Abortion doctors would lose medical licenses under new Oklahoma bill (1 Viewer)

[JANFU]

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...p_no-name_mm-oklahoma-1234pm_1:homepage/story

Under a bill passed by the legislature this week, doctors who perform abortions — defined in the measure as “unprofessional conduct” — would be barred from obtaining or renewing their medical licenses. The bill, now on the governor’s desk, would not apply to abortions performed to save a mother’s life, although the bill lacks similar exceptions for abortions performed in cases of rape or incest.

“This is our proper function, to protect life,” the bill’s sponsor, Sen. Nathan Dahm (R), said last month.

The bill passed the Senate early last month and the House on Thursday. Both houses are controlled by the GOP, but a few Democrats in each chamber voted for the bill. Gov. Mary Fallin (R) has not yet said whether she will sign the bill, Reuters reports.

The constant end runs to remove a woman's right to her body.
When will it stop?
Thoughts are

 

[apdst]

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...p_no-name_mm-oklahoma-1234pm_1:homepage/story


The constant end runs to remove a woman's right to her body.
When will it stop?
Thoughts are

It will never end, since The Supreme Court can't make law, now amend The Constitution.

 

[JANFU]

It will never end, since The Supreme Court can't make law, now amend The Constitution.

No, the decision as Ginsburg stated, is right to privacy. That is IIRC
They have to clarify it

 

[apdst]

No, the decision as Ginsburg stated, is right to privacy. That is IIRC
They have to clarify it

That argument could make any crime legal.

 

[JANFU]

That argument could make any crime legal.

Not if strictly applied to abortion.

 

[Henrin]

If you're a doctor and you kill one of your two patients at the request of the other patient, yeah, it's unprofessional conduct. Duh?

 

[apdst]

Not if strictly applied to abortion.

You can't strictly apply it to one thing. Then it violates the equal protection clause.

 

[digsbe]

For any late-term or even mid-term abortion not done to save the mother's life I think their license should be revoked under the principal that they are to do no harm and to abort a viable, healthy, and developed human fetus constitutes harm. I'm all for early term abortion but mid and late-term abortions when not done due to pregnancy complications should be outlawed and recognized as an abhorrent inhumane practice.

 

[JANFU]

You can't strictly apply it to one thing. Then it violates the equal protection clause.

Not if SCOTUS writes it that way,
SCOTUS has written narrow and case specific ruling previously.

 

[Jetboogieman]

If you're a doctor and you kill one of your two patients at the request of the other patient, yeah, it's unprofessional conduct. Duh?

Ah yes there's the liber... :lamo Libert... :lamo Libertarian :lamo proposing the state take direct control over the medical decisions of women.

I stand by my statement that in the Henrin universe there'd be no government, no roads, no civilization except for a single maximum security prison for women who've ever dreamed of not wanting to be pregnant.

 

[apdst]

Not if SCOTUS writes it that way,
SCOTUS has written narrow and case specific ruling previously.

The Supreme Court can't make law, nor amend The Constitution. Can't say that enough.

For The Supreme Court to make such a ruling, that only applies to women is discrminatory.

 

[JANFU]

The Supreme Court can't make law, nor amend The Constitution. Can't say that enough.

For The Supreme Court to make such a ruling, that only applies to women is discrminatory.

Not if you go back to R V W.
There was a later ruling, that I do not have at hand. Will look sometime

 

[apdst]

Not if you go back to R V W.
There was a later ruling, that I do not have at hand. Will look sometime

Get back to us, but since The Supreme Court can't make law the state's will keep proposing anti-abortion legislation.

 

[JANFU]

Get back to us, but since The Supreme Court can't make law the state's will keep proposing anti-abortion legislation.

They can throw it out and redefine past rulings.
That they can do.

 

[apdst]

They can throw it out and redefine past rulings.
That they can do.

No, I don't think they can.

 

[ajn678]

The Supreme Court can't make law, nor amend The Constitution. Can't say that enough.

For The Supreme Court to make such a ruling, that only applies to women is discrminatory.

Of course The Supreme Court can rule that it only applies to certain instances. Before a fetus is born, it has no rights. Therefore, its not the same as trying to make murder legal. What a horrible understanding of the law you posses. They have done things like this in the past. They have limited the First Amendment so that saying certain things is not protected. You obviously don't understand how the system works.

 

[Real Korimyr #9]

No legislature will ever pass it-- true bipartisan opposition-- but we need a law that if you sponsor a bill that is throw out by the courts for being unconstitutional, you should be stripped of your office and pension and horsewhipped.

Doesn't matter if it's the left trying to take away our gun rights or the right trying to take away our right to make our own medical decisions... if you are a lawmaker and you violate the Constitution, there should be penalties.

 

[Casper]

It will never end, since The Supreme Court can't make law, now amend The Constitution.

Correct it can only determine if a law is Constitutional or Not. Since abortion is not illegal, this law, if signed will die along with the other many attempted end runs.