Anonymous wrote:You absolute wingnuts keep getting it wrong, wrong, wrong. When will you just admit that you don't understand what was going on, and it was horrible, and it is all your fault?

1.This case doesn't even really exist!
It does.

2. But a leading light of our side said it didn't!
They were lying to you and almost got away with it, because you believed them.

3. Okay, but the Ohio doctor didn't do her job!
She did.

4. But a leading light of our side said she didn't!
They were lying to you and almost got away with it, because you believed them.

5. Okay, but the law doesn't work that way!
It really does.

6. Okay, but the Indiana doctor didn't do her job!
She did.

7. But a leading light of our side said she didn't!
They were lying to you and almost got away with it, because you believed them.

This is exactly why a case like this had to be discussed publicly. Apparently the people who want to ban abortion don't really understand what abortion is, how laws work, or believe that problematic cases are as common as they are. They don't believe so hard that they cling to every person willing to lie to them and say they don't -- and when proven wrong, they just cling to the next one in line.

This is why many people oppose abortion bans. Do you get it? I hope you get it.

Please get it. Stop jumping to the next useful lie and really look at how this works. And this case came up immediately -- the child was already there, pregnant, and then had to navigate this as soon as the legislation was put in place.

How many other things about this don't you know? How many other cases do or will you deny before you get it?

Anonymous wrote:Bless the beasts and the children. Give them from the storm. Keep them safe and warm. Nobody cares about the children anymore. Not their innocence, mental health, happiness, physical health. It really is sad. Adults are too consumed to realize what everything is doing to them.

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?

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.

Doctor Informed State of 10-Year-Old Girl’s Abortion
A document obtained by The New York Times shows that the Indiana obstetrician reported the child’s abortion to the state.

A lawyer for the Indiana obstetrician who has drawn national attention for providing abortion care to a 10-year-old rape victim said on Thursday that the doctor had taken “every appropriate and proper action” in the case — including filing necessary forms to report the abortion with state authorities, contrary to the assertions of Indiana’s attorney general.

The case of the rape victim, who crossed state lines from Ohio to get an abortion in Indianapolis, has become a hot-button issue in the nation’s roiling abortion debate. Many on the right — including the Ohio attorney general — initially doubted the veracity of the story when it was shared by Dr. Caitlin Bernard, the Indiana obstetrician. The story was confirmed after the arrest of the man accused of raping the girl. Yet Dr. Bernard remained under scrutiny.

The Indiana attorney general, Todd Rokita, told Fox News on Wednesday that he intended to investigate Dr. Bernard, and suggested she failed to file required reports.

“We’re gathering the information, we’re gathering the evidence as we speak, and we’re going to fight this to the end, including looking at her licensure if she failed to report,” Mr. Rokita said in an interview, in which he assailed Dr. Bernard, who practices in Indianapolis, as an “abortion activist acting as a doctor, with a history of failing to report.”

But a document obtained by The New York Times appears to contradict Mr. Rokita’s assertion. The document, a “Terminated Pregnancy Report” filed with the Indiana Department of Health and the Department of Child Services, states that Dr. Bernard provided abortion medication — a two-pill combination that can be taken at home or in any location and is authorized for use in the first 10 weeks of pregnancy — to a 10-year-old patient on June 30. The report was dated July 2, which puts it within Indiana’s three-day reporting requirement.
Dr. Bernard’s lawyer, Kathleen DeLaney, said in the statement issued Thursday that she is “considering legal action against” Mr. Rokita and others, adding that “the facts will all come out in due time.”

A spokesman for Mr. Rokita said on Thursday night that his office was continuing to gather evidence, and that “our legal review of it remains open.”

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Look, I’m sure conservatives don’t love the idea of a 10 year old going through a pregnancy. But to them, such cases are just collateral damage, something regretful but acceptable in the tradeoff of banning abortion. They accept making raped pregnant children bear babies if that’s what it takes to ban women from getting abortions. They won’t admit it, esp not on this forum. But it’s true.

Yup.

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?

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?

Anonymous wrote:Look, I’m sure conservatives don’t love the idea of a 10 year old going through a pregnancy. But to them, such cases are just collateral damage, something regretful but acceptable in the tradeoff of banning abortion. They accept making raped pregnant children bear babies if that’s what it takes to ban women from getting abortions. They won’t admit it, esp not on this forum. But it’s true.

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.

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 wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

I would expect lawyers to be able to make logical decisions. But they can't do this either.

Anonymous wrote:I think... this case might just become another modified Roe vs. Wade.. Can we hope? Horrible that this happened to his poor child, but it's hard to argue complete abortion bans when cases like hers exist, and there are even worse ones probably that could be brought forth.

Anonymous wrote:

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.