NYT story: Trump administration could strike abortion almost immediately using Comstock law

[Anonymous]

A national abortion ban was removed from the republican party platform.

This is their current stance on reproductive rights, it includes banning Late Term Abortion, access to IVF and access to Birth Control:

We proudly stand for families and Life. We believe that the 14th Amendment to the Constitution of the United States guarantees that no person can be denied Life or Liberty without Due Process, and that the States are, therefore, free to pass Laws protecting those Rights. After 51 years, because of us, that power has been given to the States and to a vote of the People. We will oppose Late Term Abortion, while supporting mothers and policies that advance Prenatal Care, access to Birth Control, and IVF (fertility treatments).

The reason to vote democrat this cycle is trump and that's pretty much it. If any other republican was running, they would win.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:A national abortion ban was removed from the republican party platform.

This is their current stance on reproductive rights, it includes banning Late Term Abortion, access to IVF and access to Birth Control:

We proudly stand for families and Life. We believe that the 14th Amendment to the Constitution of the United States guarantees that no person can be denied Life or Liberty without Due Process, and that the States are, therefore, free to pass Laws protecting those Rights. After 51 years, because of us, that power has been given to the States and to a vote of the People. We will oppose Late Term Abortion, while supporting mothers and policies that advance Prenatal Care, access to Birth Control, and IVF (fertility treatments).

The reason to vote democrat this cycle is trump and that's pretty much it. If any other republican was running, they would win.

Read the part about the 14th amendment again. They interpret it to protect blastocysts/embryos/fetuses.

[Anonymous]

I'm going to ask this in all seriousness.

"A national abortion ban was removed from the republican party platform."

What's going to keep a Republican controlled Senate/House from putting together legislation to ban abortions nationwide? What's to keep Trump (or any other Republican president) from signing it into law? Because it's in their platform? Because they'll go to jail for saying something today and doing something different tomorrow?

It's performative. They took out something from their platform because it was deeply unpopular, not because they won't try to actually enact it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:A national abortion ban was removed from the republican party platform.

This is their current stance on reproductive rights, it includes banning Late Term Abortion, access to IVF and access to Birth Control:

We proudly stand for families and Life. We believe that the 14th Amendment to the Constitution of the United States guarantees that no person can be denied Life or Liberty without Due Process, and that the States are, therefore, free to pass Laws protecting those Rights. After 51 years, because of us, that power has been given to the States and to a vote of the People. We will oppose Late Term Abortion, while supporting mothers and policies that advance Prenatal Care, access to Birth Control, and IVF (fertility treatments).

The reason to vote democrat this cycle is trump and that's pretty much it. If any other republican was running, they would win.

Where is the part about exceptions for rape, the life/health of the mother, serious anomalies? There is a reason they refuse to put that in writing in the platform.

Without any written exceptions in the platform, they will never get my vote. I don't care what Trump says verbally, he changes with the wind. Never my vote as a woman and a mother to a daughter.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Call it whatever you want. Human life, unborn baby, fetus, embryo - it should be the woman’s choice to end a pregnancy. However, I do think that once a woman is in her third trimester and the baby can technically breathe on its own, abortion should be discouraged (assuming both mother and baby are and will continue to be healthy) but not necessarily illegal.

I’ve personally had an abortion (at 5 weeks) after undergoing years of infertility and two successful and healthy births due to IVF. I’ve also had miscarriages from IVF. I don’t regret my decision to have an abortion at all. I didn’t want a third child (and due to my infertility, I didn’t think I could get pregnant naturally).

Let women decide what’s best for them.

Please explain what you mean by "discouraged" because I support Roe and think it should be fully reinstated and codified into law - but even Roe allowed stated some regulations and most did not allow abortions past ~26 wks.

Under Roe, states could regulate abortion after viability, which is generally considered to be between 24 to 28 weeks after a patient’s last menstrual period.

After Roe was overturned...

Over half of states have restrictions in place only at or after viability, or have no limit at all.

24 weeks: Four states ban abortions at 24 weeks of pregnancy.

Viability: 14 states ban abortions after the fetus is considered viable. Some laws that don't specify a limit say it's up to the abortion provider's "judgment" to determine whether a fetus is viable.

Third trimester: Virginia is the only state that prohibits abortions in the pregnancy's third trimester, which starts at around 25 weeks, per Guttmacher. It's also the lone southern state that hasn't banned or restricted abortion since the end of Roe.

No limit: Six states and Washington, D.C., do not impose any term restrictions. That has not changed since the overturning of Roe.

Of note: Most states with restrictions have exceptions, including to preserve a pregnant person's life or health, though they are often narrowly defined.

So - are you telling me that it should be completely deregulated?? Meaning a fetus at 8 months is not considered a life at all? Because that's a slippery slope and has other consequences.

I'm all about pro-choice and women's rights...but I believe we should all come to the table to compromise and agree as to when a fetus is viable and considered a life with rights (22-26 weeks) where abortion would be restricted with the obvious exceptions, including to preserve a pregnant person's life or health.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:A national abortion ban was removed from the republican party platform.

This is their current stance on reproductive rights, it includes banning Late Term Abortion, access to IVF and access to Birth Control:

We proudly stand for families and Life. We believe that the 14th Amendment to the Constitution of the United States guarantees that no person can be denied Life or Liberty without Due Process, and that the States are, therefore, free to pass Laws protecting those Rights. After 51 years, because of us, that power has been given to the States and to a vote of the People. We will oppose Late Term Abortion, while supporting mothers and policies that advance Prenatal Care, access to Birth Control, and IVF (fertility treatments).

The reason to vote democrat this cycle is trump and that's pretty much it. If any other republican was running, they would win.

False. Reproductive rights are more important than even Trump.

No person who respects women will vote R.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Call it whatever you want. Human life, unborn baby, fetus, embryo - it should be the woman’s choice to end a pregnancy. However, I do think that once a woman is in her third trimester and the baby can technically breathe on its own, abortion should be discouraged (assuming both mother and baby are and will continue to be healthy) but not necessarily illegal.

I’ve personally had an abortion (at 5 weeks) after undergoing years of infertility and two successful and healthy births due to IVF. I’ve also had miscarriages from IVF. I don’t regret my decision to have an abortion at all. I didn’t want a third child (and due to my infertility, I didn’t think I could get pregnant naturally).

Let women decide what’s best for them.

Please explain what you mean by "discouraged" because I support Roe and think it should be fully reinstated and codified into law - but even Roe allowed stated some regulations and most did not allow abortions past ~26 wks.

Under Roe, states could regulate abortion after viability, which is generally considered to be between 24 to 28 weeks after a patient’s last menstrual period.

After Roe was overturned...

Over half of states have restrictions in place only at or after viability, or have no limit at all.

24 weeks: Four states ban abortions at 24 weeks of pregnancy.

Viability: 14 states ban abortions after the fetus is considered viable. Some laws that don't specify a limit say it's up to the abortion provider's "judgment" to determine whether a fetus is viable.

Third trimester: Virginia is the only state that prohibits abortions in the pregnancy's third trimester, which starts at around 25 weeks, per Guttmacher. It's also the lone southern state that hasn't banned or restricted abortion since the end of Roe.

No limit: Six states and Washington, D.C., do not impose any term restrictions. That has not changed since the overturning of Roe.

Of note: Most states with restrictions have exceptions, including to preserve a pregnant person's life or health, though they are often narrowly defined.

So - are you telling me that it should be completely deregulated?? Meaning a fetus at 8 months is not considered a life at all? Because that's a slippery slope and has other consequences.

I'm all about pro-choice and women's rights...but I believe we should all come to the table to compromise and agree as to when a fetus is viable and considered a life with rights (22-26 weeks) where abortion would be restricted with the obvious exceptions, including to preserve a pregnant person's life or health.

But nobody is aborting viable pregnancies that late. It’s silly and nonproductive to make a stink about making policy on things they don’t happen. “We need to come to the table.” Give me a break. we have real problems in this country, and this is such a waste of time.

Trust women and doctors. Do you really think women are just getting bored in pregnancy and scheduling these later term abortions? If an abortion is happening that late something is going on with the health and life of the mom or baby. No one is having a 26 week abortion cause they want to snap back to their bikini body in time for summer.

[Anonymous]

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Call it whatever you want. Human life, unborn baby, fetus, embryo - it should be the woman’s choice to end a pregnancy. However, I do think that once a woman is in her third trimester and the baby can technically breathe on its own, abortion should be discouraged (assuming both mother and baby are and will continue to be healthy) but not necessarily illegal.

I’ve personally had an abortion (at 5 weeks) after undergoing years of infertility and two successful and healthy births due to IVF. I’ve also had miscarriages from IVF. I don’t regret my decision to have an abortion at all. I didn’t want a third child (and due to my infertility, I didn’t think I could get pregnant naturally).

Let women decide what’s best for them.

Please explain what you mean by "discouraged" because I support Roe and think it should be fully reinstated and codified into law - but even Roe allowed stated some regulations and most did not allow abortions past ~26 wks.

Under Roe, states could regulate abortion after viability, which is generally considered to be between 24 to 28 weeks after a patient’s last menstrual period.

After Roe was overturned...

Over half of states have restrictions in place only at or after viability, or have no limit at all.

24 weeks: Four states ban abortions at 24 weeks of pregnancy.

Viability: 14 states ban abortions after the fetus is considered viable. Some laws that don't specify a limit say it's up to the abortion provider's "judgment" to determine whether a fetus is viable.

Third trimester: Virginia is the only state that prohibits abortions in the pregnancy's third trimester, which starts at around 25 weeks, per Guttmacher. It's also the lone southern state that hasn't banned or restricted abortion since the end of Roe.

No limit: Six states and Washington, D.C., do not impose any term restrictions. That has not changed since the overturning of Roe.

Of note: Most states with restrictions have exceptions, including to preserve a pregnant person's life or health, though they are often narrowly defined.

So - are you telling me that it should be completely deregulated?? Meaning a fetus at 8 months is not considered a life at all? Because that's a slippery slope and has other consequences.

I'm all about pro-choice and women's rights...but I believe we should all come to the table to compromise and agree as to when a fetus is viable and considered a life with rights (22-26 weeks) where abortion would be restricted with the obvious exceptions, including to preserve a pregnant person's life or health.

But nobody is aborting viable pregnancies that late. It’s silly and nonproductive to make a stink about making policy on things they don’t happen. “We need to come to the table.” Give me a break. we have real problems in this country, and this is such a waste of time.

Trust women and doctors. Do you really think women are just getting bored in pregnancy and scheduling these later term abortions? If an abortion is happening that late something is going on with the health and life of the mom or baby. No one is having a 26 week abortion cause they want to snap back to their bikini body in time for summer.

DP. What gets me is that people don't even bother to really think about these objections.

I mean, think about it. Think about how this would actually work, in practice. Unless a woman is locked in a serial killer's basement, people see her. She gets pregnant. She looks like a pregnant woman. People comment, ask questions: "Oh my god, are you pregnant?" or "Is there any news you wanted to share, hmmm?" or whatever. She's on the bus or train and maybe people offer her their seat.

The checkout worker she uses all the time at her neighborhood grocery starts laughing and asking if she is eating for two. Morning sickness lands her in the bathroom at work like clockwork. She waddles.

People generally know when you are pregnant. Sure, if you are morbidly obese or never seen in public, maybe not -- but that's not typical. And what woman is going to wait 6 months just on whimsies to decide on a casual abortion just, I don't know, cause she got bored?

And how many questions is she going to be asked about where the baby is, and how the baby is doing, and "I never met your baby, but I bet they're cute! What's the name?"

This is a realistic choice scenario that anyone believes?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You are an actual world salad now. Tighten it up, PP.

Pregnancy is a biological process that occurs in women and girls. It is not forced work.

Women and children pregnant by rape and incest would likely disagree. And many of these bans have no exceptions for rape or incest.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Call it whatever you want. Human life, unborn baby, fetus, embryo - it should be the woman’s choice to end a pregnancy. However, I do think that once a woman is in her third trimester and the baby can technically breathe on its own, abortion should be discouraged (assuming both mother and baby are and will continue to be healthy) but not necessarily illegal.

I’ve personally had an abortion (at 5 weeks) after undergoing years of infertility and two successful and healthy births due to IVF. I’ve also had miscarriages from IVF. I don’t regret my decision to have an abortion at all. I didn’t want a third child (and due to my infertility, I didn’t think I could get pregnant naturally).

Let women decide what’s best for them.

Please explain what you mean by "discouraged" because I support Roe and think it should be fully reinstated and codified into law - but even Roe allowed stated some regulations and most did not allow abortions past ~26 wks.

Under Roe, states could regulate abortion after viability, which is generally considered to be between 24 to 28 weeks after a patient’s last menstrual period.

After Roe was overturned...

Over half of states have restrictions in place only at or after viability, or have no limit at all.

24 weeks: Four states ban abortions at 24 weeks of pregnancy.

Viability: 14 states ban abortions after the fetus is considered viable. Some laws that don't specify a limit say it's up to the abortion provider's "judgment" to determine whether a fetus is viable.

Third trimester: Virginia is the only state that prohibits abortions in the pregnancy's third trimester, which starts at around 25 weeks, per Guttmacher. It's also the lone southern state that hasn't banned or restricted abortion since the end of Roe.

No limit: Six states and Washington, D.C., do not impose any term restrictions. That has not changed since the overturning of Roe.

Of note: Most states with restrictions have exceptions, including to preserve a pregnant person's life or health, though they are often narrowly defined.

So - are you telling me that it should be completely deregulated?? Meaning a fetus at 8 months is not considered a life at all? Because that's a slippery slope and has other consequences.

I'm all about pro-choice and women's rights...but I believe we should all come to the table to compromise and agree as to when a fetus is viable and considered a life with rights (22-26 weeks) where abortion would be restricted with the obvious exceptions, including to preserve a pregnant person's life or health.

But nobody is aborting viable pregnancies that late. It’s silly and nonproductive to make a stink about making policy on things they don’t happen. “We need to come to the table.” Give me a break. we have real problems in this country, and this is such a waste of time.

Trust women and doctors. Do you really think women are just getting bored in pregnancy and scheduling these later term abortions? If an abortion is happening that late something is going on with the health and life of the mom or baby. No one is having a 26 week abortion cause they want to snap back to their bikini body in time for summer.

DP. What gets me is that people don't even bother to really think about these objections.

I mean, think about it. Think about how this would actually work, in practice. Unless a woman is locked in a serial killer's basement, people see her. She gets pregnant. She looks like a pregnant woman. People comment, ask questions: "Oh my god, are you pregnant?" or "Is there any news you wanted to share, hmmm?" or whatever. She's on the bus or train and maybe people offer her their seat.

The checkout worker she uses all the time at her neighborhood grocery starts laughing and asking if she is eating for two. Morning sickness lands her in the bathroom at work like clockwork. She waddles.

People generally know when you are pregnant. Sure, if you are morbidly obese or never seen in public, maybe not -- but that's not typical. And what woman is going to wait 6 months just on whimsies to decide on a casual abortion just, I don't know, cause she got bored?

And how many questions is she going to be asked about where the baby is, and how the baby is doing, and "I never met your baby, but I bet they're cute! What's the name?"

This is a realistic choice scenario that anyone believes?

As has been said: Republicans are weird.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:A national abortion ban was removed from the republican party platform.

This is their current stance on reproductive rights, it includes banning Late Term Abortion, access to IVF and access to Birth Control:

We proudly stand for families and Life. We believe that the 14th Amendment to the Constitution of the United States guarantees that no person can be denied Life or Liberty without Due Process, and that the States are, therefore, free to pass Laws protecting those Rights. After 51 years, because of us, that power has been given to the States and to a vote of the People. We will oppose Late Term Abortion, while supporting mothers and policies that advance Prenatal Care, access to Birth Control, and IVF (fertility treatments).

The reason to vote democrat this cycle is trump and that's pretty much it. If any other republican was running, they would win.

And yet, when given the option to vote to solidify the right to IVF, Senate Republicans (including JD Vance) couldn't find it in the hearts to vote yes. Why is that, do you think?
Actions speak louder than words.