|
Post by mervinswerved on Apr 12, 2024 17:26:12 GMT -5
Hmmm, let's start with the Senate GOP conference and Donald Trump who put the votes in place to end Roe and all the state legislatures who've passed restrictive abortion laws the last several decades. The current environment isn't just the logical outcome of Dobbs it's the desired result. (are you ever going to acknowledge your bogus claim a couple pages back that nobody has been allowed to legislate on abortion for fifty years?) Opposition to Roe is not nearly the same thing as wanting it to be illegal to remove a dead fetus from a woman's body. If only the right wing legal movement could have known the consequences of getting exactly what they've wanted.
|
|
|
Post by n00b on Apr 12, 2024 17:26:44 GMT -5
Opposition to Roe is not nearly the same thing as wanting it to be illegal to remove a dead fetus from a woman's body. Uh huh. I recall people saying opposition to Roe was not nearly the same thing as wanting a number of far-fetched things, then, surprise surprise, it turns out that some legislators really did want to restrict all abortion from day 1 with no exceptions, to deny travel for pregnant women, deny contraceptives and plan b to be sent through the mail, deny contraceptives and plan b period, to eliminate IVF, and even to legislate interracial marriage. We even have members of Congress who believe a solar eclipse is a sign to repent. Your assurances ring very hollow these days. Again I ask. Can you find one quote from one legislator that affirmatively makes the argument for prohibiting the removal of a nonviable fetus? The responses to that question were extremely vague. Please let me know who said it so I can vote against them.
|
|
|
Post by n00b on Apr 12, 2024 17:29:29 GMT -5
Opposition to Roe is not nearly the same thing as wanting it to be illegal to remove a dead fetus from a woman's body. If only the right wing legal movement could have known the consequences of getting exactly what they've wanted. But only theoretical to this point, right? Has anybody been charged anywhere relating to the IVF issue? Or for for removing a nonviable fetus?
|
|
|
Post by mervinswerved on Apr 12, 2024 17:36:50 GMT -5
If only the right wing legal movement could have known the consequences of getting exactly what they've wanted. But only theoretical to this point, right? Has anybody been charged anywhere relating to the IVF issue? Or for for removing a nonviable fetus? Plenty of examples of doctors refusing any kind of treatment which could result in termination or even resemble termination for fear of prosecution. Also, I guess the answer to this is no. (are you ever going to acknowledge your bogus claim a couple pages back that nobody has been allowed to legislate on abortion for fifty years?)
|
|
|
Post by n00b on Apr 12, 2024 18:50:26 GMT -5
But only theoretical to this point, right? Has anybody been charged anywhere relating to the IVF issue? Or for for removing a nonviable fetus? Plenty of examples of doctors refusing any kind of treatment which could result in termination or even resemble termination for fear of prosecution. Also, I guess the answer to this is no. (are you ever going to acknowledge your bogus claim a couple pages back that nobody has been allowed to legislate on abortion for fifty years?) Arizona's abortion law was passed in 1864. There is no actual Alabama legislation about IVF, that was a trickle down effect from a court ruling. These are things that would've been fixed through legislation over the past 50 years if all of these laws weren't hidden by Roe. Yes, some laws have been passed. The major issues that have come up lately have almost exclusively been about a lack of clarity or lack of any update to a 150-year-old law.
|
|
|
Post by n00b on Apr 12, 2024 18:52:42 GMT -5
But only theoretical to this point, right? Has anybody been charged anywhere relating to the IVF issue? Or for for removing a nonviable fetus? Plenty of examples of doctors refusing any kind of treatment which could result in termination or even resemble termination for fear of prosecution. Also, I guess the answer to this is no. (are you ever going to acknowledge your bogus claim a couple pages back that nobody has been allowed to legislate on abortion for fifty years?) And I agree. There should be more clarity so doctors don't have that fear. That doesn't mean the doctors are RIGHT in that they'd get prosecuted. The pro-choice-activist thing to do now is to refuse treatment to highlight the situation. Is there no brave doctor who would remove a dead fetus from a woman's body to test the law?
|
|
|
Post by mervinswerved on Apr 12, 2024 18:55:05 GMT -5
Plenty of examples of doctors refusing any kind of treatment which could result in termination or even resemble termination for fear of prosecution. Also, I guess the answer to this is no. And I agree. There should be more clarity so doctors don't have that fear. That doesn't mean the doctors are RIGHT in that they'd get prosecuted. The pro-choice-activist thing to do now is to refuse treatment to highlight the situation. Is there no brave doctor who would remove a dead fetus from a woman's body to test the law? I don't know, man. I'm not the person who wanted this. All of these consequences were talked about loudly for years before Dobbs. We were even talking about them in threads here. The idea SCOTUS and other right wingers didn't know what would happen beggars belief.
|
|
|
Post by n00b on Apr 12, 2024 19:29:14 GMT -5
And I agree. There should be more clarity so doctors don't have that fear. That doesn't mean the doctors are RIGHT in that they'd get prosecuted. The pro-choice-activist thing to do now is to refuse treatment to highlight the situation. Is there no brave doctor who would remove a dead fetus from a woman's body to test the law? I don't know, man. I'm not the person who wanted this. All of these consequences were talked about loudly for years before Dobbs. We were even talking about them in threads here. The idea SCOTUS and other right wingers didn't know what would happen beggars belief. Why is that just the right's fault? Is Arizona really so pro-life that it would've been impossible to pass better legislation at any point in the past 160 years?
|
|
|
Post by mervinswerved on Apr 13, 2024 7:10:09 GMT -5
I don't know, man. I'm not the person who wanted this. All of these consequences were talked about loudly for years before Dobbs. We were even talking about them in threads here. The idea SCOTUS and other right wingers didn't know what would happen beggars belief. Why is that just the right's fault? It's their fault because they are the ones who spent half a century organizing their entire political party around eliminating the right to abortion in this country. Now now that the dog has caught the car, conservatives are trying to rationalize by saying there's no way people could have seen the consequences of their political movement.
|
|
|
Post by staticb on Apr 13, 2024 13:09:46 GMT -5
And I agree. There should be more clarity so doctors don't have that fear. That doesn't mean the doctors are RIGHT in that they'd get prosecuted. The pro-choice-activist thing to do now is to refuse treatment to highlight the situation. Is there no brave doctor who would remove a dead fetus from a woman's body to test the law? If you're an abortion doctor in a conservative community would you really risk it? I agree with you, they would likely not be be prosecuted and/or they would win the eventual court cases--but you can't blame them if they also don't want to upend their life that way. They'll likely just move to a pro-choice state (which is already happening)
|
|
|
Post by mikegarrison on Apr 13, 2024 13:40:16 GMT -5
Why is that just the right's fault? It's their fault because they are the ones who spent half a century organizing their entire political party around eliminating the right to abortion in this country. Now now that the dog has caught the car, conservatives are trying to rationalize by saying there's no way people could have seen the consequences of their political movement. For years before Roe, people pointed out that abortion bans were bad for women's health. The wire coat hanger is of course one symbol of this, but also so-called "abortion clinics" were usually women's health clinics that provided lots of services that were not abortions. And people pointed out for years that many abortions were not by selfish choice but because of dangerous pregnancies or severe developmental defects. But the "right to life" movement ignored all that, and pushed and pushed, and unconstitutionally packed the SCOTUS, and finally got most of what they wanted. (They won't be happy until they have a national ban, but for now at least they have a large number of state bans.) And guess what? Stories are immediately coming out about how the new bans are endangering women's health -- exactly as was warned about for more than 50 years. And suddenly right-wingers are claiming that these are "unforseen" complications that they never wanted....
|
|
|
Post by oldnewbie on Apr 13, 2024 14:30:23 GMT -5
I don't know, man. I'm not the person who wanted this. All of these consequences were talked about loudly for years before Dobbs. We were even talking about them in threads here. The idea SCOTUS and other right wingers didn't know what would happen beggars belief. Why is that just the right's fault? Is Arizona really so pro-life that it would've been impossible to pass better legislation at any point in the past 160 years? They did. They passed a law with limits. The SC ruled that the law was based on Roe and didn't itself grant a right to abortion, so in absence of Roe, they completely threw it out. A lot of people think that was a terrible interpretation.
|
|
|
Post by mervinswerved on Apr 13, 2024 15:49:26 GMT -5
It's their fault because they are the ones who spent half a century organizing their entire political party around eliminating the right to abortion in this country. Now now that the dog has caught the car, conservatives are trying to rationalize by saying there's no way people could have seen the consequences of their political movement. For years before Roe, people pointed out that abortion bans were bad for women's health. The wire coat hanger is of course one symbol of this, but also so-called "abortion clinics" were usually women's health clinics that provided lots of services that were not abortions. And people pointed out for years that many abortions were not by selfish choice but because of dangerous pregnancies or severe developmental defects. But the "right to life" movement ignored all that, and pushed and pushed, and unconstitutionally packed the SCOTUS, and finally got most of what they wanted. (They won't be happy until they have a national ban, but for now at least they have a large number of state bans.) And guess what? Stories are immediately coming out about how the new bans are endangering women's health -- exactly as was warned about for more than 50 years. And suddenly right-wingers are claiming that these are "unforseen" complications that they never wanted.... My only quibble is it wasn't court packing (that would have involved adding justices) and what they did to Garland wasn't unconstitutional.
|
|
|
Post by mervinswerved on Apr 17, 2024 14:27:16 GMT -5
I don't know, man. I'm not the person who wanted this. All of these consequences were talked about loudly for years before Dobbs. We were even talking about them in threads here. The idea SCOTUS and other right wingers didn't know what would happen beggars belief. Why is that just the right's fault? Is Arizona really so pro-life that it would've been impossible to pass better legislation at any point in the past 160 years? Just so we're clear, this is the Arizona GOP voting *twice* to keep the 1864 law in place. I, for one, I'm going to believe them when they say they want an outright abortion ban.
|
|
|
Post by n00b on Apr 17, 2024 18:45:31 GMT -5
Why is that just the right's fault? Is Arizona really so pro-life that it would've been impossible to pass better legislation at any point in the past 160 years? Just so we're clear, this is the Arizona GOP voting *twice* to keep the 1864 law in place. I, for one, I'm going to believe them when they say they want an outright abortion ban. I don't live in Arizona, so I guess I can't really confirm this, but I have to imagine Republicans in that state will get HAMMERED this fall if the bill isn't repealed before then. And we'll get to the center of what the people of Arizona want in there abortion laws eventually.
|
|