Are you worried about the end of reproductive rights?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Reminder to readers, it's obvious, but in case you need help, there is more than one person responding on each side.

Carry on.

m
Nope, you answered along in the thread. That’s how you pulled into being asked to cite. You either posted the 10 year prison sentence or you went along with it. Cite it.

I have only posted about one thing and not responded to other claims.

Made the cite. Nobody seems to be willing or able to respond to it. I guess that will have to be answer enough on its own.

You were in the same thread as the “injecting women” and “ 10 year prison term”. That was asked to be cited.

"In the same thread" is your defense?

Then why did you inject yourself into the thread?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Reminder to readers, it's obvious, but in case you need help, there is more than one person responding on each side.

Carry on.

m
Nope, you answered along in the thread. That’s how you pulled into being asked to cite. You either posted the 10 year prison sentence or you went along with it. Cite it.

I have only posted about one thing and not responded to other claims.

Made the cite. Nobody seems to be willing or able to respond to it. I guess that will have to be answer enough on its own.

You were in the same thread as the “injecting women” and “ 10 year prison term”. That was asked to be cited.

"In the same thread" is your defense?

Then why did you cite if you weren’t asked. What’s your defense?

I did cite, and I requoted it again to bring it forward (on my phone).

My defense is that some thread posters must not be able to read.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So many concerns. I have so many friends who went through fertility struggles including miscarriages and ectopic pregnancies and later pregnancy loses. The idea of people being forced to carry dead or unviable fetuses, especially when they so desperately want a child, is horrifying.

As a lesbian parent I’m also concerned we’ll seeing the return of restricting artificial reproductive technologies to straight married couples again. After all, I’m not the kind of person who should “deserve” to have a child according to some lawmakers.

No one is carrying dead babies you idiot.

DP. What's the special word you use for a fetus with no heartbeat and that can't survive, if not dead? It's in a magical limbo until the tissue becomes gangrenous? Is it "dead" then?

What does a special word have to do with whatever nonsense you are trying to pull?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Where state laws define life as beginning at conception, how would those laws view embryos created via IVF? They would say those are babies, yes? Where state laws ban abortion, possibly with exceptions in cases of rape/incest/health of the pregnant woman, how would those laws be applied to embryos not implanted - either disposed of or placed in long-term cryopreservation?

Believing overturning Roe will have no effect on IVF treatments is naive.

It’s also a deliberate misinformation campaign to keep women complacent until after their rights have already been stripped away.

It’s a deliberate fear mongering campaign from you and other libs.

That's what they said about a possible RvW overturn. It's "settled law".

You cannot ban the murder of humans because life begins at conception, and then make ANY exceptions. There cannot be selective reduction if you ban abortion. There cannot be expections for rape and incest. It is not the fault of the embryo as to how it was conceived. You cannot flush embyros by the thousands down the drain. You cannot allow IUDs to cause fertilized embryos to be flushed out of the womb.

If you ban abortion and still allow all of the above.... then it would almost be like fetal life is not the point. Which would be really weird.

So how do you view the many European countries that ban abortion after 12 weeks?

DP. This thread isn’t about European abortion laws, it’s about the implications for access to fertility treatments of Toe is overturned and abortions are banned.

Seems relevant to me. You’re acting as though limiting abortion will mean contraceptives, IVF etc will be illegal or regulated. Has this happened in Europe?

As you noted, most European countries allow abortion at least up to 12 weeks, which means their experiences are irrelevant to the question of how access to fertility treatments would be affected by an abortion ban in the US.

If you have examples of countries than ban abortion from conception but allow ready access to fertility treatments, feel free to share them.

This is the problem. Then end game is not ending abortion in certain states, it's ending all access to abortion country wide (Mitch McConnell) and ending most access to contraception.

If you can't have any abortion, you essentially can't do most fertility treatments. Please list the countries banning all abortions under any circumstances, which also have fertility treatment center.

Waiting for you all to list lol the countries that completely ban abortion and allow IVF.

I’m unaware of any, including the United States.

Then that’s that. You cannot point to a single country where abortion is banned but IVF and other reproductive technologies are allowed. Therefore, it is reasonable to expect that if abortion is banned in the US, this may also result in a ban (outright or effective) on reproductive technologies.

Why would abortion be banned in the US? That’s not what happens if roe is overturned.

14 states already have trigger bans on the books that would automatically ban abortion if Roe is overturned. Another dozen states have pre-Roe abortion bans that were never repealed. Therefore, if Roe is overturned, abortion will immediately be banned in half the country.

Typo, that should be 13, not 14. The point still stands.

That leaves a lot of other states you can live in.

DP. The Republican party absolutely plans to introduce bans at the federal level next time they have the presidency and Congress. You are either delusional or arguing in bad faith to suggest otherwise. This was never about states' rights.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Reminder to readers, it's obvious, but in case you need help, there is more than one person responding on each side.

Carry on.

m
Nope, you answered along in the thread. That’s how you pulled into being asked to cite. You either posted the 10 year prison sentence or you went along with it. Cite it.

I have only posted about one thing and not responded to other claims.

Made the cite. Nobody seems to be willing or able to respond to it. I guess that will have to be answer enough on its own.

You were in the same thread as the “injecting women” and “ 10 year prison term”. That was asked to be cited.

"In the same thread" is your defense?

Then why did you cite if you weren’t asked. What’s your defense?

I did cite, and I requoted it again to bring it forward (on my phone).

My defense is that some thread posters must not be able to read.

Why did you cite when you were not asked to? You inserted yourself and then can’t understand why you information isn’t relevant.
I applaud you on your deflecting. It’s impressive but not.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Where state laws define life as beginning at conception, how would those laws view embryos created via IVF? They would say those are babies, yes? Where state laws ban abortion, possibly with exceptions in cases of rape/incest/health of the pregnant woman, how would those laws be applied to embryos not implanted - either disposed of or placed in long-term cryopreservation?

Believing overturning Roe will have no effect on IVF treatments is naive.

It’s also a deliberate misinformation campaign to keep women complacent until after their rights have already been stripped away.

It’s a deliberate fear mongering campaign from you and other libs.

That's what they said about a possible RvW overturn. It's "settled law".

You cannot ban the murder of humans because life begins at conception, and then make ANY exceptions. There cannot be selective reduction if you ban abortion. There cannot be expections for rape and incest. It is not the fault of the embryo as to how it was conceived. You cannot flush embyros by the thousands down the drain. You cannot allow IUDs to cause fertilized embryos to be flushed out of the womb.

If you ban abortion and still allow all of the above.... then it would almost be like fetal life is not the point. Which would be really weird.

So how do you view the many European countries that ban abortion after 12 weeks?

DP. This thread isn’t about European abortion laws, it’s about the implications for access to fertility treatments of Toe is overturned and abortions are banned.

Seems relevant to me. You’re acting as though limiting abortion will mean contraceptives, IVF etc will be illegal or regulated. Has this happened in Europe?

As you noted, most European countries allow abortion at least up to 12 weeks, which means their experiences are irrelevant to the question of how access to fertility treatments would be affected by an abortion ban in the US.

If you have examples of countries than ban abortion from conception but allow ready access to fertility treatments, feel free to share them.

This is the problem. Then end game is not ending abortion in certain states, it's ending all access to abortion country wide (Mitch McConnell) and ending most access to contraception.

If you can't have any abortion, you essentially can't do most fertility treatments. Please list the countries banning all abortions under any circumstances, which also have fertility treatment center.

Waiting for you all to list lol the countries that completely ban abortion and allow IVF.

I’m unaware of any, including the United States.

Then that’s that. You cannot point to a single country where abortion is banned but IVF and other reproductive technologies are allowed. Therefore, it is reasonable to expect that if abortion is banned in the US, this may also result in a ban (outright or effective) on reproductive technologies.

Why would abortion be banned in the US? That’s not what happens if roe is overturned.

14 states already have trigger bans on the books that would automatically ban abortion if Roe is overturned. Another dozen states have pre-Roe abortion bans that were never repealed. Therefore, if Roe is overturned, abortion will immediately be banned in half the country.

Typo, that should be 13, not 14. The point still stands.

That leaves a lot of other states you can live in.

DP. The Republican party absolutely plans to introduce bans at the federal level next time they have the presidency and Congress. You are either delusional or arguing in bad faith to suggest otherwise. This was never about states' rights.

And?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So many concerns. I have so many friends who went through fertility struggles including miscarriages and ectopic pregnancies and later pregnancy loses. The idea of people being forced to carry dead or unviable fetuses, especially when they so desperately want a child, is horrifying.

As a lesbian parent I’m also concerned we’ll seeing the return of restricting artificial reproductive technologies to straight married couples again. After all, I’m not the kind of person who should “deserve” to have a child according to some lawmakers.

No one is carrying dead babies you idiot.

DP. What's the special word you use for a fetus with no heartbeat and that can't survive, if not dead? It's in a magical limbo until the tissue becomes gangrenous? Is it "dead" then?

A woman has a right to have a fetus such as what you described removed within 3 days and in fact is medically necessary do so before a period of 4-5 weeks.
On another note, you are a wacko.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Where state laws define life as beginning at conception, how would those laws view embryos created via IVF? They would say those are babies, yes? Where state laws ban abortion, possibly with exceptions in cases of rape/incest/health of the pregnant woman, how would those laws be applied to embryos not implanted - either disposed of or placed in long-term cryopreservation?

Believing overturning Roe will have no effect on IVF treatments is naive.

It’s also a deliberate misinformation campaign to keep women complacent until after their rights have already been stripped away.

It’s a deliberate fear mongering campaign from you and other libs.

That's what they said about a possible RvW overturn. It's "settled law".

You cannot ban the murder of humans because life begins at conception, and then make ANY exceptions. There cannot be selective reduction if you ban abortion. There cannot be expections for rape and incest. It is not the fault of the embryo as to how it was conceived. You cannot flush embyros by the thousands down the drain. You cannot allow IUDs to cause fertilized embryos to be flushed out of the womb.

If you ban abortion and still allow all of the above.... then it would almost be like fetal life is not the point. Which would be really weird.

So how do you view the many European countries that ban abortion after 12 weeks?

DP. This thread isn’t about European abortion laws, it’s about the implications for access to fertility treatments of Toe is overturned and abortions are banned.

Seems relevant to me. You’re acting as though limiting abortion will mean contraceptives, IVF etc will be illegal or regulated. Has this happened in Europe?

As you noted, most European countries allow abortion at least up to 12 weeks, which means their experiences are irrelevant to the question of how access to fertility treatments would be affected by an abortion ban in the US.

If you have examples of countries than ban abortion from conception but allow ready access to fertility treatments, feel free to share them.

This is the problem. Then end game is not ending abortion in certain states, it's ending all access to abortion country wide (Mitch McConnell) and ending most access to contraception.

If you can't have any abortion, you essentially can't do most fertility treatments. Please list the countries banning all abortions under any circumstances, which also have fertility treatment center.

Waiting for you all to list lol the countries that completely ban abortion and allow IVF.

I’m unaware of any, including the United States.

Then that’s that. You cannot point to a single country where abortion is banned but IVF and other reproductive technologies are allowed. Therefore, it is reasonable to expect that if abortion is banned in the US, this may also result in a ban (outright or effective) on reproductive technologies.

Why would abortion be banned in the US? That’s not what happens if roe is overturned.

14 states already have trigger bans on the books that would automatically ban abortion if Roe is overturned. Another dozen states have pre-Roe abortion bans that were never repealed. Therefore, if Roe is overturned, abortion will immediately be banned in half the country.

Typo, that should be 13, not 14. The point still stands.

That leaves a lot of other states you can live in.

DP. The Republican party absolutely plans to introduce bans at the federal level next time they have the presidency and Congress. You are either delusional or arguing in bad faith to suggest otherwise. This was never about states' rights.

Justices that will protect women's rights must be put on the court.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Where state laws define life as beginning at conception, how would those laws view embryos created via IVF? They would say those are babies, yes? Where state laws ban abortion, possibly with exceptions in cases of rape/incest/health of the pregnant woman, how would those laws be applied to embryos not implanted - either disposed of or placed in long-term cryopreservation?

Believing overturning Roe will have no effect on IVF treatments is naive.

It’s also a deliberate misinformation campaign to keep women complacent until after their rights have already been stripped away.

It’s a deliberate fear mongering campaign from you and other libs.

That's what they said about a possible RvW overturn. It's "settled law".

You cannot ban the murder of humans because life begins at conception, and then make ANY exceptions. There cannot be selective reduction if you ban abortion. There cannot be expections for rape and incest. It is not the fault of the embryo as to how it was conceived. You cannot flush embyros by the thousands down the drain. You cannot allow IUDs to cause fertilized embryos to be flushed out of the womb.

If you ban abortion and still allow all of the above.... then it would almost be like fetal life is not the point. Which would be really weird.

So how do you view the many European countries that ban abortion after 12 weeks?

DP. This thread isn’t about European abortion laws, it’s about the implications for access to fertility treatments of Toe is overturned and abortions are banned.

Seems relevant to me. You’re acting as though limiting abortion will mean contraceptives, IVF etc will be illegal or regulated. Has this happened in Europe?

As you noted, most European countries allow abortion at least up to 12 weeks, which means their experiences are irrelevant to the question of how access to fertility treatments would be affected by an abortion ban in the US.

If you have examples of countries than ban abortion from conception but allow ready access to fertility treatments, feel free to share them.

This is the problem. Then end game is not ending abortion in certain states, it's ending all access to abortion country wide (Mitch McConnell) and ending most access to contraception.

If you can't have any abortion, you essentially can't do most fertility treatments. Please list the countries banning all abortions under any circumstances, which also have fertility treatment center.

Waiting for you all to list lol the countries that completely ban abortion and allow IVF.

I’m unaware of any, including the United States.

Then that’s that. You cannot point to a single country where abortion is banned but IVF and other reproductive technologies are allowed. Therefore, it is reasonable to expect that if abortion is banned in the US, this may also result in a ban (outright or effective) on reproductive technologies.

Why would abortion be banned in the US? That’s not what happens if roe is overturned.

14 states already have trigger bans on the books that would automatically ban abortion if Roe is overturned. Another dozen states have pre-Roe abortion bans that were never repealed. Therefore, if Roe is overturned, abortion will immediately be banned in half the country.

Typo, that should be 13, not 14. The point still stands.

That leaves a lot of other states you can live in.

DP. The Republican party absolutely plans to introduce bans at the federal level next time they have the presidency and Congress. You are either delusional or arguing in bad faith to suggest otherwise. This was never about states' rights.

Justices that will protect women's rights must be put on the court.

They are.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Where state laws define life as beginning at conception, how would those laws view embryos created via IVF? They would say those are babies, yes? Where state laws ban abortion, possibly with exceptions in cases of rape/incest/health of the pregnant woman, how would those laws be applied to embryos not implanted - either disposed of or placed in long-term cryopreservation?

Believing overturning Roe will have no effect on IVF treatments is naive.

It’s also a deliberate misinformation campaign to keep women complacent until after their rights have already been stripped away.

It’s a deliberate fear mongering campaign from you and other libs.

That's what they said about a possible RvW overturn. It's "settled law".

You cannot ban the murder of humans because life begins at conception, and then make ANY exceptions. There cannot be selective reduction if you ban abortion. There cannot be expections for rape and incest. It is not the fault of the embryo as to how it was conceived. You cannot flush embyros by the thousands down the drain. You cannot allow IUDs to cause fertilized embryos to be flushed out of the womb.

If you ban abortion and still allow all of the above.... then it would almost be like fetal life is not the point. Which would be really weird.

So how do you view the many European countries that ban abortion after 12 weeks?

DP. This thread isn’t about European abortion laws, it’s about the implications for access to fertility treatments of Toe is overturned and abortions are banned.

Seems relevant to me. You’re acting as though limiting abortion will mean contraceptives, IVF etc will be illegal or regulated. Has this happened in Europe?

As you noted, most European countries allow abortion at least up to 12 weeks, which means their experiences are irrelevant to the question of how access to fertility treatments would be affected by an abortion ban in the US.

If you have examples of countries than ban abortion from conception but allow ready access to fertility treatments, feel free to share them.

This is the problem. Then end game is not ending abortion in certain states, it's ending all access to abortion country wide (Mitch McConnell) and ending most access to contraception.

If you can't have any abortion, you essentially can't do most fertility treatments. Please list the countries banning all abortions under any circumstances, which also have fertility treatment center.

Waiting for you all to list lol the countries that completely ban abortion and allow IVF.

I’m unaware of any, including the United States.

Then that’s that. You cannot point to a single country where abortion is banned but IVF and other reproductive technologies are allowed. Therefore, it is reasonable to expect that if abortion is banned in the US, this may also result in a ban (outright or effective) on reproductive technologies.

Why would abortion be banned in the US? That’s not what happens if roe is overturned.

14 states already have trigger bans on the books that would automatically ban abortion if Roe is overturned. Another dozen states have pre-Roe abortion bans that were never repealed. Therefore, if Roe is overturned, abortion will immediately be banned in half the country.

Typo, that should be 13, not 14. The point still stands.

That leaves a lot of other states you can live in.

DP. The Republican party absolutely plans to introduce bans at the federal level next time they have the presidency and Congress. You are either delusional or arguing in bad faith to suggest otherwise. This was never about states' rights.

And?

And so you are FOS when you say "[t]hat leaves a lot of other states you can live in." I realize that you people need to lie about your agenda because it is broadly unpopular, and it needs to be called out more.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Where state laws define life as beginning at conception, how would those laws view embryos created via IVF? They would say those are babies, yes? Where state laws ban abortion, possibly with exceptions in cases of rape/incest/health of the pregnant woman, how would those laws be applied to embryos not implanted - either disposed of or placed in long-term cryopreservation?

Believing overturning Roe will have no effect on IVF treatments is naive.

It’s also a deliberate misinformation campaign to keep women complacent until after their rights have already been stripped away.

It’s a deliberate fear mongering campaign from you and other libs.

That's what they said about a possible RvW overturn. It's "settled law".

You cannot ban the murder of humans because life begins at conception, and then make ANY exceptions. There cannot be selective reduction if you ban abortion. There cannot be expections for rape and incest. It is not the fault of the embryo as to how it was conceived. You cannot flush embyros by the thousands down the drain. You cannot allow IUDs to cause fertilized embryos to be flushed out of the womb.

If you ban abortion and still allow all of the above.... then it would almost be like fetal life is not the point. Which would be really weird.

So how do you view the many European countries that ban abortion after 12 weeks?

DP. This thread isn’t about European abortion laws, it’s about the implications for access to fertility treatments of Toe is overturned and abortions are banned.

Seems relevant to me. You’re acting as though limiting abortion will mean contraceptives, IVF etc will be illegal or regulated. Has this happened in Europe?

As you noted, most European countries allow abortion at least up to 12 weeks, which means their experiences are irrelevant to the question of how access to fertility treatments would be affected by an abortion ban in the US.

If you have examples of countries than ban abortion from conception but allow ready access to fertility treatments, feel free to share them.

This is the problem. Then end game is not ending abortion in certain states, it's ending all access to abortion country wide (Mitch McConnell) and ending most access to contraception.

If you can't have any abortion, you essentially can't do most fertility treatments. Please list the countries banning all abortions under any circumstances, which also have fertility treatment center.

Waiting for you all to list lol the countries that completely ban abortion and allow IVF.

I’m unaware of any, including the United States.

Then that’s that. You cannot point to a single country where abortion is banned but IVF and other reproductive technologies are allowed. Therefore, it is reasonable to expect that if abortion is banned in the US, this may also result in a ban (outright or effective) on reproductive technologies.

Why would abortion be banned in the US? That’s not what happens if roe is overturned.

All it takes is republicans having the presidency and both houses. I’d bet on that happening after the 2024 elections

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Where state laws define life as beginning at conception, how would those laws view embryos created via IVF? They would say those are babies, yes? Where state laws ban abortion, possibly with exceptions in cases of rape/incest/health of the pregnant woman, how would those laws be applied to embryos not implanted - either disposed of or placed in long-term cryopreservation?

Believing overturning Roe will have no effect on IVF treatments is naive.

It’s also a deliberate misinformation campaign to keep women complacent until after their rights have already been stripped away.

It’s a deliberate fear mongering campaign from you and other libs.

That's what they said about a possible RvW overturn. It's "settled law".

You cannot ban the murder of humans because life begins at conception, and then make ANY exceptions. There cannot be selective reduction if you ban abortion. There cannot be expections for rape and incest. It is not the fault of the embryo as to how it was conceived. You cannot flush embyros by the thousands down the drain. You cannot allow IUDs to cause fertilized embryos to be flushed out of the womb.

If you ban abortion and still allow all of the above.... then it would almost be like fetal life is not the point. Which would be really weird.

So how do you view the many European countries that ban abortion after 12 weeks?

DP. This thread isn’t about European abortion laws, it’s about the implications for access to fertility treatments of Toe is overturned and abortions are banned.

Seems relevant to me. You’re acting as though limiting abortion will mean contraceptives, IVF etc will be illegal or regulated. Has this happened in Europe?

As you noted, most European countries allow abortion at least up to 12 weeks, which means their experiences are irrelevant to the question of how access to fertility treatments would be affected by an abortion ban in the US.

If you have examples of countries than ban abortion from conception but allow ready access to fertility treatments, feel free to share them.

This is the problem. Then end game is not ending abortion in certain states, it's ending all access to abortion country wide (Mitch McConnell) and ending most access to contraception.

If you can't have any abortion, you essentially can't do most fertility treatments. Please list the countries banning all abortions under any circumstances, which also have fertility treatment center.

Waiting for you all to list lol the countries that completely ban abortion and allow IVF.

I’m unaware of any, including the United States.

Then that’s that. You cannot point to a single country where abortion is banned but IVF and other reproductive technologies are allowed. Therefore, it is reasonable to expect that if abortion is banned in the US, this may also result in a ban (outright or effective) on reproductive technologies.

Why would abortion be banned in the US? That’s not what happens if roe is overturned.

14 states already have trigger bans on the books that would automatically ban abortion if Roe is overturned. Another dozen states have pre-Roe abortion bans that were never repealed. Therefore, if Roe is overturned, abortion will immediately be banned in half the country.

Typo, that should be 13, not 14. The point still stands.

That leaves a lot of other states you can live in.

DP. The Republican party absolutely plans to introduce bans at the federal level next time they have the presidency and Congress. You are either delusional or arguing in bad faith to suggest otherwise. This was never about states' rights.

Justices that will protect women's rights must be put on the court.

The democrats had two years to make up for McConnell getting into an extra Justice and did nothing. They will lose the senate on 2022 and not get another Justice under Biden. It’s over because Senate democrats have no spine

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Where state laws define life as beginning at conception, how would those laws view embryos created via IVF? They would say those are babies, yes? Where state laws ban abortion, possibly with exceptions in cases of rape/incest/health of the pregnant woman, how would those laws be applied to embryos not implanted - either disposed of or placed in long-term cryopreservation?

Believing overturning Roe will have no effect on IVF treatments is naive.

It’s also a deliberate misinformation campaign to keep women complacent until after their rights have already been stripped away.

It’s a deliberate fear mongering campaign from you and other libs.

That's what they said about a possible RvW overturn. It's "settled law".

You cannot ban the murder of humans because life begins at conception, and then make ANY exceptions. There cannot be selective reduction if you ban abortion. There cannot be expections for rape and incest. It is not the fault of the embryo as to how it was conceived. You cannot flush embyros by the thousands down the drain. You cannot allow IUDs to cause fertilized embryos to be flushed out of the womb.

If you ban abortion and still allow all of the above.... then it would almost be like fetal life is not the point. Which would be really weird.

So how do you view the many European countries that ban abortion after 12 weeks?

Europe is not the focus of this discussion.

You are at best naive about how Dobbs will affect reproductive rights in the US. You are at least disingenuous. At worst, you are … ?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Reminder to readers, it's obvious, but in case you need help, there is more than one person responding on each side.

Carry on.

m
Nope, you answered along in the thread. That’s how you pulled into being asked to cite. You either posted the 10 year prison sentence or you went along with it. Cite it.

I have only posted about one thing and not responded to other claims.

Made the cite. Nobody seems to be willing or able to respond to it. I guess that will have to be answer enough on its own.

You were in the same thread as the “injecting women” and “ 10 year prison term”. That was asked to be cited.

"In the same thread" is your defense?

Then why did you cite if you weren’t asked. What’s your defense?

I did cite, and I requoted it again to bring it forward (on my phone).

My defense is that some thread posters must not be able to read.

Why did you cite when you were not asked to? You inserted yourself and then can’t understand why you information isn’t relevant.
I applaud you on your deflecting. It’s impressive but not.

You think there is a rule at Dcum AGAINST cutting sources unless you are specifically asked? Is that what you mean?

[Anonymous]

"AGAINST citing sources"