[norcal2k19]

Originally Posted by FordBronco1967

Every single state has exceptions for the life of the mother. Almost every state has exceptions for rape and incest, which is only truly needed in states that enact strict limits. It should also be noted that abortions that occur due to rape, incest, or life of the mother only makeup about 1.5 percent of all abortions. The vast majority of abortions that occur are the result of unprotected sex.

If the Constitution does not explicitly state or imply that the right to an abortion is Constitutionally protected, then how would the Supreme Court be able to establish limits on abortion? The answer is that they cannot, which is why they completely left it up to the states.

No man should tell a woman what she should do with her body. Arguments about the constitution and states rights do not supercede this fundamental notion of personal liberty and freedom. I'm glad Connecticut officials recognize this and are taking steps to enshrine this into law.

[seymourct]

Originally Posted by JayCT

I was on Reddit today and saw this thread asking if people in Red States are considering moving to Connecticut to escape “increasingly authoritarian environment” there. Initially I thought no one would respond but surprisingly after just a few hours there were several seriously considering it or on their way. I’m wondering if we have any lurkers here? Anyone? Jay

Hi Jay.. it’s been a long time since I felt like commenting .. I am indeed seeing many many more out of state cars in the Naugatuck valley ..
the house behind me was just bought by NewYorkers 5 months ago.. across the street also New Yorkers about 2 years ago .. up at the end of our road also from New York (I heard that family was choosing to leave the increasing violence in the city)

so not sure I’d say those families were escaping authoritarian rule .. rather changing from urban to suburban setting.. likely burnt out from what their last few years in the city was like under pandemic situations

However, real estate in Seymour has gone nutty this past month , with homes popping up and being snatched up in weeks .. last week there was .. I don’t know.. something like 70 houses were for sale.., that quantity was a real rarity for Seymour.. .. this morning it’s in the 30ish range , not off the market , truly more than 1/2 already sold . .. I truly doubt most of the buyers are from instate .. so since this really active month happened right after the scotus leaked brief.. this month’s wave of folks might be escaping Red Rule & you may be right ..

Only time will tell ..

Now all these outa state cars just gotta get re-registered so the rest of us don’t have to pick up the extra taxes they aren’t paying ..

[hvexpatinct]

Originally Posted by FordBronco1967

Every single state has exceptions for the life of the mother. Almost every state has exceptions for rape and incest, which is only truly needed in states that enact strict limits. It should also be noted that abortions that occur due to rape, incest, or life of the mother only makeup about 1.5 percent of all abortions. The vast majority of abortions that occur are the result of unprotected sex.

If the Constitution does not explicitly state or imply that the right to an abortion is Constitutionally protected, then how would the Supreme Court be able to establish limits on abortion? The answer is that they cannot, which is why they completely left it up to the states.

Oh my goodness - ‘the life of the woman,’. What does that even mean? It’s like a dog whistle for the ‘hey, who cares about the Dobbs decision’ crowd. Medical professionals already have to do so much CYA that putting this one in their hands is a de facto method denying needed medical care.

The daughter of someone I know personally just had a very traumatic experience with a miscarriage in a state with a trigger law. What she went through was not humane and 100% would not have happened if Dobbs hadn’t been decided that week. Because there is no longer any federal protection, well, one of the outcomes is basically outlawing pain management for medical procedures.

Does anyone without a uterus want to go through major dental care or a surgical procedure without anesthesia? No? Well let me tell you something….

[synchem]

Originally Posted by 7 Wishes

Common sense would say that would be the more likely outcome and I'm not saying you're totally incorrect on that, far from it, but I'm thinking of the one and probably the only scenario where secession even would be attempted. I can't think how else blue states would react if the combination of Trump or DeSantis and a fully red Congress bans abortion and/or birth control nationally in an absolute way. I think it would be just too much for blue states to take and I wouldn't blame them. If we were talking about guns as being the trigger for secession (pun intended) I'd fully agree with you. But I think Roe really woke up a sleeping giant and maybe the total 2024 scenario I paint won't happen as a result.

Since someone noted how France stops it at 14 weeks or something like that, if SCOTUS followed Roberts' lead and simply cut it to 15 weeks, I don't think we'd have the chaos that resulted and it would kind of be compromise. But I'd still want there to be exceptions for situations where it's "life of the mother". I think 15 weeks could easily be enough for rape though (but not 6! Or worse, total absolute bans).

In CT an most other states that allow abortion it is only allowed until fetal viability, which is the time when a fetus could survive outside the mother and is around 23-24 weeks. Except when the life of the mother is at stake.

[FordBronco1967]

Originally Posted by hvexpatinct

Oh my goodness - ‘the life of the woman,’. What does that even mean? It’s like a dog whistle for the ‘hey, who cares about the Dobbs decision’ crowd. Medical professionals already have to do so much CYA that putting this one in their hands is a de facto method denying needed medical care.

The "life of the woman" means exactly as it sounds. An abortion will be allowed to be performed at any point during a pregnancy, when the woman's life is at risk.

Originally Posted by hvexpatinct

The daughter of someone I know personally just had a very traumatic experience with a miscarriage in a state with a trigger law. What she went through was not humane and 100% would not have happened if Dobbs hadn’t been decided that week. Because there is no longer any federal protection, well, one of the outcomes is basically outlawing pain management for medical procedures.

Does anyone without a uterus want to go through major dental care or a surgical procedure without anesthesia? No? Well let me tell you something….

What "basically" outlaws pain management? This is the first I have heard of this. After a quick search of the internet, I could not locate any information that concurs with what you describe. I find it quite difficult to believe someone was denied pain management, unless their was a known allergy.

Your post has no logic, no reason, and no rationality. Quite frankly, I have a hard time finding any truth in what you posted.

And, "basically" outlawing something is contradictory.

[hvexpatinct]

Originally Posted by FordBronco1967

The "life of the woman" means exactly as it sounds. An abortion will be allowed to be performed at any point during a pregnancy, when the woman's life is at risk.



What "basically" outlaws pain management? This is the first I have heard of this. After a quick search of the internet, I could not locate any information that concurs with what you describe. I find it quite difficult to believe someone was denied pain management, unless their was a known allergy.

Your post has no logic, no reason, and no rationality. Quite frankly, I have a hard time finding any truth in what you posted.

And, "basically" outlawing something is contradictory.

Let me make it a bit clearer. Allowing the state to dictate the relationship between a patient and a provider introduces fear into the equation and creates a situation where the patient is put into the middle. It is not black and white and when a woman presents at the ER for a pregnancy related complication it’s not always clear that it is life or death.

If the standard of care for a suspected miscarriage is to administer medicine to hasten the inevitable and manage pain, and the state prohibits the administration of that medicine because it’s an abortifacient, the hospital sends the person home to wait and see, without pain management.

Unfortunately, you seem to not be open to understanding that laws have unintended consequences and you seem to not want to understand what I am saying so instead you are trying to undermine or minimize me. Again, a perfect reason why you should have zero say in what happens in my medical care.

Please, educate yourself on women’s healthcare matters. Our voices will not be minimized by your disbelief or trolling.

[brownedbits]

Originally Posted by FordBronco1967

The vast majority of abortions that occur are the result of unprotected sex.

Sir, you are clearly not well versed in women's healthcare. Let me help you out. Did you many miscarriages, which are known as spontaneous abortions in the medical field, have to end in what you would define as an abortion? If not, you force the woman to wait anywhere from hours to weeks until their body naturally expels the non viable pregnancy. That is 1. cruel to do to a grieving mother and 2. can be downright medically dangerous.

Apologies for going off topic to the mods, but uneducated men spouting off about things they don't know anything about is a particular pet peeve of mine.

[JayCT]

This thread is getting off topic. The topic is whether there are people fleeing red states for our state. It is not to discuss the recent ruling by the Supreme Court or the US Constitution. There are threads on other forums for that. If you want to discuss that, I’d suggest you go to one of those threads. JayCT, Moderator

[SteveM85]

Originally Posted by tsek

The poor people who stand to suffer the most are unlikely to move to expensive blue states imo, they don’t have the means. In our unequal society the upper middle class and upper class can get what they need and want wherever they are, imo.

Hundred percent no doubt. The poorest are immobile. They're stuck and there isn't anything they can do about it.
For the uppers were seeing, and more and more going forward, migrating to States that align with their political ideals, no question. Some of the middle class will have to determine if higher local taxes in progressive trending deep blue states like CT are worth moving to over political ideals. For the time being, the South is experiencing unprecendented levels of new housing starts suggesting the move in that direction far exceeds the opposite direction. There is no denying that. That is indisputable. More and more today are now laser focused on seeking their own sanctuaries based on states.

[WestRiverTraveler]

Just saw another one of these "get me out of Prairie Hell" threads on Reddit today. CT welcomes you all with open arms!

The talk of a federal ban is just that - talk. It's also to keep Dems from getting serious about ending the filibuster. The interstate bans are getting proposed, but they they seem to be getting smushed in committee. The GOP leadership needs CT, NY, and CA to keep abortion safe and legal for their their mistresses and daughters. On second thought, they always have Canada. So, maybe it will be a thing.