Ohio heartbeat law

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If fertilized embryo is a person bye bye IVF.

This would make an incredible sci-fi movie plot... Alt Right government takes over all IVF clinics and orders EVERY SINGLE FROZEN EMBRYO brought to life using surrogates. These children are raised in a government-military esq compound and used as weapons for the alt right as "savior babies".

Don't give them any ideas.

This doesn't seem so far fetched. Aren't Republicans opposed to the morning after pill, which merely prevents the formation of an embryo?

I know someone who voted for Trump because "Supreme Court" and has 2 IVF kids and is undecided about a third but has 3-4 frozen embryos. She only planted 1 each of the previous 2 times.

She does not see any issue with her position.

[Anonymous]

In the end, people get what they deserve

[Anonymous]

I hope the Dems propose a bill to grant citizenship based on where you're conceived rather than born. Also, fetuses should be dependents for tax purposes. And every miscarriage should be investigated. Let's take this nonsense to its logical conclusion.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What is wrong with letting each state decide whether abortion should be legal in their state?

because it's a fundamental, federal, constitutional right.

No it's not. It's a "right" created out of thin air by a Supreme Court decision that is universally considered to have laughable reasoning.

No, it's really not. Again, if you don't believe their is a right to bodily privacy, how do you feel about the state storming in to examine your wastebasket for used condoms? Forcing you to take medication? Requiring that your wife have a c-section? Taking your children away to educate them elsewhere?

[Anonymous]

I am kind of tired of GOP getting so many votes based on RvW overturning dream.

So I am kind of starting to think let it go to the States.
In addition to heroine and meth, that should make misoprostol and mifepristone the next big drug boom in Red States. Already, it's sold a lot on the mexican border where people go to get pills to 'get their period back'.
Alternatively, women will wake up and demand the right even in those States.

[Anonymous]

I think a lot of millennials will be surprised to learn that abortion rights aren't nearly as set in stone as they think.

[Anonymous]

It's the price of spending money to fund Jill Frankenstein's futile recount:

funds given to her can't be given elsewhere.

Oh noes!!

[Anonymous]

It's certainly a step in the right direction. Yes, unfortunately, I agree it will be knocked down by SCOTUS rulings, but it just shows that the tone of the country is finally evolving on this issue. Thank God.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If fertilized embryo is a person bye bye IVF.

This would make an incredible sci-fi movie plot... Alt Right government takes over all IVF clinics and orders EVERY SINGLE FROZEN EMBRYO brought to life using surrogates. These children are raised in a government-military esq compound and used as weapons for the alt right as "savior babies".

Seriously, this is relevant. If people really want to base a "right to life" on "being a person" AND hold that an embryo is a person, then those frozen embryos have exactly as much right to life.

No, they don't. As any reasonable person with an understanding of basic biology (not many people in this discussion, unfortunately) knows, it takes three things to create life: A sperm, an Egg and a Host in which to grow the life. "Frozen Embryos" do not have a host to give them life.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What is wrong with letting each state decide whether abortion should be legal in their state?

because it's a fundamental, federal, constitutional right.

No it's not. It's a "right" created out of thin air by a Supreme Court decision that is universally considered to have laughable reasoning.

No, it's really not. Again, if you don't believe their is a right to bodily privacy, how do you feel about the state storming in to examine your wastebasket for used condoms? Forcing you to take medication? Requiring that your wife have a c-section? Taking your children away to educate them elsewhere?

You sound like a lunatic. All we want is to make murder illegal.

[Anonymous]

Logistically, what would it mean to "ban" abortions? Would doctors be charged with a crime if they performed abortions? If so, what crime? First-degree murder? What about the girl who received an abortion? Would she be charged with murder as well? Would the method of conception matter? If a girl is raped and impregnated by her rapist would she be required by law to carry her rapist's baby to term? Would Ohio actually start arresting rape victims?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Logistically, what would it mean to "ban" abortions? Would doctors be charged with a crime if they performed abortions? If so, what crime? First-degree murder? What about the girl who received an abortion? Would she be charged with murder as well? Would the method of conception matter? If a girl is raped and impregnated by her rapist would she be required by law to carry her rapist's baby to term? Would Ohio actually start arresting rape victims?

Yes, both the provider and the patient could be charged with a crime. And then any woman who miscarries may be investigated and/or charged with abortion.

[Anonymous]

I have not heard one sound reason why the right to abortions should not be left to each individual state.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Logistically, what would it mean to "ban" abortions? Would doctors be charged with a crime if they performed abortions? If so, what crime? First-degree murder? What about the girl who received an abortion? Would she be charged with murder as well? Would the method of conception matter? If a girl is raped and impregnated by her rapist would she be required by law to carry her rapist's baby to term? Would Ohio actually start arresting rape victims?

This really depends on how the legal situation evolves. SCOTUS could find that there is no Constitutional protection for abortions without going so far as to determine there is a thing such as "fetal personhood". If that's what they do (most likely scenario), then it's entirely up to the states to decide how/if they want to legislate. Most likely states, which generally regulate medical licenses, would find ways to punish doctors for performing abortions...anything from loss of license to criminal charges. Even anti-choice activists have been reluctant to endorse punishing women who get abortions, though, again, it would be up to the states to decide. And one of the more chilling aspects of the most recent crop of anti-choice activists is their absolutism on the issue, being unwilling to include many exceptions for protection of the mother. Frankly, it's a bit more morally justifiable to take an absolutist position on pregnancies resulting from rape ("a life is a life regardless of how it was conceived"), but it's also cruel which is why a majority of Americans don't support it.
If the SCOTUS finds that a fetus is a person, then I suspect all of the other questions will also have to be litigated through the courts under existing laws. As is always the case, part of the court's job is to weigh the competing interests of two parties under the law, in this case the mother vs. the fetus. Frankly, this would be a complete mess and the courts are absolutely not equipped to decide this stuff which will turn on a nuanced understanding of reproductive science, but they're deciding a bunch of other stuff that they are not well-equipped to decide like digital privacy, so...

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It's certainly a step in the right direction. Yes, unfortunately, I agree it will be knocked down by SCOTUS rulings, but it just shows that the tone of the country is finally evolving on this issue. Thank God.

The tone of Ohio would be a more precise description.