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.
I've seen women who didn't know they were pregnant until it was too late to abort, or who had a change in their relationship and no longer wanted the baby but didn't want to put it up for adoption (who knows why), or women who are mentally ill or as I mentioned earlier, meth heads.
And - under this law, it appears none of these examples qualify under the "danger to life and health" clause.
GOD said "Life begins at conception" What part of that do these people not understand or care about. Very pathetic.
Then don't have an abortion. Why you think your religious beliefs get to control what other women do is beyond me.
BTW, most hormonal birth control, iuds, and so on have a secondary action of preventing pregnancy by preventing implantation. How often that actually occurs is unclear exactly, but that means it is entirely possible for birth control to work after conception.
Are you against all hormonal forms of birth control like the pill? If not, how do you reconcile your hypocrisy?
Notice the word play on how they say the "fetus" being "no longer viable". That can mean anything. Any excuse could be made up to justify why the fetus aka baby is no longer viable at 7-9 months. There's a special place in hell for the politicians who vote for this law. I can understand the 1st trimester (1-3 months) but 7-9 months? Really? You have premature babies being born at 7 months surviving and doing just fine with no issues. I'm sorry, this is insane!
This is a sane, necessary law. Kudos to my home state. May all others take their lead.
Women don't need permission from the peanut gallery to make a medical decision about their own body or to have sexual intercourse, as hard as that is for some of you to fathom.
The number of times this has raised it's head in the U.S. says a lot about the people and their supposed freedoms.
You know, I really wish they would just make a forum sticky for abortion--it is so tedious to wade through the threads of poutrage and religious bs.
"Don't kill that innocent baby (even if it is only a zygote), you murderer!"
Then after the kid is born? "Cut off her SNAP" and starve the kid that they were so so anxious for some stranger to have.
But, but, the 'sanctity of life!" And yet, "execute that guy--he shouldn't be alive!"
But, but, the 'sanctity of life'! And--"Don't touch my guns, no gun registry, no stronger background checks -- those shooting massacre victims should have been armed."
Like many hypocritical political issues--this is about Control, Religion and Power over others. Sanctity of life--right.
That whole thing about 'the mother's health' is horsehi$. Please give me an example of where you had to kill a baby to save the mother. You can't because it's just another stupid Democrat talking point to push abortion like 'men shouldn't tell women what to do with their bodies' and 'PP doesn't use tax $$ for abortions'. It's all lies.
My best friends sister had an undiagnosed heart condition discovered when she was 6 months pregnant. Her doctor advised a late term abortion as the stress of going full term could kill her She chose otherwise. She died during her c-section, she was 28.
Katie, I am very sorry for your loss. My wife and I went through a similar situation with what would have been our first child about 19 years ago. Thank God we were able to have more children later. We never really talk about it but I know it still weighs on her sometimes.
I am appalled at posters here who pretend to occupy the moral high ground.
They absolutely do not.
When a woman finds out she's pregnant and wants her baby she is very excited and can't wait to begin showing off her 'baby bump'. She makes loving remarks about the forthcoming birth of her 'baby'.
However, when a women discovers she's pregnant and doesn't want the baby then it isn't a baby, it's nothing and worth nothing; therefore discharging it from her body is declared as her right since it's her body.
Baby or fetus? Depends on the woman I suppose. Strange.
JAMS, in cases where the mothers health is in jeopardy late in pregnancy, they deliver the fetus. That's what you do.
And it's fairly frequent - cholestasis, pre-eclampsia, placenta previa with dangerous bleeding, etc. It happens frequently that to preserve the health of the mother (and by doing so, save the baby too) the baby is delivered early, and steroids are given to the baby before birth to increase the baby's chance of survival.
As I read this, a woman could abort a baby at 39 weeks if she develops any of those conditions. Which is an absolute outrage.
I can't see how you can square this with the hippocratic oath.
Delivery is traumatic, c-section is major surgery, sometimes a woman's health cannot tolerate either without risking her life.
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.
