Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
If you vote against abortions then I'm sure you are well aware that you are voting against the Bill of Rights yes? See the pursuit of happiness.
I also assume that you support bodily autonomy, in the sense that if an organ transplant from even a dead person to save a living person's life cannot be done because the dead person never agreed to give away their working organs while they were alive, you are straight up saying women have less rights over her body than dead people.
Dead people have more rights than women in this country, what a damn shame.
OMG. THIS is NOT in the Bill of Rights! Even giving this absurd and WRONG argument a modicum of validity, then how do you not also give credit to LIFE which is listed before "pursuit of happiness in the DECLARATION OF INDEPENDENCE.
Why is there any point at all in trying to save the Constitution when people make arguments like this. Seriously, we. are. doomed.
Seriously? Everyone knows the Supreme Court isn't legitimate, even liberals know it.
Liberals don't believe the court was legitimate in the "Heller" case, or McDonald v. Chicago, or Citizens-United, or countless other decisions that split 5-4, and that they didn't agree with.
For that matter, the liberals are freaking out right now because Scalia died, and both parties desperately want the presidency so that they can appoint possibly several new Supreme Court Justices.
The liberals jumped up and down when Scalia died, because they believed Obama would appoint a "left-leaning" justice, who would "vote" their way.
The Supreme Court is a political appointment, and only a moron would believe otherwise.
You are to be commended on your honesty. You are speaking the truth and anyone with an ounce of intellectual honesty HAS to agree with you!
There were over 60,000 abortions performed in Texas in 2013 and only 30 had complications and you feel it is necessary to meet construction standards under ASC and for doctors to have admitting rights?
Almost half the clinics closed in 2013, you are ignoring the downside of women needing to travel great distances to not only seek abortion but also the loss of basic health care, contraception and education that was provided. If your mission was to prevent more abortions this legislation was wrong headed in so many aspects.
This isn't a celebration by the way, Texas has caused undue hardship on these women by placing religious ideology ahead of their constituents needs. Now they can get back to providing reasonable health care.
HB2 was a solution looking for a problem.
Interesting. I never realized that only religious ideologists value life. I will have to share that with my pro-life atheist friends. I'm sure that will give them a chuckle.
D&C is not a "minor procedure". But hey I only work in a hospital and worked previously in an office. This isn't some sebaceous cyst being cut into. And the levels of their requirement are laughably low as it sit.
Come on now, is puncturing a uterus really that big a deal? /sarc
All these people claiming this is a violation of rights. Meanwhile SCOTUS left NYC gun permit scheme which is months of waiting, criminal fingerprinting, background check, hundreds of dollars in fees, and treating people like they want to rob a bank.bank . That is OK.
Making sure women's clinics performing procedures meet a higher standard and we lose our minds.
Interesting. I never realized that only religious ideologists value life. I will have to share that with my pro-life atheist friends. I'm sure that will give them a chuckle.
Well not exactly, I don't see a great deal of support for unwanted children once they are born. They don't want abortions but they don't really have an answer beyond that as to how they would handle 70,000 children per year in Texas alone going into social services.
Last edited by Goodnight; 06-30-2016 at 04:26 PM..
You stated Texas is going to have back alley abortions because of the SCOTUS decision, that was already a result of HB2 but you pretty much ignored that consequence. Quite an exaggeration since Texas already had very thorough inspections at these facilities
Being such a pro-choice advocate as you claim to be, did you take issue with women being forced to go to Mexico or seek other means to abort, do you not see the irony in your statement.
If Texas was serious about this law they would have made it apply to ALL outpatient surgical procedures, but they didn't because that would have run most doctor and dental offices out of business. I have a funny feeling that was the intent of this law.
I don't deny that the law was focused on abortion providers, but I also believe that the legislation was the result of the Gosnell horror show and the investigations of substandard abortion clinics around the country. Would enacting the legislation be burdensome on abortion clinics? Absolutely, but would the result mean safer, more regulated medical care for the women seeking abortions? Absolutely. Sorry, but the Gosnell abortion factor was horrendous and well hidden by the media. And it is not alone in the disgusting clinics around the nation. People like Tiller the killer brag about performing late term abortions and nothing happens. The fact that late term abortions are rare is a lie, and more protection for the patient is never a bad thing in my viewpoint.
That being said, the left is equally guilty for attempting to place excessively burdensome regulations on pregnancy clinics that have the goal of protecting the unborn.
At least the Texas legislation was intended to protect the mother, unlike democrat legislation aimed at making pregnant women and teens aware of their options and providing support and education directed at keeping the baby instead of aborting it.
Well not exactly, I don't see a great deal of support for unwanted children once they are born. They don't want abortions but they don't really have an answer beyond that as to how they would handle 70,000 children per year in Texas alone going into social services.
That's because you are willfully blind to the reality that there are THOUSANDS of facilities around the nation that provide housing, medical treatment, education and financial support to unwed mothers and pregnant teens. Some charitable organization provide up to two years of financial and residential assistance. A simple search for unwed or teen pregnancy assistance will prove how wrong your assumption is.
Well not exactly, I don't see a great deal of support for unwanted children once they are born. They don't want abortions but they don't really have an answer beyond that as to how they would handle 70,000 children per year in Texas alone going into social services.
It won't let me rep you again I must've repped you elsewhere. Not only this but legal abortion is estimated to have 30 billion in savings from less people being incarcerated and lower crime rates.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.