of the studies , there seems to be a pattern. The difficult reasons like because of rape or incest run around 5 % .Health both physical and mental of the mother adds another 5-10%. The large majority are for socio-economic reasons to do with timing, lack of money, relationship troubles etc.

To add a personal anecdote to the fray, one of my distant relatives lived in a country where abortion was legal. Over her reproductive life she had 13 abortions. She used it as a contraceptive after the fact. But I'm sure she was the exception, right?