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.
So perhaps you can enlighten me as to why IVF has been specifically exempted from the law in Indiana?
There is no law against indefinite storage or destruction of embryos. IVF is excepted from abortion law, so if you need to “selectively reduce” the number of embryos in the womb, you can go ahead and do that.
If you have too many children and don’t know what to do with your unused embryos, you can have them put into the uterus so they’ll pass with your next menstrual period.
So to wit, it appears ok to kill life as long as ya didn’t have sex to make it.
Like most states, the true majority is diluted through gerrymandering that disproportionately allocates seats to rural, conservative districts. This is how it is possible for Republicans to put through laws that, were they put to a vote of the people would be easily rejected. All states should have an easily accessible referendum process to limit partisan abuse that circumvents the will of the voters.
Tony Evers, Dem gov of our state which has both legislative houses controlled by Republicans, did just that - proposed a referendum on abortion. In the news today, GOP legislature shot it down:
WI gerrymandering has resulted in popular vote going Democrat, but an over 60% GOP representation in the legislature. Democrats in this state are powerless, including our Gov.
The only way the GOP will see the light is when one of their daughters/wives is denied an abortion even when their life is at stake because doctors fear a lawsuit - and these women die as a result, leaving their living children motherless. In TX and other states, for now these women are sent home, with a variety of life-threatening conditions, to wait it out because the laws are too broad - i.e., define 'life of the mother.' In the past, a termination would have been considered medically necessary, sound procedure. Some OB/GYNs are choosing to not practice in states with laws such as ours because they can't use common sense medical procedures without risk of a lawsuit.
Last edited by Ariadne22; 09-22-2022 at 09:45 PM..
So perhaps you can enlighten me as to why IVF has been specifically exempted from the law in Indiana?
There is no law against indefinite storage or destruction of embryos. IVF is excepted from abortion law, so if you need to “selectively reduce” the number of embryos in the womb, you can go ahead and do that.
If you have too many children and don’t know what to do with your unused embryos, you can have them put into the uterus so they’ll pass with your next menstrual period.
So to wit, it appears ok to kill life as long as ya didn’t have sex to make it.
A fetus doesn’t trump the right of a woman’s own desires. Until a artificial womb is invented, a woman has the choice if she wants to remain pregnant or not. Her choice.
A fetus doesn’t trump the right of a woman’s own desires. Until a artificial womb is invented, a woman has the choice if she wants to remain pregnant or not. Her choice.
Not in the America the GOP/American Taliban/Christian fundamentalists envision. Which is why it's so important for every women in the country--and the men who love them and want them to remain first class citizens--to go to the polls to make sure the GOP doesn't gain control of Congress. Women's rights to autonomy over their own lives is on the ballot in every single state.
I have no idea what you are talking about. On a personal level I believe that abortion should be allowed under the following criteria......
In cases of rape and incest
To protect the life and physical health of the mother
If a fetus is diagnosed with a lethal anomaly
I’m talking about the process of IVF being explicitly exempt from abortion legislation in Indiana.
It’s exempt so as not to interfere with people’s IVF treatment. The reason it’s even necessary to explicitly exempt IVF from abortion laws is because
a) embryos are routinely destroyed in the process if they are not needed
and
b) embryos are sometimes destroyed in the womb after implantation if too many are successful and the parents don’t want multiples
This cannot be tenable for people that argue it’s wrong to terminate life at the embryonic stage when it’s been conceived via sexual intercourse.
Don’t those test tube embryos have the same right to life? Why has IVF been excluded from the law?
Seems like a double standard to me.
(I have no issues with a naturally pregnant woman choosing to terminate an embryo or an IVF enabled pregnant woman doing the same. I just don’t get why some pro lifers think it’s ok in one instance and not the other.)
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.
