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.
Unfortunately, you are raped, you are the victim of incest
The fetus grows in your body is abnormal
Pregnancy will interfere with your health.
Any women who don't fall in these categories, feel free to travel
This is a near total ban and you are outraged by it? Why so?
Some states now have a complete ban even for rape and incest, easy for you to say just travel to another state. If you are a poor and live in southern Texas are you going to take time off from work and fly to another state.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ellis Bell
imo, people are obsessed with Federal powers in delegation of their rights --- and in the delegation of State rights, as well. From what I've read, it seems to me some people believe the Federal power gives to them the power, to tell other people what to do. And they love that idea. That's why for the State to get their powers back, would be the end of the world for them.
Seems more like these states are the ones exerting power over women by placing additional restrictions.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Eyebee Teepee
Currently there are abortion centers operating in the Indiana communities of Merrillville, South Bend, Fort Wayne, Lafayette, Indianapolis, and Bloomington."
So obviously, IN had a lot of restrictions in place, or being fought over in the court system before Roe was even leaked. And surely whoever voted for the 3 women who brought the bill knew their position on the issue, right?
And that's the beauty of it. It was the choice of the State government in Indiana. I mean, CA seems to do about 1/2 their legislating by Propositions. Not every state does. If you want a say in how Indiana conducts its lawmaking, you need to move to Indiana.
When the governor of Oklahoma campaigns on the idea of "any pro-life bill that crosses my desk I will sign" - as one example - you don't think the "pro-choice" crowd in OK considered it an imperative issue?
Kansas' action started in 2015, a law that was eventually overturned by the KS SC 7-1 in 2019. In January 2020, before their November elections legislators began the work to introduce and eventually pass in Jan '21 (after the election) the amendment that would then (eventually) get voted on this past week.
I happen to agree with the results of the Kansas Amendment vote. But there's a difference between agree and "approve of". I wouldn't expect a single Kansas citizen to care whether somebody in another state "approves of" their vote.
The prior laws in both Indiana and Kansas were trivial compared to the seismic shift of striking down Roe. The court case in Kansas was regarding procedures in the second trimester, hardly comparable to a complete ban as was proposed.
The states began prepping when the finally got the court they wanted, Amy Barrett was the last piece they needed to overturn Roe.
In reality, many voters are probably not happy with the new abortion law, but the majority of the voters elected their legislator.
In addition to that, the abortion ban is not a near total ban like you described. Certainly abortion will be inconvenient for some, but life is never perfect, people travel to different states for medical procedure all the time. Just don't know why some of you act like this is the end of the world.
The Indiana ban will ban 95% or more of all abortions. If that isnt near total, I don't know what would be.
I don't understand why you keep saying people travel to different states for medical procedures all the time.
I don't know anyone and never have who routinely travels to a different state for garden variety medical treatments. The only people doing that are people who by choice live in some remote area without health care or possibly in a tri-state area where they are close to the border.
The Indiana ban will ban 95% or more of all abortions. If that isnt near total, I don't know what would be.
I don't understand why you keep saying people travel to different states for medical procedures all the time.
I don't know anyone and never have who routinely travels to a different state for garden variety medical treatments. The only people doing that are people who by choice live in some remote area without health care or possibly in a tri-state area where they are close to the border.
The vast majority of abortions (80+%) in Indiana took place in two counties.
One of those counties actually abuts the Illinois state line. The other is less than two hours away.
The vast majority of abortions (80+%) in Indiana took place in two counties.
One of those counties actually abuts the Illinois state line. The other is less than two hours away.
Not far at all.
That of course depends where you live, some may have been already traveling a great distance to that county so why the need to make it more difficult on poor women. It's not as if they analyzed or cared about travel time to clinics when they passed the ban, they could have cared less.
Like I always said, overturning Roe won't stop abortion but it will sure make life miserable for those living below the poverty level. Middle class women will experience a slight inconvenience.
Unfortunately, you are raped, you are the victim of incest
The fetus grows in your body is abnormal
Pregnancy will interfere with your health.
Any women who don't fall in these categories, feel free to travel
This is a near total ban and you are outraged by it? Why so?
And how are these things determined, and by whom?
Pregnancy is a time sensitive state. How does one determine if rape has occurred?
Do you not see a scenario where some scared 16 year old accuses her sex partner of rape because she doesn't want to remain pregnant? Or some poor kid who now has to report her stepfather -
the potential consequences to her (violence, homelessness) be damned, and whether she has somewhere else to go or not?
Are there more special victims units in place to deal with how to help women in awful situations who are not reporting abuse for fear of retribution (sometimes death?).
These situations can be highly complex and sometimes the abortion is the lesser of all the evils.
"Interfere with your health"? Do you really think that's the threshold? What is the threshold?
How abnormal is abnormal? Who determines such? Do the parents get a say? You know, the ones that have to raise the child, no matter what its circumstances, or theirs?
The state should not be involved in any of this, except to provide support for and prosecute abuse of girls and women.
imo, people are obsessed with Federal powers in delegation of their rights --- and in the delegation of State rights, as well. From what I've read, it seems to me some people believe the Federal power gives to them the power, to tell other people what to do. And they love that idea. That's why for the State to get their powers back, would be the end of the world for them.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Goodnight
Seems more like these states are the ones exerting power over women by placing additional restrictions.
The States or the people that live within the State that vote? It's what happens when a person no longer has to rely on 9 folks to tell 'em what they can and can not do. Just because people believe Federal powers gives to them powers, doesn't mean that it does. It just means it is going to take time for them to realize --- they have their voice back and they no longer have to give their rally cries to the law makers in Washington.
Judge blocks the Indiana abortion ban a week after it took effect
An Indiana judge on Thursday blocked the state's abortion ban from being enforced, putting the new law on hold as abortion clinic operators argue that it violates the state constitution.
The judge wrote "there is reasonable likelihood that this significant restriction of personal autonomy offends the liberty guarantees of the Indiana Constitution" and that the clinics will prevail in the lawsuit.
Judge blocks the Indiana abortion ban a week after it took effect
An Indiana judge on Thursday blocked the state's abortion ban from being enforced, putting the new law on hold as abortion clinic operators argue that it violates the state constitution.
The judge wrote "there is reasonable likelihood that this significant restriction of personal autonomy offends the liberty guarantees of the Indiana Constitution" and that the clinics will prevail in the lawsuit.
Reasonable likelihood as it's used there means it's not completely inconceivable. Indiana's abortion laws date back to 1905 and were extremely limiting. They permitting abortion ONLY in the case where the women's death was a certainty. Not just a likelihood or a probability or merely nearly certain, a certainty. Ectopic pregnancies, for example, may untreated cause serious heath complications and occasionally it's even fatal. The fetus is usually completely non-viable, although not certainly so. In cases where the egg implants on the abdominal wall rather than the fallopian tubes they have a slim chance. Indiana law, however, only permitted abortion where death was a certainty. Up until Row unsettled that longstanding law, an ectopic pregnancy in the fallopian tubes which was absolutely non-viable under any chance abortion was illegal. Yes, it needlessly put the mother's health in risk for absolutely no reason whatsoever but that was the law.
1972 Cheaney v. State (of Indiana) upheld sentence of 3-14 years against Cheaney who illegally performed an abortion. Interesting in a couple of ways. Although not specifically asked to rule on the matter, the Court none the less went out of its way to preemptively address the issue of "quickening" (generally 16-20 weeks) as NOT being when life began but rather that began at the moment of conception. This under the latest precedent from Indiana law Plan B would be illegal. Likewise it very directly ruled on what Indiana's law meant in regards to a women's death being a certainty.
Quote:
The words, "unless ... necessary to preserve her life" might present some difficulties if each word were to be defined separately without reference to the other words. This is the course which the California Supreme Court took in People v. Belous (1969), 71 Cal. 2d 954, 80 Cal. Rptr. 354, 458 P.2d 194, cert. den. 397 U.S. 915, 90 S. Ct. 920, 25 L. Ed. 2d 96. However, these words cannot be defined in a vacuum but must be read as a gestalt and in the context of the entire statute. Read in this manner the words have a clear meaning an abortion will be allowed only when the continuation of the pregnancy will directly and proximately result in the death of the mother. If this law appears too strict or harsh for some, the place to change it is not in the courts but in the legislature.
Now, courts do overturn themselves from time to time. That's why any of this is relevant. SCOTUS overturned itself. But in general courts
1) follow precedent which is very clear from 1972 what that is.
2) look upwards. While the US Constitution is not Indiana's Constitution, Indiana's supreme court would look to precedent set by SCOTUS insofar as interpretation of the law. And again, that's pretty clear, which combined with the longstanding 1905 law outlawing abortion in Indiana unless there's been a change in Indiana's Constitution it's unlikely. But unlikely is not the same as unreasonable. The standard is very low for a temporary stay until the case is heard.
I know Roe was overturned. But until that happened, abortion was considered legal in all 50 states. Everyone accepted the Roe decision.
Then the supremes overturned it and put us right back were we were before the Roe decision. It's de ja vu all over again with every state trying to be more restrictive than the next. Lots of virtue signaling going on, with women's lives at stake.
Women's lives are a stake? Um no, the unborn baby's lives are at stake.
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.
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.
