It's now easier to perform an abortion in the state of New York than to legally apply a tattoo.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Deliver the baby. Do not abort it. Murderers.

Give babies medical care and food. Do not let them suffer. Murderers.

[Anonymous]

I don't agree with this new law, but I do think that the states should have the ability to make their own laws on this issue, because RvW was wrongly decided. Leave it up to the states. If a state like NY want there to be no limits on abortion, that's fine.

Note that under this law, if a husband/boyfriend beats a late term pregnant wife/girlfriend to the point of miscarriage, he will only be guilty of assault, not manslaughter/murder.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP please give us statistics for how many abortions occur after viability and please tell us the reasons women seek out such abortions at that stage. Real life cases please, not just something you made up.

Until you can discuss these things there is no use taking with you about anything.

If it happens ONCE, that's enough.

Nope not until you tell us the reasons why women seek out abortions after about 20 weeks. Are you afraid to discuss them?

The child lacks organs that make that child viable... like a heart.

Or, the fetus has been diagnosed with a disease like the lethal form of Osteogenesis Imperfecta. The lethal form of OI means that the fetus breaks its bones simply from moving in the amniotic fluid (multiple fractures are evident on ultrasound), its lungs cannot develop, and its skull will be crushed in the birth canal. If born alive, the fetus will likely die shortly after birth.

[/quote
Shall we deprive Grammy sustanance because she's "likely" to die next year? Besides, you all know she'd want to be taken out of her misery if she could tell you.

So you're good with a fetus suffering breaking its bones over and over again and then, if born alive, not being able to breathe and dying shortly thereafter?

Are you seriously concerned about the suffering?
Let's be honest here.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Wild. Let's see what happens when the first pregnant woman is murdered. Democrats rejected the Republicans attempt to strengthen the rights of the unborn in crimes.

It truly is playing God.

The pregnant woman and only the pregnant woman gets to decide whether to have an abortion.

If anyone else decides for her and harms her embryo/fetus, it’s a crime.

I don’t see the problem.

Nope.

Can't eat your cake and have it, too. Sorry.

Actually you can.

Having sex with a woman isn't a crime. Unless of course, she declines your advances and you do it against her will. Then it's rape.

See how that works? The person who has the uterus or vagina or what have you gets to decide what does or does not happen to it (or whatever goes inside or stays inside).

Are there any reason why she cannot decide prior to having sex (other than diminished brain capacity)?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP please give us statistics for how many abortions occur after viability and please tell us the reasons women seek out such abortions at that stage. Real life cases please, not just something you made up.

Until you can discuss these things there is no use taking with you about anything.

If it happens ONCE, that's enough.

Nope not until you tell us the reasons why women seek out abortions after about 20 weeks. Are you afraid to discuss them?

The child lacks organs that make that child viable... like a heart.

Or, the fetus has been diagnosed with a disease like the lethal form of Osteogenesis Imperfecta. The lethal form of OI means that the fetus breaks its bones simply from moving in the amniotic fluid (multiple fractures are evident on ultrasound), its lungs cannot develop, and its skull will be crushed in the birth canal. If born alive, the fetus will likely die shortly after birth.

[/quote
Shall we deprive Grammy sustanance because she's "likely" to die next year? Besides, you all know she'd want to be taken out of her misery if she could tell you.

So you're good with a fetus suffering breaking its bones over and over again and then, if born alive, not being able to breathe and dying shortly thereafter?

Are you seriously concerned about the suffering?
Let's be honest here.

DP

If a woman has carried far into her term and finds out about this diagnosis, is she concerned about the suffering of the fetus? Is her Ob-Gyne?

Yes. Yes, they are.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Wild. Let's see what happens when the first pregnant woman is murdered. Democrats rejected the Republicans attempt to strengthen the rights of the unborn in crimes.

It truly is playing God.

The pregnant woman and only the pregnant woman gets to decide whether to have an abortion.

If anyone else decides for her and harms her embryo/fetus, it’s a crime.

I don’t see the problem.

Nope.

Can't eat your cake and have it, too. Sorry.

Actually you can.

Having sex with a woman isn't a crime. Unless of course, she declines your advances and you do it against her will. Then it's rape.

See how that works? The person who has the uterus or vagina or what have you gets to decide what does or does not happen to it (or whatever goes inside or stays inside).

Are there any reason why she cannot decide prior to having sex (other than diminished brain capacity)?

I think we’ve lost the plot here. WTF are you talking about?

[Anonymous]

Reposting to break the open formatting

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP please give us statistics for how many abortions occur after viability and please tell us the reasons women seek out such abortions at that stage. Real life cases please, not just something you made up.

Until you can discuss these things there is no use taking with you about anything.

If it happens ONCE, that's enough.

Nope not until you tell us the reasons why women seek out abortions after about 20 weeks. Are you afraid to discuss them?

The child lacks organs that make that child viable... like a heart.

Or, the fetus has been diagnosed with a disease like the lethal form of Osteogenesis Imperfecta. The lethal form of OI means that the fetus breaks its bones simply from moving in the amniotic fluid (multiple fractures are evident on ultrasound), its lungs cannot develop, and its skull will be crushed in the birth canal. If born alive, the fetus will likely die shortly after birth.

[/quote
Shall we deprive Grammy sustanance because she's "likely" to die next year? Besides, you all know she'd want to be taken out of her misery if she could tell you.

So you're good with a fetus suffering breaking its bones over and over again and then, if born alive, not being able to breathe and dying shortly thereafter?

Are you seriously concerned about the suffering?
Let's be honest here.

DP

If a woman has carried far into her term and finds out about this diagnosis, is she concerned about the suffering of the fetus? Is her Ob-Gyne?

Yes. Yes, they are.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Reposting to break the open formatting

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP please give us statistics for how many abortions occur after viability and please tell us the reasons women seek out such abortions at that stage. Real life cases please, not just something you made up.

Until you can discuss these things there is no use taking with you about anything.

If it happens ONCE, that's enough.

Nope not until you tell us the reasons why women seek out abortions after about 20 weeks. Are you afraid to discuss them?

The child lacks organs that make that child viable... like a heart.

Or, the fetus has been diagnosed with a disease like the lethal form of Osteogenesis Imperfecta. The lethal form of OI means that the fetus breaks its bones simply from moving in the amniotic fluid (multiple fractures are evident on ultrasound), its lungs cannot develop, and its skull will be crushed in the birth canal. If born alive, the fetus will likely die shortly after birth.

[/quote
Shall we deprive Grammy sustanance because she's "likely" to die next year? Besides, you all know she'd want to be taken out of her misery if she could tell you.

So you're good with a fetus suffering breaking its bones over and over again and then, if born alive, not being able to breathe and dying shortly thereafter?

Are you seriously concerned about the suffering?
Let's be honest here.

DP

If a woman has carried far into her term and finds out about this diagnosis, is she concerned about the suffering of the fetus? Is her Ob-Gyne?

Yes. Yes, they are.

Which diagnosis are you now referring to?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP please give us statistics for how many abortions occur after viability and please tell us the reasons women seek out such abortions at that stage. Real life cases please, not just something you made up.

Until you can discuss these things there is no use taking with you about anything.

If it happens ONCE, that's enough.

Nope not until you tell us the reasons why women seek out abortions after about 20 weeks. Are you afraid to discuss them?

The child lacks organs that make that child viable... like a heart.

Or, the fetus has been diagnosed with a disease like the lethal form of Osteogenesis Imperfecta. The lethal form of OI means that the fetus breaks its bones simply from moving in the amniotic fluid (multiple fractures are evident on ultrasound), its lungs cannot develop, and its skull will be crushed in the birth canal. If born alive, the fetus will likely die shortly after birth.

[/quote
Shall we deprive Grammy sustanance because she's "likely" to die next year? Besides, you all know she'd want to be taken out of her misery if she could tell you.

So you're good with a fetus suffering breaking its bones over and over again and then, if born alive, not being able to breathe and dying shortly thereafter?

Are you seriously concerned about the suffering?
Let's be honest here.

OI runs in my mother's family, affecting several members in various ways. Some family members live relatively normal lives, some have to be afraid that their legs will literally break under their own weight (yes, this happened to my cousin's son who was standing on the playground when his leg broke under him), and others are severely disabled. All of them have some degree of hearing loss in addition to the brittle bones, as well as other problems. None of them have OI bad enough that their bones broke in utero, even those who are severely disabled (can't walk or stand).

I did a great deal of research about OI before I ever got pregnant precisely because I was afraid of the suffering the disease can inflict, whether in utero, or not. The idea that my beloved child could be breaking its bones simply from kicking in utero devastates me. If you believe that a fetus can feel pain, how painful must it be to fracture your femur and vetebrae?

Please don't tell me it isn't about the suffering for me because you don't know what you're talking about. You also fail to understand that there are real people facing real tragedies who don't need you or the government to insert themselves and add to the utter misery.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Reposting to break the open formatting

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP please give us statistics for how many abortions occur after viability and please tell us the reasons women seek out such abortions at that stage. Real life cases please, not just something you made up.

Until you can discuss these things there is no use taking with you about anything.

If it happens ONCE, that's enough.

Nope not until you tell us the reasons why women seek out abortions after about 20 weeks. Are you afraid to discuss them?

The child lacks organs that make that child viable... like a heart.

Or, the fetus has been diagnosed with a disease like the lethal form of Osteogenesis Imperfecta. The lethal form of OI means that the fetus breaks its bones simply from moving in the amniotic fluid (multiple fractures are evident on ultrasound), its lungs cannot develop, and its skull will be crushed in the birth canal. If born alive, the fetus will likely die shortly after birth.

[/quote
Shall we deprive Grammy sustanance because she's "likely" to die next year? Besides, you all know she'd want to be taken out of her misery if she could tell you.

So you're good with a fetus suffering breaking its bones over and over again and then, if born alive, not being able to breathe and dying shortly thereafter?

Are you seriously concerned about the suffering?
Let's be honest here.

DP

If a woman has carried far into her term and finds out about this diagnosis, is she concerned about the suffering of the fetus? Is her Ob-Gyne?

Yes. Yes, they are.

Which diagnosis are you now referring to?

The key is in the words "of the fetus." Also, the fact that it is a thread.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Have you heard of pre-eclampsia? Pre-eclampsia and other hypertensive disorders of pregnancy account for 6.8% of maternal pregnancy-related deaths. The primary treatment if it is rapidly progressing to fatal crisis is delivery of the fetus, even if it has not reached viability.

But maybe it doesn't exist, if you haven't heard of it. That would be news to the CDC and a major relief to a heck of a lot of women.

Np. Yes, and in those cases the answer was delivery.

What happens when the crisis is at 20 weeks?

Or if a woman suffered near-fatal HELLP in a previous pregnancy and doesn't want to go through a second unintended pregnancy due to the possibility of it recurring?

There's also something called "mirror syndrome," where a fetus with hydrops (a condition that may result from any number of fetal abnormalities) gives the mother life-threatening pre-eclampsia. Here's one case study. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4659014/

Then it was already legal.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If you don't want an abortion, don't have one.

If you don't want women to have abortions, then
1) pay for their medical care
2) pay for their birth control
3) pay for men to have vasectomies
4) offer to house the pregnant women, pay for their care, and adopt the child

x1000000

Do this for all unwanted pregnancies then we can talk.

And pay for their PAID maternity leave.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Have you heard of pre-eclampsia? Pre-eclampsia and other hypertensive disorders of pregnancy account for 6.8% of maternal pregnancy-related deaths. The primary treatment if it is rapidly progressing to fatal crisis is delivery of the fetus, even if it has not reached viability.

But maybe it doesn't exist, if you haven't heard of it. That would be news to the CDC and a major relief to a heck of a lot of women.

Np. Yes, and in those cases the answer was delivery.

What happens when the crisis is at 20 weeks?

Or if a woman suffered near-fatal HELLP in a previous pregnancy and doesn't want to go through a second unintended pregnancy due to the possibility of it recurring?

There's also something called "mirror syndrome," where a fetus with hydrops (a condition that may result from any number of fetal abnormalities) gives the mother life-threatening pre-eclampsia. Here's one case study. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4659014/

Then it was already legal.

Yes, that’s the point. It is legal under Roe v. Wade but New York wanted to adjust its state law, which predated Roe v. Wade, in case Roe v. Wade goes away. I don’t really understand what all of the stupid tattoo artist hullabaloo is about.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
Yes, that’s the point. It is legal under Roe v. Wade but New York wanted to adjust its state law, which predated Roe v. Wade, in case Roe v. Wade goes away. I don’t really understand what all of the stupid tattoo artist hullabaloo is about.

OP is upset because a rich blue state is re-affirming roe v wade, while ignoring how some red states allow full term abortions without the mother's life at risk.

Can OP please explain why these red states, full of ultra conservatives, allow for full term abortions?

[Anonymous]

Omar L. Hamada, MD, MBA
?

@OmarHamada
Jan 23
More
I want to clear something up so that there is absolutely no doubt.

I’m a Board Certified OB/GYN who has delivered over 2,500 babies.

There’s not a single fetal or maternal condition that requires third trimester abortion. Not one. Delivery, yes. Abortion, no.