Texas 6-week abortion ban takes effect after Supreme Court inaction

FoxHastings said: ↑
Pregnancy means there is a ZEF....science isn't voodoo.

Pregnancy means there is a ZEF....science isn't voodoo.... a zygote isn't a baby, an embryo isn't a baby, a fetus isn't a baby....science isn't voodoo.....try it !!!

 

Please to read actual law someday...

 

So "proabortion propagandists" have convinced the "public " that the unborn aren't really human ???

Where is your proof of that trite repetitious Anti-Choicers bit of trash ???

LOL...to ANY Anti-Choicer ANY scientific word is OBSCURE

Anti-Women's right people need to use words with more emotional appeal because they deal on emotions because they have no facts .

Just like Anti-Choicers want to DEHUMANISE WOMEN by taking away their right to their own bodies and making them nothing but animals, livestock, broodmares..

 

If you do nothing to actively inhibit that single cells growth. What would it grow into?

 

Lol you’re not reading the law. That’s saying if someone gives money or assists for someone to have an abortion IN ACCORDANCE TO the earlier sub chapter.

What sub chapter was that? The one which describes how a DOCTOR must either perform or induce an abortion.

Please read the entire law instead of letting MSNBC cherry-pick part of it for you to read.

 

For STARTERS having an ABORTION is the RESPONSIBLE option to bringing an UNWANTED child into this world.

Sad that YOU want to PROMOTE the IRRESPONSIBILITY of imposing the BURDEN of UNWANTED children onto TAXPAYERS.

Do YOU enjoy paying HIGHER taxes because of having so many UNWANTED children needing schools, teachers, guidance counselors, truancy officers, drug treatment programs, police officers, courts, lawyers and prisons because scientific studies have proven that UNWANTED children have a GREATER propensity for drug usage and criminal behavior when they grow up.

It is the HEIGHT of IRRESPONSIBILITY to FORCE women to have UNWANTED children.

FACTS matter!

 

Not interested in projecting the future into the present - and chances of the zygote making it are not good in any case. The question is what is it now.

 

It’s a human. And I’m not asking you to project into the future. I’m asking you a scientific fact.

Can that fetus develop into ANYTHING other than a human?

 

If it was so obvious in the law that it must be a doctor, you should certainly be able to post that section of the law like I did...

Fire away... You do have a screen sniping tool available, correct?

 

Sure not a problem.

Sec. 171.204. PROHIBITED ABORTION OF UNBORN CHILD WITH
DETECTABLE FETAL HEARTBEAT; EFFECT. (a) Except as provided by
Section 171.205, a physician may not knowingly perform or induce an
abortion on a pregnant woman if the physician detected a fetal
heartbeat for the unborn child as required by Section 171.203 or
failed to perform a test to detect a fetal heartbeat.
(b) A physician does not violate this section if the
physician performed a test for a fetal heartbeat as required by
Section 171.203 and did not detect a fetal heartbeat.
(c) This section does not affect:
(1) the provisions of this chapter that restrict or
regulate an abortion by a particular method or during a particular
stage of pregnancy; or
(2) any other provision of state law that regulates or
prohibits abortion.

 

It specifically defines that the abortion must be caused or induced by a PHYSICIAN

That’s why it DEFINES physician:


(4) "Physician" means an individual licensed to
practice medicine in this state, including a medical doctor and a
doctor of osteopathic medicine.

 

You provided three ANECDOTAL OPINIONS and NO FACTS to support your lame position on this issue.

I recommend that you try again with FACTS instead.

The Maternal MORTALITY rate in America is 17.4 per 100,000 pregnancies which is the HIGHEST of all industrialized nations.

FORCING more women to give birth INSTEAD of having abortions will ENSURE that more women DIE needlessly for no other reason than a bunch of Science Denying Theists have a bug up their ass.

 

Does it consist of HUMAN cells?

Yes or no?

 

The scientific fact - is that "scientifically speaking" a zygote is not a human..-- lacking the requisite characteristics to be characterized as such - nor what comes after for quite some time.

The other scientific fact - is that a often does develop into a human - but this does not make it a human in the present.

Define what a human is - then show how the organism you are referring to fits that definition - this is what we do in science.
Feel free to use non scientific definitions or a mix - - but give a definition of some sort.

 

Fair enough... I concede your point...

Changes nothing about how generally unconstitutional this is but well done...

Seems the best way to avoid this law is to self-abort or use an unlicensed person then.... Yay!! Welcome back to 1950!!

 

Not sure whose YUUUUGE ass you are pulling those numbers from but AFTER Obamacare provided CONTRACEPTION to women the number of abortions per year here in America has CONSISTENTLY DECLINED to well UNDER a million.

 

Of course it can. The “thing” born can identify as whatever it wants to be. Human, unicorn, lizard, whatever the parents allow, hehe.

I’m not for unwanted babies being brought into this world, especially those who are not really desired. As sad as it is, it’s much harder to find parents for certain demographics over others. If you abort early on, it’s truly for the best.

I just don’t like the idea of abortion being used as birth control at tax payers expense. And I understand an abortion is cheaper than what an unwanted baby is almost destined to become. Obviously the chances of a kid excelling after being pushed through the foster system, is low. And late term abortion for anything other than extreme health risks, is mostly abhorrent if you think about the procedure at all.

 

It isn't and , as you say below, ""abortion is cheaper than what an unwanted baby is almost destined to become""
.

So you have me a little confused on whether you think taxpayers are better off funding abortions or not...

 

Because It’s not cut and dry. Is the aborted baby a net gain or a net loss on society? Pretty damn hard to calculate. You could abort the next Einstein or you can birth the next mass murderer. We’ll never know.

I’m a big fan of personal responsibility. You get pregnant, YOU and the male should take care of it. You become parents and fulfill your responsibility or you “take care of it”. For those that don’t give a **** and just expect society to take care of everything, it’s a lose lose.

 

Yup .. personal responsibility is key .. if an unintended pregnancy happened ... the man should definitely take responsibility for half of the costs of an abortion... and likely most would foot the whole bill.

 

I don't know if this article or something similar has been posted here, but this is an interesting article on why "fetal heartbeat" isn't even a real thing

SNIP
However, in conversation with NPR, Dr. Nisha Verma, an OB-GYN who specializes in abortion care and works at the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, says that that heartbeat doesn't exist in 6-week old fetuses.

"At six weeks of gestation, those valves don't exist," she told the news site.

In fact, it takes about 9-10 weeks for these valves to form.
ENDSNIP

https://www.yahoo.com/news/fetal-heartbeat-defines-texas-abortion-121000668.html

There are so many avenues to challenge this silly thing, I'm losing track...

 

FoxHastings said: ↑
It isn't and , as you say below, ""abortion is cheaper than what an unwanted baby is almost destined to become""

So you have me a little confused on whether you think taxpayers are better off funding abortions or not...

But if abortion is banned there WILL be more on Welfare since poor women don't have access to clinics in other countries ....

You say: "I’m a big fan of personal responsibility. You get pregnant, YOU and the male should take care of it""

So you are Pro-Choice?

Because if a woman is pregnant is is HER responsibility to "take care of it"...NOT legislators nor nosy busy body Anti-Women's rights proponents....it's the PREGNANT WOMAN's responsibility..

 

Oh, the Anti-Women's rights people will "know" better than a mere DOCTOR!!!

 

Unfortunately, the right won't put any stock in what a female nurse-pretending-to-be-a-doctor has to say...

 

You're assuming I agree with the law. It’s stupid. The only abortion that should be illegal is late term, just for the heck of it. That’s straight up execution and quite sick.

I’m mostly pro abortion, especially with the poor. We need to control the population, but tragically those who should be having more children aren’t and those who shouldn’t have more, aren’t controlling themselves. It’s Idiocrisy the movie for real.

And I don’t like the idea of tax payer funded abortion but I understand it’s necessary due to those who can’t control their primal instincts and are too fracking stupid to take fairly basic precautions.