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.
All they need now is an 11-year-old victim of incest who is 14 weeks pregnant. What a mess this is!
Any victim of incest will not be seen by an OB/Gyn before the 6 week deadline. The cornerstone of incest is forced secrecy. Babies born from an incestuous sexual encounter have a very high incidence of birth defects do to increased probability of receiving two recessive gene mutations, one from the male and one from the female.
Any victim of incest will not be seen by an OB/Gyn before the 6 week deadline. The cornerstone of incest is forced secrecy. Babies born from an incestuous sexual encounter have a very high incidence of birth defects do to increased probability of receiving two recessive gene mutations, one from the male and one from the female.
I'm aware. The story is coming, and when it hits the press, all hell is going to break loose in Iowa.
As a Doctor on social media stated weeks ago (referring to Alphie UK) that got overwhelming Liberal support (especially on here) said "no child is the property of their parents - they dont own them".
Iowa legislators agree.
Sure, the issue is when the fetus is a child. Personally I dont know if the heartbeat is that crazy of metric to use. I am unsure what that would mean. If Roe vs wade is struck down, the abortion question would just be dealt on a state basis or are pro life proponents ultimately looking for a federal abortion ban.
Sure, the issue is when the fetus is a child. Personally I dont know if the heartbeat is that crazy of metric to use. I am unsure what that would mean. If Roe vs wade is struck down, the abortion question would just be dealt on a state basis or are pro life proponents ultimately looking for a federal abortion ban.
I think they're looking for the latter. This is just the first step.
I think they're looking for the latter. This is just the first step.
Its unclear what the argument would be. I can see how you can legalize abortion in the context of equal protection under the constitution, and the SCOTUS having jurisprudence over it. SCOTUS does not write legislation, you would still need congress to pass a federal abortion ban which seems like a political impossibility. Scotus would need a case where personhood could be extended to a fetus in order to afford it constitutional protections seems very unlikely. A roe vs Wad repeal takes away ammunition to strike down state level legislation that is currently unconstitutional, but it doesnt ban anything.
There will be a special place in heaven for that man.
So God will richly bless men who drive pregnant women to seek self induced abortions or unlicensed people who claim they know how to give abortions? If so, God, no doubt, has the kind of sick and disgusting morals that make my stomach turn.
I think its a good bill, but I don't support it at this time as we are trying to get Kennedy to retire! Continuing to push these hot button issues (and he supports a constitutional right to abortion even thought such is nowhere to be found in the Constitution) isn't the best way to go about that IMO.
A woman has a right to decide this issue for herself. It is her body and in the early months the fetus is not viable outside the womb.
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.
