No, the real question is why ban abortion at all and then raped women would have nothing to worry about and Anti-Choicers won't look so hypocritical...
FoxHastings said: ↑ No, the real question is why ban abortion at all and then raped women would have nothing to worry about and Anti-Choicers won't look so hypocritical... No, they are not....do YOU make exceptions for rape ? If so, why?
I don't believe you know how many rapes aren't reported. There are very real reasons for not reporting rape.
Too bad no one is keeping any statistics on this, huh? Maybe we could start with that? Start collecting information. (Require information to be collected)
Are you SERIOUSLY suggesting that girls from 10yo and above should all be medicated to disable ovulation and conception so they are protected against rape? Does that make ANY kind of sense to you? Do you have kids?
So your argument is we can't pass any laws because we don't have enough information, but you are totally unwilling to allow us to collect that information.
States that are making abortion essentially impossible are also making morning after medication difficult to acquire. Let's remember that even the Supreme Court has weighed in on this, with J. Thomas stating that morning after medication must now be targeted. Proposing a solution when the political assault is also assaulting the solution you propose is just pure sophistry.
Only "difficult" so that pregnant women further along in gestation don't get it. Morning after is fine. "30 mornings after" is something different.
This defies the reality that can be seen concerning human reaction to being victims of rape and incest. Proposing solutions that apply to some perfect world of how you think victims of rape and incest respond is not even slightly good enough. You actually have to CARE about these victims. The solution has to work for THEM.
That goes back to your argument that every woman needs to have access to later term abortion, because a small fraction of them might be the victims of incest. Sorry, even if it was incest, at some point a baby is a baby.
FoxHastings said: ↑ No, the real question is why ban abortion at all and then raped women would have nothing to worry about and Anti-Choicers won't look so hypocritical What TF does that have to do with the post of mine you quoted????
If they are RAPED YES................YOU DON'T?? There are widely available and highly effective medications to prevent ovulation and pregnancy AFTER the rape has occurred. You would prefer they get pregnant and then have to have an abortion instead of preventing it in the first place? Please explain the logic of that.
False on it's face. An unborn baby is a baby. So accept the facts about what happens in an abortion and stop trying to change the meanings of words to make it more palatable to support.
Was you're "later term abortion" intentionally designed to be misleading? The first and second trimester are NOT considered "late term" by laws written concerning "late term". If you want to discuss "late term", go for it.
oic, you just don't understand procreation. It's your use of "ovulation" that was misleading, as an ovulation leading to pregnancy can occur at or before the rape. So, it sounded like you were trying to medicate to stop ovulations that could lead to rape pregnancy - clearly not a realistic idea. As for "morning after", making that difficult to obtain is championed by the same people having success at eliminating the abortion option. Suggesting that medication when the same politicians are trying to stop its use is just pure sophistry.
Do you believe all of abortion law should bed base on 10 year old victims of rape or incest? Does killing the baby make the rape go away? And I why wouldn't it come under the death of the mother or SERIOUS bodily harm exemption? Here is my state's law which had been under an injunction until the Dobbs case "Relating to abortion; to make abortion and attempted 4 abortion felony offenses except in cases where abortion is 5 necessary in order to prevent a serious health risk to the 6 unborn child's mother; to provide that a woman who receives an 7 abortion will not be held criminally culpable or civilly 8 liable for receiving the abortion; and in connection therewith 9 would have as its purpose or effect the requirement of a new 10 or increased expenditure of local funds within the meaning of 11 Amendment 621 of the Constitution of Alabama of 1901, now 12 appearing as Section 111.05 of the Official Recompilation of 13 the Constitution of Alabama of 1901, as amended. 14 BE IT ENACTED BY THE LEGISLATURE OF ALABAMA:" Alabama you know one of the most if not the most restrictive states. If the mother is going to die then so will the baby.....................that is when abortion IS the most appropriate. And for adult women that would be an EXTREMELY rare case even the AMA has stated abortion is never the appropriate response in late term pregnancy. I think we all agree a 10 year going through a pregnancy is a serious health risk. The young girl in Ohio could have received her abortion IN OHIO instead of it being made some spectacle to promote unrestricted abortion for all. Let's why don't we move on to the 99.99999999% of other abortions?
Another who doesn't know what happens in a rape ( MINIMIZES IT).. first, try REAL HARD to understand every rape is not the same and every raped woman IS NOT THE SAME. In rape women are traumatized mentally and physically...all to varying degrees....some end up in a coma, some have to undergo surgery and months of recovery...and not every woman is capable of making a decision on pregnancy... ....Rape is NOT what you say it is....it is what happened to the woman....
FoxHastings said: ↑ What TF does that have to do with the post of mine you quoted???? FoxHastings said: ↑ What TF does that have to do with the post of mine you quoted????