Texas attorney general petitions state supreme court after woman who sued the state was granted perm

Because where else would we get our recommended daily allowance of BS??

Reading most of this thread has sickened me. Much of it is obvious trolling, but some of it's not.

 

For laughs. I enjoy watching them engage in mental gymnastics.

 

And they do, shamelessly and modeled after Agent Orange.

As to the topic, when you have a corrupt self serving scumbag AG grabbing the third rail, this MAGA misery is inevitable.

 

I can't find any reference anywhere online that note risks to a mother regarding a Chomosome 18 pregnancy or birth. The risks are for the baby--that he or she may die during pregnancy, Or die after birth, or within the next two years---or as shown in case studies may live many years.

What risks parents have--have to do with dealing with a child that will be born dead, die soon or need extensive care-----the real issue is if the baby survives. Then parents deal with the emotional and financial aspects of raising a disabled child. This is a baby the mother doesn't want. And frankly, who does? Lets be honest and not throw in "risks to the life of the mother" Bullsht. This mother, and any mother most likely does not want a disabled child.

The mother could of gone to New Mexico, Kansas or California --but she's wants to be an advocate so that others can kill their babies if they have disabilities. I really don't respect that.

In the state of Texas killing your disabled unborn child is not lawful. If you can't respect the law, go to another state.

 

But I'm conservative. The lady in the op should get an abortion because it's a healthcare issue. Where theres a health concern with the fetus and/or mother, then health care should step in. A normal pregnancy is not a danger to health, so in those cases, an abortion should be denied.

If the topic then goes onto the usual, "My body, my choice", I agree with that too. But I believe it's common sense that the choice should be made before sex. If a female doesn't want to conceive, and/or the bloke doesn't want to be a father, then they shouldn't do the deed, otherwise, they'll get a prize courtesy of nature in approx 9 months time.

If you feel sickened, then just realise people have different opinions.

 

And if her doctor is being threatened with civil and/or criminal actions for doing so??

Opinions that sicken me are still opinions that sicken me... as do people commenting on threads with opinions that don't reflect the current thread topic.

This woman planned to get pregnant with her 3rd child.... this won't be it...

I mean, how far behind this story are you?

 

I'm up to date with the story, but I've studied psychology over the years, so I don't suffer anger issues like you do.

If the law states no abortion whatsoever, then I feel it's wrong from the content of my previous post, and it would give rise to the doctor being prosecuted, per the law.

To alter the law, that's called voting. So you vote for the person/party that's in alignment with your views on abortion.

But if each State had a more direct democracy approach, then the citizens would get to vote on such issues via a legally binding referendum.

 

The risk to the mother is miscarriage. I'm sure you've seen that in the vast majority of Trisomy 18 cases result in miscarriage, right? Do you not understand that miscarriage can result in death or infertility?
https://www.nbcnews.com/health/womens-health/hidden-dangers-miscarriages-scar-would-be-moms-n212646

Assuming for a moment that is the only motive, what right does the state have to intervene in what is clearly a very personal decision?

Except Texas has threatened to prosecute out-of-state actors who facilitate abortions on Texas residents.
https://truthout.org/articles/texas...e-abortions-forces-prosecutions-of-abortions/

Furthermore, calling this baby "disabled" is ****ing dumb and you know it. This isn't the case of a baby with down syndrome or mental retardation. This baby is terminally ill because his prognosis is that he is almost certain to die before he is born or shortly thereafter. And there's a possibility that he could take his mother with him or make her incapable of having children again.

 

Then I suggest your posts should start mirroring that.... hasn't happened thus far..

 

That's the feature to the plan, not the bug....

 

of course not.

 

There is a small risk of complications with both Miscarriage and Abortion. And frankly--abortion seems to read at a higher risk.

Abortion Risk: https://www.nhs.uk/common-health-questions/sexual-health/can-having-an-abortion-affect-my-fertility/

Miscarriage: risk due to utilizing the same technique abortion would utilize: https://www.shadygrovefertility.com/article/can-a-miscarriage-impact-my-fertility/

So I think with the agenda at hand---we have a lot of unsubstantiated hype.

Its called "State Rights"--the ability of the residents within each state to direct ethical, moral conclusions on what can be protected or/and what life can be destroyed. State rights are in play in other states that make it legal to kill disabled people. State rights isn't just for SOME states!

That is speculation and not in play for this scenerio. Texas isn't doing that so it is not relevant.

You don't know who is going to live or die unless that person is actively killed: https://www.fox23.com/news/local/ok...cle_25b2070a-fe8c-5c93-b860-6b3ee0ff2dd4.html

Abortion could end up making the mother incapable of having children and there are the SAME risks with the mother for abortion as there is for miscarriage. So stop the hype. And she could have gone to a variety of nearby states to get it done.

 

This. This right here is what the Republican pro life stand for. They do NOT care about the mother. They are satisfied if the mother should dies. They don’t care. @Dayton3 is showing who he is. He is delivering proof

 

Where in the links you posted does it say that the risk of complications with abortion is higher or even comparable to miscarriages? How do you expect me to take you seriously when you are blatantly dishonest? You have the gall to complain of unsubstantiated hype when you can't even substantiate your own claims?

The fact of the matter is that, statistically speaking, it is always safter to have an abortion than to go through with a pregnancy. Unlike you, I am going to substantiate that claim. You can read about it here. https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/pregnancy-is-far-more-dangerous-to-women-than-abortion/

So the notion that the risks associated with an abortion are greater than or even equal to miscarriage is laughable.

And here's more:

https://www.hexahealth.com/blog/dif...-and-complications-of-abortion-vs-miscarriage

Except state rights are subordinate to individual rights. Yes, states have police power under the 10th amendment. But they cannot use that police power to deprive anyone of life, liberty or property without due process of law, else it is a violation of the 14th amendment.

SCOTUS has ruled that state laws banning abortion are not a per se violation of the 14th amendment. But they will probably react differently to a law that requires a woman to continue with a pregnancy that will almost certainly result in the death of the child and could very well result in her death, infertility or other complications.

How is that speculation? Texas has passed laws imposing civil liability on anyone who helps an transport people across state lines to receive an abortion.
https://www.reuters.com/world/us/fi...reaches-biggest-battlegrounds-yet-2023-10-23/

Don't you think those laws have a chilling effect?

We do know that the baby is statistically likely to die and that continuing the pregnancy puts the mother at risk. The fact that the baby might possibly defy the odds and survive for a brief period after birth does not justify putting the mother at risk.

Except I have already exposed this as a lie.

 

Well, I think they'd generally prefer the mother pull through somehow, especially a 31 yo with several good breeding years ahead of her.

But, no great loss if she doesn't... plenty more where she came from in the middle schools...

 

Only if you inject some intelligence above kindergarten level in yours.

You have crayons in your mouth. So when you've finished chewing, can we have at least an adult post from you.

 

Maybe scientists one day will come up with alternative methods to prevent unwanted pregnancy.

 

I didnt even bother to read the OP. Aint nobody got time for that!

 

It wasn’t unwanted. Did you even read the story?

 

He says he doesn’t “got time” to read it. But, he does have the time to condemn someone who is already suffering………….truly heroic.

 

More proof you ain’t a democrat lol

 

You know the greek letters for males? (Alpha Male, Beta Male etc)

Meet your Epsilon male.... The lowest on the list. I suspect most MAGA's fall into this category

https://www.newtraderu.com/2023/10/23/12-male-personality-types-which-one-are-you/

 

Then we have to choose. This is what people are not “getting”. Maternal mortality is fuelled by the fact that when things go wrong they go wrong FAST! Maternal mortality is caused by things like amniotic emboli - that is when some of the amnion (fluid surrounding the baby) enters the mothers blood stream and it triggers the clotting cascade - it has a near 100% mortality

 

I have noticed this pattern amongst the so called “pro-lifers”. There seems to be a fixed mental image about who is getting abortions, why they are getting them and what the “baby” looks like. This mental image is at serious odds with the reality. It is not “slutty young teens” wanting an “abortion at eight months so they can fit into a swimsuit”. (Don’t deny it it this is exactly what some of the antiabortion sites were pushing). As reporting has shown, especially since Dobbs, there are valid medical reasons for abortion and these have the capacity to stir public sentiment far more than the cry of “but the babies!” All you have to do is look at Ireland. It had hideously restrictive abortion legislation AND it was “cooking the books” on maternal mortality to claim zero maternal mortality - now those of us who know better know that we will never achieve a zero maternal mortality - sadly so it became obvious something was rotten in the stats themselves. The a young female dentist with a wanted pregnancy was admitted for sepsis. She begged for an abortion as she knew what might happen. Because there was a “heartbeat” the doctors could not perform an abortion - she and the baby died. Then it hit the media and within about a year that legislation was overturned

 

Maybe some day there will be adequate eduction on the “typical use” failure rates of contraception. Unfortunately for a proportion of the so called “pro-lifers” it is less about stopping abortion than it is feeling superior to “slutty women who don’t know how to look after themselves”