Anonymous wrote:

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:

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.

You are not pro-choice. Stop lying.

and how do you explain red states that also closed schools?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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

I’m so pissed at those imbeciles (not all white but vast majority were) who ate up the school closures (when they were already open) and CRT BS when voting for this man. I’m hoping this immobilizes enough young voters to halt a VA GOP take over.

If McAuliffe had won we would still have masks in schools, and probably closures too. People were reporting on here that case levels were at an all time high.

DP. Where in the country were schools still closed this past school year due to covid? Do you really think Virginia would have been some bizarre outlier that kept schools closed when every other state had reopened? That’s pretty deluded thinking.

Anonymous wrote:

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

I’m so pissed at those imbeciles (not all white but vast majority were) who ate up the school closures (when they were already open) and CRT BS when voting for this man. I’m hoping this immobilizes enough young voters to halt a VA GOP take over.

+1000 they are so f-ing stupid. WTF did you think would happen, morons????

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

I’m so pissed at those imbeciles (not all white but vast majority were) who ate up the school closures (when they were already open) and CRT BS when voting for this man. I’m hoping this immobilizes enough young voters to halt a VA GOP take over.

Anonymous wrote:

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

I’m so pissed at those imbeciles (not all white but vast majority were) who ate up the school closures (when they were already open) and CRT BS when voting for this man. I’m hoping this immobilizes enough young voters to halt a VA GOP take over.

If McAuliffe had won we would still have masks in schools, and probably closures too. People were reporting on here that case levels were at an all time high.

Anonymous wrote:

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

Anonymous wrote:

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

I’m so pissed at those imbeciles (not all white but vast majority were) who ate up the school closures (when they were already open) and CRT BS when voting for this man. I’m hoping this immobilizes enough young voters to halt a VA GOP take over.

If McAuliffe had won we would still have masks in schools, and probably closures too. People were reporting on here that case levels were at an all time high.

Anonymous wrote:

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.

You are not pro-choice. Stop lying.

Anonymous wrote:

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

I’m so pissed at those imbeciles (not all white but vast majority were) who ate up the school closures (when they were already open) and CRT BS when voting for this man. I’m hoping this immobilizes enough young voters to halt a VA GOP take over.

If McAuliffe had won we would still have masks in schools, and probably closures too. People were reporting on here that case levels were at an all time high.

Anonymous wrote:

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.

Then they should have not taken this case to the Supreme Court. Roberts was willing to stop at 15 weeks and not rule on Roe. Both sides in the case asked for a ruling on Roe.

Other issues get litigated with more tact. New York City had a different gun law. When they saw they might lose, they repealed the law rather than risk getting a bad ruling on guns. They tried the same with COVID restrictions, but the Supreme Court wouldn't let them get away with it there.
They also settled an affirmative action case with firefighters than risk getting a bad ruling from the Supreme Court.

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.

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

I’m so pissed at those imbeciles (not all white but vast majority were) who ate up the school closures (when they were already open) and CRT BS when voting for this man. I’m hoping this immobilizes enough young voters to halt a VA GOP take over.