Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m so happy with today’s announcement. Looking forward to seeing what Youngkin brings our way.

Yay! I'm really looking forward to seeing your taxes raised significantly to ensure that women and their babies have high-quality and freely available medical, social, and educational support throughout their lives! You're gonna vote for that...right? Right?

Right.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Just announced - https://www.washingtonpost.com/dc-md-va/2022/06/24/virginia-youngkin-abortion-15-week-ruling/

I seriously wanted to know. Did those of you who voted for Youngkin really think he wouldn't do it? I truly, genuinely, want to know.

This is what I don’t get…. Are people seriously upset with a 15 or 20 week ban, with exceptions? To me this sounds like just the kind of compromise most people would agree with. 6 week bans- I get the objection because you may not even know you are pregnant. But is what you seriously want is for people to be free to abort, for any reason at all, at any time during pregnancy? That is actually the extreme position here, not Youngkin’s.

Yes, people are upset about this. Personally, I am upset about it for two reasons.

First, when Republicans say they would allow exceptions, they are deliberately vague on what those exceptions would look like because they know the details would prove that the exceptions are meaningless in practice. For instance, how would a rape exception work? Does a woman have to make a criminal complaint to get an abortion? Does there have to be an adjudication that the rape occurred? If not, what would stop women from claiming they were raped weeks ago (when there would no longer be physical evidence) by an unknown assailant so they would be eligible for abortion? The prospect of this happening is why there would be onerous requirements of reporting the rape, providing evidence, etc., to justify an abortion, which means in practice it would take so long to get approval for the abortion that it would be too late to get it.

Similar issues are raised with life/health of the mother exceptions. If it is sufficient just to have a doctor's sign off that a pregnancy may jeopardize a woman's life/health, then any woman could get an abortion at any time because pregnancy is inherently risky (moreso than abortion). To avoid that, they would need to impose more restrictions about imminence of death, panel reviews of the medical justification, etc., which would mean in practice women could only have an abortion if they are literally on the verge of death, in which case it may be too late to save them or avoid serious permanent injury even if the abortion is performed.

These "exceptions" will be meaningless in practice. Just look at what happens to teens to try to get a judicial bypass of a parental consent law.

Second, the data on abortions shows that abortions performed after 15 weeks are overwhelmingly due to severe fetal abnormalities or life/health of the mother. They are performed on women who wanted those pregnancies to continue but find themselves in a situation where it cannot. In those cases, government intrusion adds absolutely nothing of value to a decision that should be made between a woman and her doctor. All that government intrusion does is make it harder for women to access necessary healthcare, thereby increasing the risk to their health.

Untrue.

https://www.guttmacher.org/journals/psrh/2013/11/who-seeks-abortions-or-after-20-weeks

This is referring to women getting abortions after 20 weeks:

"Most women seeking later abortion fit at least one of five profiles: They were raising children alone, were depressed or using illicit substances, were in conflict with a male partner or experiencing domestic violence, had trouble deciding and then had access problems, or were young and nulliparous."

I don't see anything about abnormalities or life/health of the mother as you're claiming is the case even earlier along in pregnancy. These are not women who wanted those pregnancies.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Just announced - https://www.washingtonpost.com/dc-md-va/2022/06/24/virginia-youngkin-abortion-15-week-ruling/

I seriously wanted to know. Did those of you who voted for Youngkin really think he wouldn't do it? I truly, genuinely, want to know.

This is what I don’t get…. Are people seriously upset with a 15 or 20 week ban, with exceptions? To me this sounds like just the kind of compromise most people would agree with. 6 week bans- I get the objection because you may not even know you are pregnant. But is what you seriously want is for people to be free to abort, for any reason at all, at any time during pregnancy? That is actually the extreme position here, not Youngkin’s.

Because they won't stop at 15 weeks, dumb-dumb.

+1

They’re only going for 15 now because that’s what’s politically feasible. Then they will find some way to make it 6.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m so happy with today’s announcement. Looking forward to seeing what Youngkin brings our way.

Yay! I'm really looking forward to seeing your taxes raised significantly to ensure that women and their babies have high-quality and freely available medical, social, and educational support throughout their lives! You're gonna vote for that...right? Right?

Most women who have abortions already have kids and cite being unable to afford another kid as their motivation.

But the same people celebrating this talk about welfare moms and support cutting WIC.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't want to hear a single peep out of those dumb, white NOVA women who voted for this man based on a single issue when they ban abortion.

You reep what you sew

*reap what you sow.*

Good Lord, if you are going to use the expression, get it right.

It is quite funny that this person is calling others who voted differently from them "dumb".

Anonymous wrote:I’m so happy with today’s announcement. Looking forward to seeing what Youngkin brings our way.

Yay! I'm really looking forward to seeing your taxes raised significantly to ensure that women and their babies have high-quality and freely available medical, social, and educational support throughout their lives! You're gonna vote for that...right? Right?

I’m so happy with today’s announcement. Looking forward to seeing what Youngkin brings our way.

Anonymous wrote:15 weeks seems reasonable, that’s gestational limit for the majority of European countries. Only 8% of US abortions occur after 13 weeks.

There will be still be ways for women to obtain abortion on demand.

But abortion should be a medical decision between a woman and her doctor. And what have limits in Europe got to do with anything? We don't live in Europe. Many of us don't have maternity leave, or access to cheap healthcare. We have a higher rate of maternal and infant mortality than many European countries.

My friend just a post 20 week abortion. She had even named the baby but went in for the anatomy scan and found out he couldn't live. His condition meant he could die at any time, putting my friend at risk for sepsis, but they couldn't say when. So she had to choose between aborting or basically going in every couple says or risk dying of sepsis.

A lot of those "life exceptions" wouldn't have covered my friend as she wasn't in sepsis yet, just very likely to be.

So what, just keep torturing her for months?

It's sick.

Anonymous wrote:15 weeks seems reasonable, that’s gestational limit for the majority of European countries. Only 8% of US abortions occur after 13 weeks.

There will be still be ways for women to obtain abortion on demand.

No restriction is reasonable.

Anonymous wrote:I don't want to hear a single peep out of those dumb, white NOVA women who voted for this man based on a single issue when they ban abortion.

You reep what you sew

*reap what you sow.*

Good Lord, if you are going to use the expression, get it right.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Just announced - https://www.washingtonpost.com/dc-md-va/2022/06/24/virginia-youngkin-abortion-15-week-ruling/

I seriously wanted to know. Did those of you who voted for Youngkin really think he wouldn't do it? I truly, genuinely, want to know.

This is what I don’t get…. Are people seriously upset with a 15 or 20 week ban, with exceptions? To me this sounds like just the kind of compromise most people would agree with. 6 week bans- I get the objection because you may not even know you are pregnant. But is what you seriously want is for people to be free to abort, for any reason at all, at any time during pregnancy? That is actually the extreme position here, not Youngkin’s.

Because they won't stop at 15 weeks, dumb-dumb.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Just announced - https://www.washingtonpost.com/dc-md-va/2022/06/24/virginia-youngkin-abortion-15-week-ruling/

I seriously wanted to know. Did those of you who voted for Youngkin really think he wouldn't do it? I truly, genuinely, want to know.

This is what I don’t get…. Are people seriously upset with a 15 or 20 week ban, with exceptions? To me this sounds like just the kind of compromise most people would agree with. 6 week bans- I get the objection because you may not even know you are pregnant. But is what you seriously want is for people to be free to abort, for any reason at all, at any time during pregnancy? That is actually the extreme position here, not Youngkin’s.

Yes, people are upset about this. Personally, I am upset about it for two reasons.

First, when Republicans say they would allow exceptions, they are deliberately vague on what those exceptions would look like because they know the details would prove that the exceptions are meaningless in practice. For instance, how would a rape exception work? Does a woman have to make a criminal complaint to get an abortion? Does there have to be an adjudication that the rape occurred? If not, what would stop women from claiming they were raped weeks ago (when there would no longer be physical evidence) by an unknown assailant so they would be eligible for abortion? The prospect of this happening is why there would be onerous requirements of reporting the rape, providing evidence, etc., to justify an abortion, which means in practice it would take so long to get approval for the abortion that it would be too late to get it.

Similar issues are raised with life/health of the mother exceptions. If it is sufficient just to have a doctor's sign off that a pregnancy may jeopardize a woman's life/health, then any woman could get an abortion at any time because pregnancy is inherently risky (moreso than abortion). To avoid that, they would need to impose more restrictions about imminence of death, panel reviews of the medical justification, etc., which would mean in practice women could only have an abortion if they are literally on the verge of death, in which case it may be too late to save them or avoid serious permanent injury even if the abortion is performed.

These "exceptions" will be meaningless in practice. Just look at what happens to teens to try to get a judicial bypass of a parental consent law.

Second, the data on abortions shows that abortions performed after 15 weeks are overwhelmingly due to severe fetal abnormalities or life/health of the mother. They are performed on women who wanted those pregnancies to continue but find themselves in a situation where it cannot. In those cases, government intrusion adds absolutely nothing of value to a decision that should be made between a woman and her doctor. All that government intrusion does is make it harder for women to access necessary healthcare, thereby increasing the risk to their health.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Democrats are against women and children. See school closures. It will take decades to win me back, sorry. BTW, any Virginia resident who wants an abortion can simply go to DC.

What on earth makes you think any Virginia resident who wants an abortion can "simply" go to DC? This is so absurd.

And guess who passed a bill saying schools had to stay open? That would be...democrats. Dems are not my favorite but they are not against women and children. That would be the party who wants to take away social supports for women and children.

The party that closed schools and screwed working moms are the democrats. I’m pro-choice but will never again vote democrat. Sorry.

Then you're not actually pro-choice, you just don't feel a personal need to ban abortion. Those are two different things.

Anonymous wrote:15 weeks seems reasonable, that’s gestational limit for the majority of European countries. Only 8% of US abortions occur after 13 weeks.

There will be still be ways for women to obtain abortion on demand.

For those 8% happening after 13 weeks, why do you think they are happening and how would they be affected by this?