The New Texas Abortion Ban

oh here we go with the feminist garbage. We gotta pay for everything, open doors AND now get parts of our nuts cut?
What’s next?

 

Helps me sleep at night? Huh?....In this context, what does that even mean? Are you aware that I am pro abortion?

I am sorry if you do not understand the difference between pragmatism and hypocrisy. I am quite sure that most people that oppose abortion legitimately believe it is murder. I am not sure how anyone could legitimately conclude otherwise.

 

The source is the abortionist. They can perform thousands in a year. They are analogous to the drug dealer in the previous example. The mother is analogous to the user in that they are the purchaser and small fish in the transaction. Additionally, most civil laws are aimed at those with deep pockets. Typically, it would be the doctor with the deepest pockets.

Obviously, this law is aimed at the source. You are not doing yourself any favors by pretending like the mother is the source and big fish in all of this. Nobody is going to buy that notion.

 

Without the woman with the baby in the womb, there can be no abortion. That makes her the source

I am not the one that calls it murder, so I do not need to do any favors to those that do

 

The drug user is not the source, rather that is the person providing the drug whom is the dealer. The mother is not the source, rather that is the person providing the abortion which is the doctor.

This is not all that difficult.

 

So basically, under this law, any ex-boyfriend can sue any ex-girlfriend's health provider, or the best friend who took her to the clinic, or her mom, claiming she had an abortion and her friends/family/doctor helped her and collect
$10,000 for his suddenly found care about her baby ... and the only way the girlfriend can prove she didn't have an
abortion is to undergo an invasive pelvic exam ...

WTF, Republicans. What could possibly go wrong with this?

 

Can there be an abortion without a pregnant woman?

 

But this law says that anyone who helps the woman get the abortion, in any way (driving her to the location, suggesting a doctor) can
all be included in the suit. So if mom sees her daughter having difficulty in carrying the baby to term - say high blood pressure - not
immediately a life or death situation, but unknown, and she takes her child to the clinic in Oklahoma for the abortion, that mom
can be named in a lawsuit by a neighbor who is still mad at the mom for her dog crapping on her lawn ...

What can possibly go wrong.

 

It IS murder. I am pro choice (1st 2 months) and still can acknowledge it for what it is. I know you liberals like to give things fancy names but that doesn’t change what something is

 

Neighbor was pregnant, now they are not...**** call the hotline and roll the dice, make them prove they did not have an abortion. maybe you will get 10 grand.

 

Well, unfortunately, with the way this law is worded, the claim can be made against any woman, pregnant or not, and then
it will be up to the woman to prove she wasn't pregnant - which means an invasive pelvic exam.

Thank god for the Republicans fighting for "individual freedoms".

 

then why does the law allow the one paying for the murder to get off scott free?

 

If it's murder, then every woman who has ever had an abortion is going to jail - there is no statute of limitation on murder like other crimes.

Shall we set up a Ministry of Vaginal Inspection to inspect every uterus in the nation to find these criminals?

 

on a more serious note, murder is the unlawful killing of another person. Abortion is not unlawful, thus it is not murder. No fancy words needed, just a basic knowledge of the definition of the word

 

And guess what, the only way a woman can prove she HASN'T had an abortion is to undergo an invasive pelvic exam ...
thank god Republicans are so adamant about men's "Freedoms" ... Women? Hell, f'em say the Republicans.

 

Yup. Whatever helps you sleep at night. Tell that to the pile of baby parts sitting in a medical waste bin at some back alley clinic

 

No, but that does not make her the source. Just as a drug dealer cannot sell his drugs without a user, an abortionist cannot sell his services without a pregnant woman.

This has gotten silly. You are not doing yourself any favors. I can do this all day if need be. Nothing that you say is going to make the pregnant woman analogous to the drug dealer.

You can complain about the Texas law along a lot of avenues. Hypocrisy however is not one of those avenues.

 

In truth, I know very little about this law, and truthfully I could not care less about it one way or the other. I would tend to bet that it is not aimed at someone driving a person to the clinic, rather I would suspect that is probably using the slippery slope argument to say it could apply to them, but perhaps at some point I will look into it more deeply.

If it really sued a driver, I would not see that as a good idea, either from a practical or a PR standpoint.

 

correct, the pregnant woman is paying someone to murder her own child, that is far worse than being a drug dealer

 

Will you admit that the left did the wrong thing?

 

Of course they did. I fully support the Hyde Amendment.

But I do not agree two wrongs make a right

 

The thing is the left wanted to do it and then claim that the other side can't. If you are going to do something then you shouldn't be surprised if the other side tries to match or better you. I'm sick of the left claiming they can do things but doesn't think the other side should. They used the pandemic against Trump to get Biden elected and increase seats in the Senate and now they complain because the right are using politics against them.

In fact, getting rid of the Hyde Amendment would effect the entire country whereas this new law is only in Texas.

 

Right, specially if you wear them like many people wear their mask!

More seriously, it remains to be seen wether this law will be deemed constitutional. Practically, it would mean going about 50 years backwards.

If the law stands, and if it is spread to other states, this might very well be the beginning of the end of the Great Old Party.

I guess a vast majority of women won't agree with that law, specially the younger generations ones.

As women are already the majority and younger ones will have more and more impact on future elections, we might soon see the GOP becoming the OGOP ( Once GOP).

 

As I said, I am not on the left and I do not support abortions, but I still find this law to be reprehensible in it structure.

If you wish to play the "well they did it first" game that is your right. I choose to not play it

Until every red state in the union copies this law

 

YES IT IS!