Roe v. Wade abandoned by Supreme Court

heron, ASN, RN · Jun 28, 2022

3 minutes ago, emtb2rn said:

Who in the wide world of sports is “they”? Mississippi itself doesn’t provide any funding for abortions and the Hyde Amendment forbids the use of federal funds for any abortion that doesn’t involve a life threat to the mother or rape/incest.

What I was asking for was comments about how a state that already does not provide support to pregnant women and has horrible health statistics is going to increase that sorely lacking support. I’ve seen plenty of comments from conservatives about support for pregnant women, it’s nothing new. But no additional support in those red states ever seems to materialize. So why would it happen now?

Hear, hear!!

Here’s where I start paying attention to what people do vs. what they say in public.

toomuchbaloney · Jun 28, 2022

34 minutes ago, Beerman said:

Actually, once again, there are those who have argued otherwise. They say the decision should be only between woman and their abortion provider without state intervention.

Who are you talking about? Let's be specific about individuals and words. I'm not accepting your interpretation of what has been represented here because you haven't provided a compelling argument.

None of us were petitioning states or the SCOTUS for changes to the "established precedent" that we had been reassures was secure.

Justlookingfornow · Jun 28, 2022

1 hour ago, toomuchbaloney said:

The previous law did not allow late term or late trimester abortion for convenience. Most abortions are completed prior to viability of the fetus. Late trimester termination procedures are not convenience healthcare.

Women and their health professionals can make these choices without political or religious in interference, they have a right to autonomy and privacy.

So a woman can abort her pregnancy at any stage for any reason? This is your answer.

There is no late trimester termination that requires the fetus to become non viable before being removed it from the mother. This is early delivery, not abortion. The difference being they try to preserve the babies life and the mothers life. The former they terminate the viability of the fetus before removal. There is no indication for this in relation to the risk to the mother.

That's correct about Roe that it does not allow late term abortions. Currently there is states that would allow this, at least more than 15 weeks. This is given to the individual states in order for the residence to vote the way in which they believe.

"Outlawing abortion" as you have described would take away abortions all together. Not leave it to the individual states.

Keeping Roe and its gestational limits would in fact make it harder for abortion access in some states.

emtb2rn, BSN, RN, EMT-B · Jun 28, 2022

8 minutes ago, Justlookingfornow said:

So a woman can abort her pregnancy at any stage for any reason? This is your answer.

You keep repeating this statement. I do not think these words mean what you think they mean.

But that is not what tmb was saying at all. Tmb’s comment specifically stated that late stage abortions are not for convenience. Nobody has ever said any stage, any reason. You just keep throwing that out. It’s very pee-wee like.

Justlookingfornow · Jun 28, 2022

2 hours ago, heron said:

I just re-read the posts you named, neither of which say what you claim they say. IOW, you got nothing. This deliberate misrepresentation of others’ opinions is typical of the whole forced pregnancy movement (Google crisis pregnancy center misinformation).

So, put up or shut up. You claim that reproductive rights advocates are calling for elective abortion at any stage of pregnancy for any reason. Prove it or stop using the most extreme scenario as some kind of argument against the concept of women’s right to decide when and if they will have a baby.

If it's a misrepresentation. Say it. The inability for the general person and more disturbing elected Democrats to say that the laws they propose will not allow late term abortions for convenience is very concerning. Most people will not kill someone,that's doesn't mean there shouldn't be a law against murder.

toomuchbaloney · Jun 28, 2022

9 minutes ago, Justlookingfornow said:

Of course not. Please tell me any abortion bill or even a conservative that would say a woman has to carry an already diseased baby .

Contrary to popular misbelief, most conservatives believe there should be abortions with limits. However the inability for some to define at what limit that should be is concerning.

This is the only point that separates me from pro choice. A woman should not be able to abort a pregnancy of a healthy viable fetus late in pregnancy for convenience. Any necessary early delivery after viability(when a premature baby has good odds of surviving) should happen, if medically necessary and both the life of the mother and baby is saved.

If most conservatives believe that there should be abortion with limits then they must be angry that the SCOTUS just gutted what THEY identified as secure, established precedent which provided "limits". Instead we now have legislative chaos and widespread insecurity as some states even seek to alter constitutional language so that they can outlaw abortion.

Why do you keep talking about women terminating late term, viable pregnancies merely for convenience when you have provided no evidence that your fear is based in facts, evidence or even anecdotal experience? There has been data cited which contradicts your reasons for worry and makes the repeated mention appear completely in related to reality and facts.

Health providers in states with abortion bans which include aggressive penalties for the abortionist are hesitant to provide urgent obstetric or gynecological care if there is a chance that they could be charged with an illegal abortion.

https://www.texastribune.org/2022/06/23/texas-abortion-law-doctors-delay-care/

heron, ASN, RN · Jun 28, 2022

13 minutes ago, Justlookingfornow said:

If it's a misrepresentation. Say it. The inability for the general person and more disturbing elected Democrats to say that the laws they propose will not allow late term abortions for convenience is very concerning. Most people will not kill someone,that's doesn't mean there shouldn't be a law against murder.

I did say it.

toomuchbaloney · Jun 28, 2022

55 minutes ago, Justlookingfornow said:

So a woman can abort her pregnancy at any stage for any reason? This is your answer.

There is no late trimester termination that requires the fetus to become non viable before being removed it from the mother. This is early delivery, not abortion. The difference being they try to preserve the babies life and the mothers life. The former they terminate the viability of the fetus before removal. There is no indication for this in relation to the risk to the mother.

That's correct about Roe that it does not allow late term abortions. Currently there is states that would allow this, at least more than 15 weeks. This is given to the individual states in order for the residence to vote the way in which they believe.

"Outlawing abortion" as you have described would take away abortions all together. Not leave it to the individual states.

Keeping Roe and its gestational limits would in fact make it harder for abortion access in some states.

Most of this is simply your opinion which is repeated again and again even through there's ample evidence that your concern is a fabricated problem. My wife worked in a high risk labor and delivery unit of a large Midwestern teaching hospital for many years. Your remarks make her shake her head.

Have you missed the point that there are now quite a number of states that have essentially banned abortion with Roe gone... with trigger laws that take effect quickly? More states are writing restrictive laws which may not ban abortions outright but make them very inaccessible for vulnerable women.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2022/06/24/abortion-state-laws-criminalization-roe/

toomuchbaloney · Jun 28, 2022

22 minutes ago, Justlookingfornow said:

If it's a misrepresentation. Say it. The inability for the general person and more disturbing elected Democrats to say that the laws they propose will not allow late term abortions for convenience is very concerning. Most people will not kill someone,that's doesn't mean there shouldn't be a law against murder.

This is a pathetic attempt to twist the issue at hand. The issue at hand is that the established precedent which protected a woman's right to access abortion, within limits, was burnt to the ground by religious conservatives.

Aren't you bored yet with this simplistic right wing talking point and "concern"? We are.

Justlookingfornow · Jun 28, 2022

41 minutes ago, emtb2rn said:

You keep repeating this statement. I do not think these words mean what you think they mean.

But that is not what tmb was saying at all. Tmb’s comment specifically stated that late stage abortions are not for convenience. Nobody has ever said any stage, any reason. You just keep throwing that out. It’s very pee-wee like.

Yes but he doesn't answer the question.

It's what's not said that causes the issue and mistrust of democrat abortion laws.

Justlookingfornow · Jun 28, 2022

18 minutes ago, toomuchbaloney said:

If most conservatives believe that there should be abortion with limits then they must be angry that the SCOTUS just gutted what THEY identified as secure, established precedent which provided "limits". Instead we now have legislative chaos and widespread insecurity as some states even seek to alter constitutional language so that they can outlaw abortion.

Why do you keep talking about women terminating late term, viable pregnancies merely for convenience when you have provided no evidence that your fear is based in facts, evidence or even anecdotal experience? There has been data cited which contradicts your reasons for worry and makes the repeated mention appear completely in related to reality and facts.

Health providers in states with abortion bans which include aggressive penalties for the abortionist are hesitant to provide urgent obstetric or gynecological care if there is a chance that they could be charged with an illegal abortion.

https://www.texastribune.org/2022/06/23/texas-abortion-law-doctors-delay-care/

Beerman has presented sources before. Don't be obtuse. Why don't ypu answer the question?

Care to provide examples of "setting it up to outlaw abortions" ? Is this one of your "facts" or another attempt to convince people that Republicans are a detrement to our democratic republic non sense?

toomuchbaloney · Jun 28, 2022

1 minute ago, Justlookingfornow said:

Yes but he doesn't answer the question.

It's what's not said that causes the issue and mistrust of democrat abortion laws.

LOL

Oh yeah... back to the notion that liberals need to jump through some hoops to satisfy your feelings about what has been said.

Your question is irrelevant. It's a smoke screen. You want to talk about something that is not the central issue... so you try to create this controversy over convenience abortions of of third trimester pregnancies...a made up problem that castes women in a very unflattering light.

You can keep trying to put words in my mouth or tell me and others what I think or support but that's not the purpose of these threads. So far your unsupported analysis has been very wrong. We're here to talk about the facts, data, evidence and realities involved this disastrous SCOTUS decision to overturn what they promised was settled law.