Reply to “We hold that Roe and Casey must be overruled," Justice Alito writes in an initial majority draft

Forum Index » Political Discussion

Reply to "“We hold that Roe and Casey must be overruled," Justice Alito writes in an initial majority draft"

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]15 weeks
No restrictions 
No waiting
Easy access
Affordable
After 15 weeks - rape/incest/life of mother or fetus
Dr. is given broad discretion to use best medical practices.

I’m hard core pro-choice and could live with this
But this country has a long way to go to get abortion access to women everywhere. Later abortions are happening because of all the roadblocks republicans have erected.

I’d also like to see verbiage for free birth control and better sex education. I had excellent sex education growing up and I think it really made a difference. [/quote]
I live in California and this would be more restrictive than what we currently have. If you've never had genetic testing come back at 20w and scrambled to get your MFM appointment before the abortion cut off in your state so that you would have options, please don't negotiate away the rest of our rights.

I would not support any bill that was more restrictive than Roe and that removed discretion for states. The WHPA is a good compromise...but people want Democrats to start off with a bill that their base doesn't support. No thank you.[/quote]

Baseline,  not a ceiling. I was just suggesting a bill that might actually pass. That’s all.
I agree 20 weeks is better.

Also: most people don’t understand what Roe even means. Democrats need to educate the public. The forced birthers have been lying for 40
Years. People now believe the lies.[/quote]

15 weeks isn't any more likely to get 60 votes than 20 weeks, viability, or 40 weeks.  None of them can ge 60 in the Senate.  Meanwhile if 15 weeks is proposed then that becomes the new baseline negotiating position.

Find the 8 extra Senators that are willing to pass anything first.  There's currently only 51 + Manchin potentially interested in anything.[/quote]

Exactly. 15 weeks is just some arbitrary line. Stick with viability. 
[/quote]

That is the gestational age where a fetus can feel pain. Science and all that.[/quote]
JFC you people with your never ending stream of bullsh!t. Also, the electric signals that the ultrasound picks up at six weeks are not a “heartbeat,” since an embryo at that stage doesn’t have a fully formed heart.[/quote]

Ok, so when do you think a fetus can feel pain?[/quote]

They don't want to answer that question.  They respond by deflecting or denying. [/quote]

It has no brain and is not sentient. So who cares?

[/quote]

At some point before birth it has a brain, no?  I’m pro-choice but would not be opposed to a heightened standard of some sort after the point that pain can be felt. To the PP that said if it’s not in my body, it’s not my business, how would you feel about a newborn being murdered. It’s not in your house, so it’s not your business right?  I think those of you who won’t even acknowledge that there might be pain to a late term fetus that must be dismembered to be aborted are just as bad as those on the other extreme end of the spectrum. [/quote]

Which late-term fetuses are being aborted? The ones without brains? The ones with devastating (painful) defects? 
[/quote]

https://www.npr.org/2006/02/21/5168163/partial-birth-abortion-separating-fact-from-spin

This article (though a bit old) was a fact checking article by NPR on “partial birth” abortions. This quote implies that all such abortions are not only performed on severely defective fetuses:

“Under what health circumstances are D&X abortions performed?

There is currently no statistical information available on why "dilation and extraction" abortions are performed.

In a widely-publicized interview with The New York Times in 1997, Ron Fitzsimmons, executive director of the National Coalition of Abortion Providers, estimated that in the majority of cases, the procedure is performed on a healthy mother and healthy fetus that is 20 weeks or more along in development.”

If anyone has more recent information that contradicts this, I would be very interested in seeing it. 
[/quote]

D&E is 2nd trimester, not “late term”.  
[/quote]

D&E refers to dilation and evacuation.  The quote above is talking about dilation and extraction (also known as partial birth abortion). [/quote]

“Partial birth” isn’t a thing.

And 2nd trimester isn’t “late term”. 
[/quote]

Did you read the linked NPR article?  The fetus is in fact partially delivered and it’s not limited to 2nd trimester.

“Two abortion physicians, one in Ohio and one in California, independently developed variations on the method by extracting the fetus intact. The Ohio physician, Martin Haskell, called his method "dilation and extraction," or D&X. It involved dilating the woman's cervix, then pulling the fetus through it feet first until only the head remained inside. Using scissors or another sharp instrument, the head was then punctured, and the skull compressed, so it, too, could fit through the dilated cervix.”

I’m not even saying this should be completely banned. But it doesn’t help the pro-choice movement to sugarcoat facts. [/quote]

“Partial birth” is RWNJ propaganda, not a medical term.

And it’s not used in the 3rd trimester. It’s not used for “late-term abortions”. 
[/quote]

Options

	Disable HTML in this message
	Disable BB Code in this message
	Disable smilies in this message

Review message

Search Recent Topics Hottest Topics