10 year old girl has to travel out of state to get abortio

[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:Well, I didn’t think that the forced birthers supported child rape prior to this. How wrong I was. My God.

Correct. Go look at the GOP corruption thread for more. I lost track over the hundred plus pages of how many rapists and child rapists and other assorted life destroying sex crimes various Republican elected officials are guilty of. It’s disgusting and it’s clearly a serious problem in the party.

Yeah, I’m a political moderate who has voted for Republicans in the past, and I used to think that the Democrats were being pretty hypocritical about the sex assaults by Republicans because there are plenty of sex assaulter amongst the Democrats too. But the aftermath of the Roe decision has shown to me that this issue of Republican child rapists is deeply part of the party. They really, as a group, support child rape. It’s horrifying to watch.

I’m probably not going to vote Republican again in my lifetime, barring serious restructuring of the party. I can’t stomach it. Between the enthusiastic cheerleading for child rape (my God!!), the insurrection, and the blind allegiance to the gun lobby, I can’t see how I could ever vote for them.

WTF are you talking about? “Cheerleading for child rape”?? Do you even hear yourself?

What is inaccurate about that assessment and the current Republicans? They are in favor of child rape.

The more you repeat this garbage, the farther people will run from you. Please stop. No one - NO ONE - is in favor of child rape, or rape of any kind. You just sound like an utter psychopath.
DP

No, it sounds accurate. This is what the Republicans support now. It’s upsetting you because it’s true.

JFC. Seek help. There’s no point trying to converse with disturbed people like you.

I would think the people in favor of children being raped and forced to bear the child of their rapists are the ones who need to seek help. But if you don’t see anything wrong with that, I can’t help you.

+1

ٌYou venal pieces of crap. You seem to grasp on some level that forcing a child to continue a pregnancy is bad, to the extent that one of your mouthpieces speaking before congress literally said that an abortion for a ten year old isn’t abortion (as you have tried to say with ectopic and other life threatening pregnancies, even though the law is written such that doctors can’t give lifesaving abortions in these states).

Come off it. Your whole policy position is stupid and cruel. You know that everyone who isn’t a kool aid swilling forced birther sees that now and you are effing terrified. It’s just a matter of time before some poor 9 or 13 year old dies from pregnancy complications or some photogenic Instagram woman with three kids and 500,000 followers is murdered by your idiotic laws. You know it’s game over.

Isn’t the witness saying that the law would not prevent the 10 year old from seeking an abortion because she could be harmed?

The guy who wrote the law says the 10-year-old needs to stay pregnant and give birth.

Can I see that in a documented statement from the lawmaker who wrote the law please?

https://www.politico.com/news/2022/07/14/anti-abotion-10-year-old-ohio-00045843

The 10-year-old Ohio girl who crossed state lines to receive an abortion in Indiana should have carried her pregnancy to term and would be required to do so under a model law written for state legislatures considering more restrictive abortion measures, according to the general counsel for the National Right to Life.

Jim Bopp, an Indiana lawyer who authored the model legislation in advance of the Supreme Court’s decision overturning Roe v. Wade, told POLITICO on Thursday that his law only provides exceptions when the pregnant person’s life is in danger.

“She would have had the baby, and as many women who have had babies as a result of rape, we would hope that she would understand the reason and ultimately the benefit of having the child,” Bopp said in a phone interview on Thursday.

So, does this change ^PP"s mind? Probably not. Vile... forcing a 10 yr old girl to have her rapist's baby. Just vile. What kind of parent would be fine with this - forced birthers.

I'm the PP. I read further on in the story. It makes it clear that Bopp knows the law has rape/incest as an exception, but that Bopp has conflicts about that. Doesn't matter how he feels (or how anyone feels for that matter). What matters is if the girl was entitled to an abortion in Ohio given her age/circumstance and the answer is yes.

The flaw in their logic is that if a life is a life, then it doesn't matter how the life was conceived. So, why should rape be an exemption?

This is the problem with rigid thinking. It leaves no room for real life, which is often, shades of gray.

-signed the former pro-lifer and a mother of two

And thank God Bopp did not et his way, right? So clearly there was room for real life.

Yes, thank goodness that, in this case, a forced birther didn't get his way.

But, you still didn't answer the question: "if a life is a life, then it doesn't matter how the life was conceived. So, why should rape be an exemption?"

A life is a life, doesn't matter how it was conceived. Why should the baby suffer for the sins of the father, right? That's Bopp's reasoning of his opinion of why rape *shouldn't* be an exemption.

[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:Well, I didn’t think that the forced birthers supported child rape prior to this. How wrong I was. My God.

Correct. Go look at the GOP corruption thread for more. I lost track over the hundred plus pages of how many rapists and child rapists and other assorted life destroying sex crimes various Republican elected officials are guilty of. It’s disgusting and it’s clearly a serious problem in the party.

Yeah, I’m a political moderate who has voted for Republicans in the past, and I used to think that the Democrats were being pretty hypocritical about the sex assaults by Republicans because there are plenty of sex assaulter amongst the Democrats too. But the aftermath of the Roe decision has shown to me that this issue of Republican child rapists is deeply part of the party. They really, as a group, support child rape. It’s horrifying to watch.

I’m probably not going to vote Republican again in my lifetime, barring serious restructuring of the party. I can’t stomach it. Between the enthusiastic cheerleading for child rape (my God!!), the insurrection, and the blind allegiance to the gun lobby, I can’t see how I could ever vote for them.

WTF are you talking about? “Cheerleading for child rape”?? Do you even hear yourself?

What is inaccurate about that assessment and the current Republicans? They are in favor of child rape.

The more you repeat this garbage, the farther people will run from you. Please stop. No one - NO ONE - is in favor of child rape, or rape of any kind. You just sound like an utter psychopath.
DP

No, it sounds accurate. This is what the Republicans support now. It’s upsetting you because it’s true.

JFC. Seek help. There’s no point trying to converse with disturbed people like you.

I would think the people in favor of children being raped and forced to bear the child of their rapists are the ones who need to seek help. But if you don’t see anything wrong with that, I can’t help you.

+1

ٌYou venal pieces of crap. You seem to grasp on some level that forcing a child to continue a pregnancy is bad, to the extent that one of your mouthpieces speaking before congress literally said that an abortion for a ten year old isn’t abortion (as you have tried to say with ectopic and other life threatening pregnancies, even though the law is written such that doctors can’t give lifesaving abortions in these states).

Come off it. Your whole policy position is stupid and cruel. You know that everyone who isn’t a kool aid swilling forced birther sees that now and you are effing terrified. It’s just a matter of time before some poor 9 or 13 year old dies from pregnancy complications or some photogenic Instagram woman with three kids and 500,000 followers is murdered by your idiotic laws. You know it’s game over.

Isn’t the witness saying that the law would not prevent the 10 year old from seeking an abortion because she could be harmed?

Yes, that’s what she claimed. She also claimed that the 10 year old’s abortion wouldn’t be an abortion because she’s 10 and that’s different. But that’s not the way the law was written or interpreted by the hospital lawyers, hence her having to go out of state.

It’s like the forced birthers are so close to admitting the damage that forced birth does to all women and the children resulting from it, but they just want to punish women so damn badly they’ll twist themselves into these pretzels.

She’s trying to explain why the law would not apply to the child, i.e. it would not meet the terms of abortion defined by their law due to her age and due to rape. The hospital was in error here, and I would dare say negligent. Another in-state hospital could have made a different decision.

She wasn't trying to "explain" anything. She just made an assertion that was untrue because the truth is unpleasant.

You heard what you wanted to hear. She was very specific in saying the law would not apply to this child

But that is a lie. There is NO age limit in the law.

If you look at the law itself in detail (I did), she was certainly eligible for an abortion under Ohio law

No she wasn’t. Here’s a breakdown of the two exceptions. Will prevent maternal death or impairment of a major body system. Mental health cannot be considered. The link to the law is in this clear synopsis. FFS— if you care, read the law.

[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:Well, I didn’t think that the forced birthers supported child rape prior to this. How wrong I was. My God.

Correct. Go look at the GOP corruption thread for more. I lost track over the hundred plus pages of how many rapists and child rapists and other assorted life destroying sex crimes various Republican elected officials are guilty of. It’s disgusting and it’s clearly a serious problem in the party.

Yeah, I’m a political moderate who has voted for Republicans in the past, and I used to think that the Democrats were being pretty hypocritical about the sex assaults by Republicans because there are plenty of sex assaulter amongst the Democrats too. But the aftermath of the Roe decision has shown to me that this issue of Republican child rapists is deeply part of the party. They really, as a group, support child rape. It’s horrifying to watch.

I’m probably not going to vote Republican again in my lifetime, barring serious restructuring of the party. I can’t stomach it. Between the enthusiastic cheerleading for child rape (my God!!), the insurrection, and the blind allegiance to the gun lobby, I can’t see how I could ever vote for them.

WTF are you talking about? “Cheerleading for child rape”?? Do you even hear yourself?

What is inaccurate about that assessment and the current Republicans? They are in favor of child rape.

The more you repeat this garbage, the farther people will run from you. Please stop. No one - NO ONE - is in favor of child rape, or rape of any kind. You just sound like an utter psychopath.
DP

No, it sounds accurate. This is what the Republicans support now. It’s upsetting you because it’s true.

JFC. Seek help. There’s no point trying to converse with disturbed people like you.

I would think the people in favor of children being raped and forced to bear the child of their rapists are the ones who need to seek help. But if you don’t see anything wrong with that, I can’t help you.

+1

ٌYou venal pieces of crap. You seem to grasp on some level that forcing a child to continue a pregnancy is bad, to the extent that one of your mouthpieces speaking before congress literally said that an abortion for a ten year old isn’t abortion (as you have tried to say with ectopic and other life threatening pregnancies, even though the law is written such that doctors can’t give lifesaving abortions in these states).

Come off it. Your whole policy position is stupid and cruel. You know that everyone who isn’t a kool aid swilling forced birther sees that now and you are effing terrified. It’s just a matter of time before some poor 9 or 13 year old dies from pregnancy complications or some photogenic Instagram woman with three kids and 500,000 followers is murdered by your idiotic laws. You know it’s game over.

Isn’t the witness saying that the law would not prevent the 10 year old from seeking an abortion because she could be harmed?

Yes, that’s what she claimed. She also claimed that the 10 year old’s abortion wouldn’t be an abortion because she’s 10 and that’s different. But that’s not the way the law was written or interpreted by the hospital lawyers, hence her having to go out of state.

It’s like the forced birthers are so close to admitting the damage that forced birth does to all women and the children resulting from it, but they just want to punish women so damn badly they’ll twist themselves into these pretzels.

She’s trying to explain why the law would not apply to the child, i.e. it would not meet the terms of abortion defined by their law due to her age and due to rape. The hospital was in error here, and I would dare say negligent. Another in-state hospital could have made a different decision.

She wasn't trying to "explain" anything. She just made an assertion that was untrue because the truth is unpleasant.

You heard what you wanted to hear. She was very specific in saying the law would not apply to this child

But that is a lie. There is NO age limit in the law.

If you look at the law itself in detail (I did), she was certainly eligible for an abortion under Ohio law

No she wasn’t. Here’s a breakdown of the two exceptions. Will prevent maternal death or impairment of a major body system. Mental health cannot be considered. The link to the law is in this clear synopsis. FFS— if you care, read the law.

Sorry! Link here
https://www.news5cleveland.com/news/politics/ohio-politics/ohio-ag-files-motion-to-dissolve-injunction-on-six-week-abortion-ban-bill

[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:Well, I didn’t think that the forced birthers supported child rape prior to this. How wrong I was. My God.

Correct. Go look at the GOP corruption thread for more. I lost track over the hundred plus pages of how many rapists and child rapists and other assorted life destroying sex crimes various Republican elected officials are guilty of. It’s disgusting and it’s clearly a serious problem in the party.

Yeah, I’m a political moderate who has voted for Republicans in the past, and I used to think that the Democrats were being pretty hypocritical about the sex assaults by Republicans because there are plenty of sex assaulter amongst the Democrats too. But the aftermath of the Roe decision has shown to me that this issue of Republican child rapists is deeply part of the party. They really, as a group, support child rape. It’s horrifying to watch.

I’m probably not going to vote Republican again in my lifetime, barring serious restructuring of the party. I can’t stomach it. Between the enthusiastic cheerleading for child rape (my God!!), the insurrection, and the blind allegiance to the gun lobby, I can’t see how I could ever vote for them.

WTF are you talking about? “Cheerleading for child rape”?? Do you even hear yourself?

What is inaccurate about that assessment and the current Republicans? They are in favor of child rape.

The more you repeat this garbage, the farther people will run from you. Please stop. No one - NO ONE - is in favor of child rape, or rape of any kind. You just sound like an utter psychopath.
DP

No, it sounds accurate. This is what the Republicans support now. It’s upsetting you because it’s true.

JFC. Seek help. There’s no point trying to converse with disturbed people like you.

I would think the people in favor of children being raped and forced to bear the child of their rapists are the ones who need to seek help. But if you don’t see anything wrong with that, I can’t help you.

+1

ٌYou venal pieces of crap. You seem to grasp on some level that forcing a child to continue a pregnancy is bad, to the extent that one of your mouthpieces speaking before congress literally said that an abortion for a ten year old isn’t abortion (as you have tried to say with ectopic and other life threatening pregnancies, even though the law is written such that doctors can’t give lifesaving abortions in these states).

Come off it. Your whole policy position is stupid and cruel. You know that everyone who isn’t a kool aid swilling forced birther sees that now and you are effing terrified. It’s just a matter of time before some poor 9 or 13 year old dies from pregnancy complications or some photogenic Instagram woman with three kids and 500,000 followers is murdered by your idiotic laws. You know it’s game over.

Isn’t the witness saying that the law would not prevent the 10 year old from seeking an abortion because she could be harmed?

The guy who wrote the law says the 10-year-old needs to stay pregnant and give birth.

Can I see that in a documented statement from the lawmaker who wrote the law please?

https://www.politico.com/news/2022/07/14/anti-abotion-10-year-old-ohio-00045843

The 10-year-old Ohio girl who crossed state lines to receive an abortion in Indiana should have carried her pregnancy to term and would be required to do so under a model law written for state legislatures considering more restrictive abortion measures, according to the general counsel for the National Right to Life.

Jim Bopp, an Indiana lawyer who authored the model legislation in advance of the Supreme Court’s decision overturning Roe v. Wade, told POLITICO on Thursday that his law only provides exceptions when the pregnant person’s life is in danger.

“She would have had the baby, and as many women who have had babies as a result of rape, we would hope that she would understand the reason and ultimately the benefit of having the child,” Bopp said in a phone interview on Thursday.

So, does this change ^PP"s mind? Probably not. Vile... forcing a 10 yr old girl to have her rapist's baby. Just vile. What kind of parent would be fine with this - forced birthers.

I'm the PP. I read further on in the story. It makes it clear that Bopp knows the law has rape/incest as an exception, but that Bopp has conflicts about that. Doesn't matter how he feels (or how anyone feels for that matter). What matters is if the girl was entitled to an abortion in Ohio given her age/circumstance and the answer is yes.

The flaw in their logic is that if a life is a life, then it doesn't matter how the life was conceived. So, why should rape be an exemption?

This is the problem with rigid thinking. It leaves no room for real life, which is often, shades of gray.

-signed the former pro-lifer and a mother of two

And thank God Bopp did not et his way, right? So clearly there was room for real life.

Not in Ohio.

[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:Well, I didn’t think that the forced birthers supported child rape prior to this. How wrong I was. My God.

Correct. Go look at the GOP corruption thread for more. I lost track over the hundred plus pages of how many rapists and child rapists and other assorted life destroying sex crimes various Republican elected officials are guilty of. It’s disgusting and it’s clearly a serious problem in the party.

Yeah, I’m a political moderate who has voted for Republicans in the past, and I used to think that the Democrats were being pretty hypocritical about the sex assaults by Republicans because there are plenty of sex assaulter amongst the Democrats too. But the aftermath of the Roe decision has shown to me that this issue of Republican child rapists is deeply part of the party. They really, as a group, support child rape. It’s horrifying to watch.

I’m probably not going to vote Republican again in my lifetime, barring serious restructuring of the party. I can’t stomach it. Between the enthusiastic cheerleading for child rape (my God!!), the insurrection, and the blind allegiance to the gun lobby, I can’t see how I could ever vote for them.

WTF are you talking about? “Cheerleading for child rape”?? Do you even hear yourself?

What is inaccurate about that assessment and the current Republicans? They are in favor of child rape.

The more you repeat this garbage, the farther people will run from you. Please stop. No one - NO ONE - is in favor of child rape, or rape of any kind. You just sound like an utter psychopath.
DP

No, it sounds accurate. This is what the Republicans support now. It’s upsetting you because it’s true.

JFC. Seek help. There’s no point trying to converse with disturbed people like you.

I would think the people in favor of children being raped and forced to bear the child of their rapists are the ones who need to seek help. But if you don’t see anything wrong with that, I can’t help you.

+1

ٌYou venal pieces of crap. You seem to grasp on some level that forcing a child to continue a pregnancy is bad, to the extent that one of your mouthpieces speaking before congress literally said that an abortion for a ten year old isn’t abortion (as you have tried to say with ectopic and other life threatening pregnancies, even though the law is written such that doctors can’t give lifesaving abortions in these states).

Come off it. Your whole policy position is stupid and cruel. You know that everyone who isn’t a kool aid swilling forced birther sees that now and you are effing terrified. It’s just a matter of time before some poor 9 or 13 year old dies from pregnancy complications or some photogenic Instagram woman with three kids and 500,000 followers is murdered by your idiotic laws. You know it’s game over.

Isn’t the witness saying that the law would not prevent the 10 year old from seeking an abortion because she could be harmed?

Yes, that’s what she claimed. She also claimed that the 10 year old’s abortion wouldn’t be an abortion because she’s 10 and that’s different. But that’s not the way the law was written or interpreted by the hospital lawyers, hence her having to go out of state.

It’s like the forced birthers are so close to admitting the damage that forced birth does to all women and the children resulting from it, but they just want to punish women so damn badly they’ll twist themselves into these pretzels.

She’s trying to explain why the law would not apply to the child, i.e. it would not meet the terms of abortion defined by their law due to her age and due to rape. The hospital was in error here, and I would dare say negligent. Another in-state hospital could have made a different decision.

She wasn't trying to "explain" anything. She just made an assertion that was untrue because the truth is unpleasant.

You heard what you wanted to hear. She was very specific in saying the law would not apply to this child

But that is a lie. There is NO age limit in the law.

If you look at the law itself in detail (I did), she was certainly eligible for an abortion under Ohio law

No she wasn’t. Here’s a breakdown of the two exceptions. Will prevent maternal death or impairment of a major body system. Mental health cannot be considered. The link to the law is in this clear synopsis. FFS— if you care, read the law.

You are correct. That other PP is a forced birther child rapist supporter who can’t read the plain text of the law.

[Anonymous]

jsteele 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:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Well, I didn’t think that the forced birthers supported child rape prior to this. How wrong I was. My God.

Correct. Go look at the GOP corruption thread for more. I lost track over the hundred plus pages of how many rapists and child rapists and other assorted life destroying sex crimes various Republican elected officials are guilty of. It’s disgusting and it’s clearly a serious problem in the party.

Yeah, I’m a political moderate who has voted for Republicans in the past, and I used to think that the Democrats were being pretty hypocritical about the sex assaults by Republicans because there are plenty of sex assaulter amongst the Democrats too. But the aftermath of the Roe decision has shown to me that this issue of Republican child rapists is deeply part of the party. They really, as a group, support child rape. It’s horrifying to watch.

I’m probably not going to vote Republican again in my lifetime, barring serious restructuring of the party. I can’t stomach it. Between the enthusiastic cheerleading for child rape (my God!!), the insurrection, and the blind allegiance to the gun lobby, I can’t see how I could ever vote for them.

WTF are you talking about? “Cheerleading for child rape”?? Do you even hear yourself?

What is inaccurate about that assessment and the current Republicans? They are in favor of child rape.

The more you repeat this garbage, the farther people will run from you. Please stop. No one - NO ONE - is in favor of child rape, or rape of any kind. You just sound like an utter psychopath.
DP

No, it sounds accurate. This is what the Republicans support now. It’s upsetting you because it’s true.

JFC. Seek help. There’s no point trying to converse with disturbed people like you.

I would think the people in favor of children being raped and forced to bear the child of their rapists are the ones who need to seek help. But if you don’t see anything wrong with that, I can’t help you.

+1

ٌYou venal pieces of crap. You seem to grasp on some level that forcing a child to continue a pregnancy is bad, to the extent that one of your mouthpieces speaking before congress literally said that an abortion for a ten year old isn’t abortion (as you have tried to say with ectopic and other life threatening pregnancies, even though the law is written such that doctors can’t give lifesaving abortions in these states).

Come off it. Your whole policy position is stupid and cruel. You know that everyone who isn’t a kool aid swilling forced birther sees that now and you are effing terrified. It’s just a matter of time before some poor 9 or 13 year old dies from pregnancy complications or some photogenic Instagram woman with three kids and 500,000 followers is murdered by your idiotic laws. You know it’s game over.

Isn’t the witness saying that the law would not prevent the 10 year old from seeking an abortion because she could be harmed?

The guy who wrote the law says the 10-year-old needs to stay pregnant and give birth.

Can I see that in a documented statement from the lawmaker who wrote the law please?

Would you like it notarized and in triplicate?

"Jim Bopp, an Indiana lawyer who authored the model legislation in advance of the Supreme Court’s decision overturning Roe v. Wade, told POLITICO on Thursday that his law only provides exceptions when the pregnant person’s life is in danger. “She would have had the baby, and as many women who have had babies as a result of rape, we would hope that she would understand the reason and ultimately the benefit of having the child,” Bopp said in a phone interview on Thursday."
https://www.politico.com/news/2022/07/14/anti-abotion-10-year-old-ohio-00045843

In fact, if you go further down in this story, the law also says this:

"While Bopp’s model legislation, which was released in advance of the Supreme Court’s ruling late last month, encourages states to ban all abortions unless necessary to save the life of the pregnant person, it notes “it may be necessary in certain states to have additional exceptions, such as for a women pregnant as a result of rape or incest.”"

That seems like very informal language for a law, doesn't it?

Yes, because it's a freaking ARTICLE that summarizes the law, not the law itself.

Shame PP isn't bright enough to quote the actual text of the law.

It's pretty long - there are a lot of exceptions. You are capable of looking it up and reading it as I did.

I don't know what you were reading but here is the current law:

https://search-prod.lis.state.oh.us/solarapi/v1/general_assembly_133/bills/sb23/EN/05?format=pdf

But, as an earlier poster stated, the only exceptions are:

“to prevent the death of the pregnant woman” or

“to prevent a serious risk of the substantial and irreversible impairment of a major bodily function of the pregnant woman”

"Two" is not "a lot".

The conversation between the girl’s doctor and the hospital’s lawyers probably went something like this:

Lawyer: Do you think she is likely to die during pregnancy or a C-section delivery?
Doctor: Most likely, no.
Lawyer: Do you think she is likely to suffer a substantial and irreversible impairment of a major bodily function during pregnancy or a C-section delivery?
Doctor: Most likely, no.

In that case, I could see how lawyers would assume that the girl was not entitled to an abortion under Ohio law.

[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:Well, I didn’t think that the forced birthers supported child rape prior to this. How wrong I was. My God.

Correct. Go look at the GOP corruption thread for more. I lost track over the hundred plus pages of how many rapists and child rapists and other assorted life destroying sex crimes various Republican elected officials are guilty of. It’s disgusting and it’s clearly a serious problem in the party.

Yeah, I’m a political moderate who has voted for Republicans in the past, and I used to think that the Democrats were being pretty hypocritical about the sex assaults by Republicans because there are plenty of sex assaulter amongst the Democrats too. But the aftermath of the Roe decision has shown to me that this issue of Republican child rapists is deeply part of the party. They really, as a group, support child rape. It’s horrifying to watch.

I’m probably not going to vote Republican again in my lifetime, barring serious restructuring of the party. I can’t stomach it. Between the enthusiastic cheerleading for child rape (my God!!), the insurrection, and the blind allegiance to the gun lobby, I can’t see how I could ever vote for them.

WTF are you talking about? “Cheerleading for child rape”?? Do you even hear yourself?

What is inaccurate about that assessment and the current Republicans? They are in favor of child rape.

The more you repeat this garbage, the farther people will run from you. Please stop. No one - NO ONE - is in favor of child rape, or rape of any kind. You just sound like an utter psychopath.
DP

Just to clarify, child rape is bad, but making a child carry a pregnancy to terms is perfectly fine?

Of course not. I’m the PP and I’m also pro-choice. But your gross, hyperbolic claims just make pro-choice people look nutty. Do better - you’re embarrassing us all.

That's literally the opposite of both the Ohio law and the Indiana Attorney General's stance.

+1 Jim Bopp, the Indiana general counsel for the National Right to Life who authored the model legislation in advance of the Supreme Court’s decision overturning Roe v. Wade, told POLITICO on Thursday that his law only provides exceptions when the pregnant person’s life is in danger and that the 10-year-oldd should have carried her pregnancy to term and would be required to do so under a model law written for state legislatures considering more restrictive abortion measures.

Of course. But the fake concern trolls who don’t like it when it’s accurately pointed out that the Republicans support child rape will pretend this isn’t true.

MAKE IT STOP! What is wrong with the Republican party? What is wrong with people who vote for them? If we don't see a tidal Blue wave in November I will have lost all hope for citizen of the US.

In what world is it OK for a child, who was raped, to carry another child to birth? Please help me understand. And pro-choice, no need to respond. I want to hear from those who support this draconian legislation.

That ship sailed January 6, 2021

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele 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:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Well, I didn’t think that the forced birthers supported child rape prior to this. How wrong I was. My God.

Correct. Go look at the GOP corruption thread for more. I lost track over the hundred plus pages of how many rapists and child rapists and other assorted life destroying sex crimes various Republican elected officials are guilty of. It’s disgusting and it’s clearly a serious problem in the party.

Yeah, I’m a political moderate who has voted for Republicans in the past, and I used to think that the Democrats were being pretty hypocritical about the sex assaults by Republicans because there are plenty of sex assaulter amongst the Democrats too. But the aftermath of the Roe decision has shown to me that this issue of Republican child rapists is deeply part of the party. They really, as a group, support child rape. It’s horrifying to watch.

I’m probably not going to vote Republican again in my lifetime, barring serious restructuring of the party. I can’t stomach it. Between the enthusiastic cheerleading for child rape (my God!!), the insurrection, and the blind allegiance to the gun lobby, I can’t see how I could ever vote for them.

WTF are you talking about? “Cheerleading for child rape”?? Do you even hear yourself?

What is inaccurate about that assessment and the current Republicans? They are in favor of child rape.

The more you repeat this garbage, the farther people will run from you. Please stop. No one - NO ONE - is in favor of child rape, or rape of any kind. You just sound like an utter psychopath.
DP

No, it sounds accurate. This is what the Republicans support now. It’s upsetting you because it’s true.

JFC. Seek help. There’s no point trying to converse with disturbed people like you.

I would think the people in favor of children being raped and forced to bear the child of their rapists are the ones who need to seek help. But if you don’t see anything wrong with that, I can’t help you.

+1

ٌYou venal pieces of crap. You seem to grasp on some level that forcing a child to continue a pregnancy is bad, to the extent that one of your mouthpieces speaking before congress literally said that an abortion for a ten year old isn’t abortion (as you have tried to say with ectopic and other life threatening pregnancies, even though the law is written such that doctors can’t give lifesaving abortions in these states).

Come off it. Your whole policy position is stupid and cruel. You know that everyone who isn’t a kool aid swilling forced birther sees that now and you are effing terrified. It’s just a matter of time before some poor 9 or 13 year old dies from pregnancy complications or some photogenic Instagram woman with three kids and 500,000 followers is murdered by your idiotic laws. You know it’s game over.

Isn’t the witness saying that the law would not prevent the 10 year old from seeking an abortion because she could be harmed?

The guy who wrote the law says the 10-year-old needs to stay pregnant and give birth.

Can I see that in a documented statement from the lawmaker who wrote the law please?

Would you like it notarized and in triplicate?

"Jim Bopp, an Indiana lawyer who authored the model legislation in advance of the Supreme Court’s decision overturning Roe v. Wade, told POLITICO on Thursday that his law only provides exceptions when the pregnant person’s life is in danger. “She would have had the baby, and as many women who have had babies as a result of rape, we would hope that she would understand the reason and ultimately the benefit of having the child,” Bopp said in a phone interview on Thursday."
https://www.politico.com/news/2022/07/14/anti-abotion-10-year-old-ohio-00045843

In fact, if you go further down in this story, the law also says this:

"While Bopp’s model legislation, which was released in advance of the Supreme Court’s ruling late last month, encourages states to ban all abortions unless necessary to save the life of the pregnant person, it notes “it may be necessary in certain states to have additional exceptions, such as for a women pregnant as a result of rape or incest.”"

That seems like very informal language for a law, doesn't it?

Yes, because it's a freaking ARTICLE that summarizes the law, not the law itself.

Shame PP isn't bright enough to quote the actual text of the law.

It's pretty long - there are a lot of exceptions. You are capable of looking it up and reading it as I did.

I don't know what you were reading but here is the current law:

https://search-prod.lis.state.oh.us/solarapi/v1/general_assembly_133/bills/sb23/EN/05?format=pdf

But, as an earlier poster stated, the only exceptions are:

“to prevent the death of the pregnant woman” or

“to prevent a serious risk of the substantial and irreversible impairment of a major bodily function of the pregnant woman”

"Two" is not "a lot".

The conversation between the girl’s doctor and the hospital’s lawyers probably went something like this:

Lawyer: Do you think she is likely to die during pregnancy or a C-section delivery?
Doctor: Most likely, no.
Lawyer: Do you think she is likely to suffer a substantial and irreversible impairment of a major bodily function during pregnancy or a C-section delivery?
Doctor: Most likely, no.

In that case, I could see how lawyers would assume that the girl was not entitled to an abortion under Ohio law.

Exactly. The biggest risk to a pregnant child is the delivery itself, which can be prevented with a C section. The other risks are just increases in the “normal” risks of pregnancy like preeclampsia. Not immediate enough to constitute the emergency required under the statute.

[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:Well, I didn’t think that the forced birthers supported child rape prior to this. How wrong I was. My God.

Correct. Go look at the GOP corruption thread for more. I lost track over the hundred plus pages of how many rapists and child rapists and other assorted life destroying sex crimes various Republican elected officials are guilty of. It’s disgusting and it’s clearly a serious problem in the party.

Yeah, I’m a political moderate who has voted for Republicans in the past, and I used to think that the Democrats were being pretty hypocritical about the sex assaults by Republicans because there are plenty of sex assaulter amongst the Democrats too. But the aftermath of the Roe decision has shown to me that this issue of Republican child rapists is deeply part of the party. They really, as a group, support child rape. It’s horrifying to watch.

I’m probably not going to vote Republican again in my lifetime, barring serious restructuring of the party. I can’t stomach it. Between the enthusiastic cheerleading for child rape (my God!!), the insurrection, and the blind allegiance to the gun lobby, I can’t see how I could ever vote for them.

WTF are you talking about? “Cheerleading for child rape”?? Do you even hear yourself?

What is inaccurate about that assessment and the current Republicans? They are in favor of child rape.

The more you repeat this garbage, the farther people will run from you. Please stop. No one - NO ONE - is in favor of child rape, or rape of any kind. You just sound like an utter psychopath.
DP

No, it sounds accurate. This is what the Republicans support now. It’s upsetting you because it’s true.

JFC. Seek help. There’s no point trying to converse with disturbed people like you.

I would think the people in favor of children being raped and forced to bear the child of their rapists are the ones who need to seek help. But if you don’t see anything wrong with that, I can’t help you.

+1

ٌYou venal pieces of crap. You seem to grasp on some level that forcing a child to continue a pregnancy is bad, to the extent that one of your mouthpieces speaking before congress literally said that an abortion for a ten year old isn’t abortion (as you have tried to say with ectopic and other life threatening pregnancies, even though the law is written such that doctors can’t give lifesaving abortions in these states).

Come off it. Your whole policy position is stupid and cruel. You know that everyone who isn’t a kool aid swilling forced birther sees that now and you are effing terrified. It’s just a matter of time before some poor 9 or 13 year old dies from pregnancy complications or some photogenic Instagram woman with three kids and 500,000 followers is murdered by your idiotic laws. You know it’s game over.

Isn’t the witness saying that the law would not prevent the 10 year old from seeking an abortion because she could be harmed?

Yes, that’s what she claimed. She also claimed that the 10 year old’s abortion wouldn’t be an abortion because she’s 10 and that’s different. But that’s not the way the law was written or interpreted by the hospital lawyers, hence her having to go out of state.

It’s like the forced birthers are so close to admitting the damage that forced birth does to all women and the children resulting from it, but they just want to punish women so damn badly they’ll twist themselves into these pretzels.

She’s trying to explain why the law would not apply to the child, i.e. it would not meet the terms of abortion defined by their law due to her age and due to rape. The hospital was in error here, and I would dare say negligent. Another in-state hospital could have made a different decision.

She wasn't trying to "explain" anything. She just made an assertion that was untrue because the truth is unpleasant.

She doesn’t get to redefine the term “abortion.” It is a medical term, not some loopy language full of holes.

Agreed, she doesn't. However that doesn't change the fact that in this case, the hospital was the one who make a judgment call that was not in keeping with the actual legislation. The state needs to put out a very definitive statement to all Ohio hospitals so lawyers aren't inclined to go into CYA mode.

That’s not true. This isn’t even a close case under the law to allow a health exception in Ohio. Sadly.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele 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:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Well, I didn’t think that the forced birthers supported child rape prior to this. How wrong I was. My God.

Correct. Go look at the GOP corruption thread for more. I lost track over the hundred plus pages of how many rapists and child rapists and other assorted life destroying sex crimes various Republican elected officials are guilty of. It’s disgusting and it’s clearly a serious problem in the party.

Yeah, I’m a political moderate who has voted for Republicans in the past, and I used to think that the Democrats were being pretty hypocritical about the sex assaults by Republicans because there are plenty of sex assaulter amongst the Democrats too. But the aftermath of the Roe decision has shown to me that this issue of Republican child rapists is deeply part of the party. They really, as a group, support child rape. It’s horrifying to watch.

I’m probably not going to vote Republican again in my lifetime, barring serious restructuring of the party. I can’t stomach it. Between the enthusiastic cheerleading for child rape (my God!!), the insurrection, and the blind allegiance to the gun lobby, I can’t see how I could ever vote for them.

WTF are you talking about? “Cheerleading for child rape”?? Do you even hear yourself?

What is inaccurate about that assessment and the current Republicans? They are in favor of child rape.

The more you repeat this garbage, the farther people will run from you. Please stop. No one - NO ONE - is in favor of child rape, or rape of any kind. You just sound like an utter psychopath.
DP

No, it sounds accurate. This is what the Republicans support now. It’s upsetting you because it’s true.

JFC. Seek help. There’s no point trying to converse with disturbed people like you.

I would think the people in favor of children being raped and forced to bear the child of their rapists are the ones who need to seek help. But if you don’t see anything wrong with that, I can’t help you.

+1

ٌYou venal pieces of crap. You seem to grasp on some level that forcing a child to continue a pregnancy is bad, to the extent that one of your mouthpieces speaking before congress literally said that an abortion for a ten year old isn’t abortion (as you have tried to say with ectopic and other life threatening pregnancies, even though the law is written such that doctors can’t give lifesaving abortions in these states).

Come off it. Your whole policy position is stupid and cruel. You know that everyone who isn’t a kool aid swilling forced birther sees that now and you are effing terrified. It’s just a matter of time before some poor 9 or 13 year old dies from pregnancy complications or some photogenic Instagram woman with three kids and 500,000 followers is murdered by your idiotic laws. You know it’s game over.

Isn’t the witness saying that the law would not prevent the 10 year old from seeking an abortion because she could be harmed?

The guy who wrote the law says the 10-year-old needs to stay pregnant and give birth.

Can I see that in a documented statement from the lawmaker who wrote the law please?

Would you like it notarized and in triplicate?

"Jim Bopp, an Indiana lawyer who authored the model legislation in advance of the Supreme Court’s decision overturning Roe v. Wade, told POLITICO on Thursday that his law only provides exceptions when the pregnant person’s life is in danger. “She would have had the baby, and as many women who have had babies as a result of rape, we would hope that she would understand the reason and ultimately the benefit of having the child,” Bopp said in a phone interview on Thursday."
https://www.politico.com/news/2022/07/14/anti-abotion-10-year-old-ohio-00045843

In fact, if you go further down in this story, the law also says this:

"While Bopp’s model legislation, which was released in advance of the Supreme Court’s ruling late last month, encourages states to ban all abortions unless necessary to save the life of the pregnant person, it notes “it may be necessary in certain states to have additional exceptions, such as for a women pregnant as a result of rape or incest.”"

That seems like very informal language for a law, doesn't it?

Yes, because it's a freaking ARTICLE that summarizes the law, not the law itself.

Shame PP isn't bright enough to quote the actual text of the law.

It's pretty long - there are a lot of exceptions. You are capable of looking it up and reading it as I did.

I don't know what you were reading but here is the current law:

https://search-prod.lis.state.oh.us/solarapi/v1/general_assembly_133/bills/sb23/EN/05?format=pdf

But, as an earlier poster stated, the only exceptions are:

“to prevent the death of the pregnant woman” or

“to prevent a serious risk of the substantial and irreversible impairment of a major bodily function of the pregnant woman”

"Two" is not "a lot".

The conversation between the girl’s doctor and the hospital’s lawyers probably went something like this:

Lawyer: Do you think she is likely to die during pregnancy or a C-section delivery?
Doctor: Most likely, no.
Lawyer: Do you think she is likely to suffer a substantial and irreversible impairment of a major bodily function during pregnancy or a C-section delivery?
Doctor: Most likely, no.

In that case, I could see how lawyers would assume that the girl was not entitled to an abortion under Ohio law.

I’m a lawyer. And if that conversation happened, an abortion would be illegal. That’s are short analysis. We don’t assume. We read the d*mn statute and this one is pretty clear. In the case of the ten year old, unless she was hemorrhaging or was type one diabetic or something we don’t know about, she doesn’t meet it. Legal analysis doesn’t give bonus points for horrific situations bad legislative drafting.

Where it gets fuzzy and is a headache for the MDs is when the woman has a health problem and pregnancy prevents treatment or makes it worse, but isn’t an all out emergency now and the prognosis without treatment is fuzzy. For example. The woman has a less aggressive (but not indolent) form of cancer that hasn’t metasitized— yet, but almost certainly will— and is 12 weeks pregnant. Is she likely to die? Suffer a substantial and irreversible impairment of a major body system if she doesn’t have chemo? Will it metastasis before delivery is safe for the fetus? In many cases, it’s anyones guess. No lawyer can opine on that. And a lawyer won’t assume that an exception is or is not met. They’ll flat out say: we don’t know if it’s legal because the law is so vague. What is a “substantial impairment”? I have no idea. A twisted ankle isn’t. Severe heart, kidney or liver failure that can’t be stabilized is. But in between is so much grey. There needs to be further regulatory guidance.

But here’s what a lawyer will also say: the doctor has to send all the medical documentation and justification to the AG for every abortion performed after 6 weeks. And the AG, himself a lawyer, is a political hack looking for an for any excuse to say— yeah, but there’s a good chance she could have held on 4 months and been okay, right? They need to make an example of an MD so there is a chilling effect and a high profile prosecution of an “abortion doctor” burnishes the conservative credentials. And the statutory standard is irreversible. So, if there are Mets by the time the baby is born, but chemo has a good chance of forcing remission, but she will need more chemo or radiation or surgery, a case can be made she doesn’t meet the statute. The doctor *could* be charged. She may or may not be found guilty, but by the time the crazies are done with the MD and the legal bills are paid, her life and career will be destroyed.

A good lawyer,— whose client is the MD not the woman, BTW— will advise not performing the abortion, even if the woman wants one. Not until they really law out how badly this could end.

Remember in all of this— lawyers are making the decisions. And they represent the doctors and the hospitals. Not the patient. This is why having lawyers deciding abortion policy is nutso.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I’m a lawyer. […] This is why having lawyers deciding abortion policy is nutso.

You make very good points and I’m always happy to hear from experts in a relevant field, but your last sentence might just as well be:
“This is why having femicidal misogynists deciding abortion policy is nutso.” Because lawyers wouldn’t have to be weighing in on how miserable, sick or dead to make a woman who just needs or wants an abortion if the femicidal misogynists didn’t insist on inserting themselves into women’s uteruses.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m a lawyer. […] This is why having lawyers deciding abortion policy is nutso.

You make very good points and I’m always happy to hear from experts in a relevant field, but your last sentence might just as well be:
“This is why having femicidal misogynists deciding abortion policy is nutso.” Because lawyers wouldn’t have to be weighing in on how miserable, sick or dead to make a woman who just needs or wants an abortion if the femicidal misogynists didn’t insist on inserting themselves into women’s uteruses.

Republicans are saying some creepy shit. This from a Montana Republican who was Speaker of the state house and is now running for the state senate:
"“The womb is the only organ in a woman’s body that serves no specific purpose to her life or well-being,” Tschida said. “It is truly a sanctuary.”" Welcome to Gilead, people.

[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:Well, I didn’t think that the forced birthers supported child rape prior to this. How wrong I was. My God.

Correct. Go look at the GOP corruption thread for more. I lost track over the hundred plus pages of how many rapists and child rapists and other assorted life destroying sex crimes various Republican elected officials are guilty of. It’s disgusting and it’s clearly a serious problem in the party.

Yeah, I’m a political moderate who has voted for Republicans in the past, and I used to think that the Democrats were being pretty hypocritical about the sex assaults by Republicans because there are plenty of sex assaulter amongst the Democrats too. But the aftermath of the Roe decision has shown to me that this issue of Republican child rapists is deeply part of the party. They really, as a group, support child rape. It’s horrifying to watch.

I’m probably not going to vote Republican again in my lifetime, barring serious restructuring of the party. I can’t stomach it. Between the enthusiastic cheerleading for child rape (my God!!), the insurrection, and the blind allegiance to the gun lobby, I can’t see how I could ever vote for them.

WTF are you talking about? “Cheerleading for child rape”?? Do you even hear yourself?

What is inaccurate about that assessment and the current Republicans? They are in favor of child rape.

The more you repeat this garbage, the farther people will run from you. Please stop. No one - NO ONE - is in favor of child rape, or rape of any kind. You just sound like an utter psychopath.
DP

No, it sounds accurate. This is what the Republicans support now. It’s upsetting you because it’s true.

JFC. Seek help. There’s no point trying to converse with disturbed people like you.

I would think the people in favor of children being raped and forced to bear the child of their rapists are the ones who need to seek help. But if you don’t see anything wrong with that, I can’t help you.

+1

ٌYou venal pieces of crap. You seem to grasp on some level that forcing a child to continue a pregnancy is bad, to the extent that one of your mouthpieces speaking before congress literally said that an abortion for a ten year old isn’t abortion (as you have tried to say with ectopic and other life threatening pregnancies, even though the law is written such that doctors can’t give lifesaving abortions in these states).

Come off it. Your whole policy position is stupid and cruel. You know that everyone who isn’t a kool aid swilling forced birther sees that now and you are effing terrified. It’s just a matter of time before some poor 9 or 13 year old dies from pregnancy complications or some photogenic Instagram woman with three kids and 500,000 followers is murdered by your idiotic laws. You know it’s game over.

Isn’t the witness saying that the law would not prevent the 10 year old from seeking an abortion because she could be harmed?

Yes, that’s what she claimed. She also claimed that the 10 year old’s abortion wouldn’t be an abortion because she’s 10 and that’s different. But that’s not the way the law was written or interpreted by the hospital lawyers, hence her having to go out of state.

It’s like the forced birthers are so close to admitting the damage that forced birth does to all women and the children resulting from it, but they just want to punish women so damn badly they’ll twist themselves into these pretzels.

She’s trying to explain why the law would not apply to the child, i.e. it would not meet the terms of abortion defined by their law due to her age and due to rape. The hospital was in error here, and I would dare say negligent. Another in-state hospital could have made a different decision.

She wasn't trying to "explain" anything. She just made an assertion that was untrue because the truth is unpleasant.

She doesn’t get to redefine the term “abortion.” It is a medical term, not some loopy language full of holes.

Agreed, she doesn't. However that doesn't change the fact that in this case, the hospital was the one who make a judgment call that was not in keeping with the actual legislation. The state needs to put out a very definitive statement to all Ohio hospitals so lawyers aren't inclined to go into CYA mode.

Here’s Ohio’s State Legislative Commission:

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m a lawyer. […] This is why having lawyers deciding abortion policy is nutso.

You make very good points and I’m always happy to hear from experts in a relevant field, but your last sentence might just as well be:
“This is why having femicidal misogynists deciding abortion policy is nutso.” Because lawyers wouldn’t have to be weighing in on how miserable, sick or dead to make a woman who just needs or wants an abortion if the femicidal misogynists didn’t insist on inserting themselves into women’s uteruses.

PP and I’m not disagreeing with you. I work for a federal agency whose mission I agree with because I couldn’t stomach crap like this. Because you have to be a femicidal maniac to decide lawyers should be making medical decisions.

[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:

Anonymous wrote:Well, I didn’t think that the forced birthers supported child rape prior to this. How wrong I was. My God.

Correct. Go look at the GOP corruption thread for more. I lost track over the hundred plus pages of how many rapists and child rapists and other assorted life destroying sex crimes various Republican elected officials are guilty of. It’s disgusting and it’s clearly a serious problem in the party.

Yeah, I’m a political moderate who has voted for Republicans in the past, and I used to think that the Democrats were being pretty hypocritical about the sex assaults by Republicans because there are plenty of sex assaulter amongst the Democrats too. But the aftermath of the Roe decision has shown to me that this issue of Republican child rapists is deeply part of the party. They really, as a group, support child rape. It’s horrifying to watch.

I’m probably not going to vote Republican again in my lifetime, barring serious restructuring of the party. I can’t stomach it. Between the enthusiastic cheerleading for child rape (my God!!), the insurrection, and the blind allegiance to the gun lobby, I can’t see how I could ever vote for them.

WTF are you talking about? “Cheerleading for child rape”?? Do you even hear yourself?

What is inaccurate about that assessment and the current Republicans? They are in favor of child rape.

The more you repeat this garbage, the farther people will run from you. Please stop. No one - NO ONE - is in favor of child rape, or rape of any kind. You just sound like an utter psychopath.
DP

No, it sounds accurate. This is what the Republicans support now. It’s upsetting you because it’s true.

JFC. Seek help. There’s no point trying to converse with disturbed people like you.

I would think the people in favor of children being raped and forced to bear the child of their rapists are the ones who need to seek help. But if you don’t see anything wrong with that, I can’t help you.

+1

ٌYou venal pieces of crap. You seem to grasp on some level that forcing a child to continue a pregnancy is bad, to the extent that one of your mouthpieces speaking before congress literally said that an abortion for a ten year old isn’t abortion (as you have tried to say with ectopic and other life threatening pregnancies, even though the law is written such that doctors can’t give lifesaving abortions in these states).

Come off it. Your whole policy position is stupid and cruel. You know that everyone who isn’t a kool aid swilling forced birther sees that now and you are effing terrified. It’s just a matter of time before some poor 9 or 13 year old dies from pregnancy complications or some photogenic Instagram woman with three kids and 500,000 followers is murdered by your idiotic laws. You know it’s game over.

Isn’t the witness saying that the law would not prevent the 10 year old from seeking an abortion because she could be harmed?

Yes, that’s what she claimed. She also claimed that the 10 year old’s abortion wouldn’t be an abortion because she’s 10 and that’s different. But that’s not the way the law was written or interpreted by the hospital lawyers, hence her having to go out of state.

It’s like the forced birthers are so close to admitting the damage that forced birth does to all women and the children resulting from it, but they just want to punish women so damn badly they’ll twist themselves into these pretzels.

She’s trying to explain why the law would not apply to the child, i.e. it would not meet the terms of abortion defined by their law due to her age and due to rape. The hospital was in error here, and I would dare say negligent. Another in-state hospital could have made a different decision.

She wasn't trying to "explain" anything. She just made an assertion that was untrue because the truth is unpleasant.

You heard what you wanted to hear. She was very specific in saying the law would not apply to this child

But that is a lie. There is NO age limit in the law.

If you look at the law itself in detail (I did), she was certainly eligible for an abortion under Ohio law

No she wasn’t. Here’s a breakdown of the two exceptions. Will prevent maternal death or impairment of a major body system. Mental health cannot be considered. The link to the law is in this clear synopsis. FFS— if you care, read the law.

Sorry! Link here
https://www.news5cleveland.com/news/politics/ohio-politics/ohio-ag-files-motion-to-dissolve-injunction-on-six-week-abortion-ban-bill

If mental health cannot be considered, then.. What happens when pregnant woman commits suicide? I don't think she'd care about the legal consequences, the end result is the death of the fetus inside of her anyway. These morons cannot do basic logic, how do they pass the LSAT?