Anyone else watching this? [W:500]

[Josie]

I have personally watched one of those 'idiots' almost die from being so desperate to abort that she resorted to an illegal one. Have you?

Nope. I don't know anyone who would choose to put her own life in danger just to kill her baby.

 

[Josie]

It should never be rare by force.

Is it okay for a woman to be forced to carry their child at any stage in her pregnancy?

 

[ThePlayDrive]

It's all about rationalization. Once you convince yourself that the unborn are not human and, better, that they are parasitic marauders intent on sexual assault, it's pretty easy. Cloak extermination in terms of "women's health," tell yourself that anybody concerned about the right to life of the unborn doesn't care about women's rights or is a misogynist, and there you are.

When are you going to get that pro-choice people like me are not "rationalizing" anything because we truly just THINK DIFFERENTLY from you? What's so difficult about accepting that millions of people just don't agree with how you perceive fetuses? Why must you assume that we believe what you do and we're just rationalizing it away? Please explain.

 

[JayDubya]

Second session #2 has been called, starts Monday.

:applaud

Sometimes I love my state, sometimes I don't understand my state. This is one of those <3 moments. To hell with Cecille Richards and her stooge, and to hell with disruptive Austinites.

 

[Henrin]

No it's not, we want abortion to be rare by choice, not by law.

Then wouldn't it be wise to stop talking to people as if there is nothing wrong with it? Wouldn't it be wise to make people value the life of the unborn instead of telling people it is meaningless before a certain point?

And yes they would, they would not just go through with an unwanted pregnancy. They would find other ways to end it, dangerous ways, which would harm women.

The only ones we must concern ourselves with is those with born children and the ones that are children themselves, imho.

 

[Henrin]

A desperate woman, is just that, desperate.

And with programs like I linked to you, the abortion rate could be tremendously reduced.

All you ask for is welfare. Not interested.

 

[Removable Mind]

So it's all the TEA's fault? :roll:

Lawmaker in the legislation control purse stings for funding education and Perry controls Texas education board.

The TEA just does what it's told.

Creationist run Texas schools.

 

[choiceone]

"If this passes, abortion would be virtually banned in the state of Texas, and many women could be forced to resort to dangerous and unsafe measures," President Cecile Richards of the Planned Parenthood Action Fund commented.

A. It's a GOOD thing that abortion would be "virtually banned". Don't we all want abortion to be rare?

B. Women wouldn't have to resort to "dangerous and unsafe measures". Millions of women have very safe pregnancies. You don't have to kill your baby.

The vast majority of people who seek and perform abortions rightly think that abortion is the removal of an embryo or fetus from a woman's body, which incidentally causes it to die. They do not think the purpose of abortion is "killing" and they do not think the embryo or fetus is a "baby." A fetus is not viable at 20 weeks. The earliest case of the survival of a fetus is 21 weeks and 6 days, and the likelihood that the conception was miscalculated is pretty good.

If people want to roll back the point of viability to 22 weeks, I can see the reasoning, but this law wanted to do more than roll back the point of viability to 20 weeks, an unreasonable choice. It wanted to force all abortion facilities, i.e., clinics, to have doctors with official affiliations with nearby hospitals and various upgrades for surgical abortions suitable for abortions even in later pregnancy. The doctors could not get affiliations with the hospitals if they were Catholic. Moreover, the upgrades, which would be totally unnecessary for clinics that only perform first-trimester abortions and get requests primarily for medical/chemical rather than surgical abortions, would be so expensive that they would put abortion economically beyond the reach of many impoverished women.

This legislation is nothing but a ploy by anti-abortion people like yourself to ban abortion for women unless they have a lot of money. And furthermore, so far, federal courts have blocked legislation like this on the grounds that it is unconstitutional.

Since you're a woman, and you apparently want to use the physical violence that underpins the enforcement of law to coerce women and girls into continuing pregnancies they do not want, perhaps you are willing to take moral responsibility. Advocating such legislation is advocating the crime of rape against women and girls. Supporting a ban on abortion that might be necessary to save the major health functions of a woman, even in the case of a gross fetal anomaly medically determined to be unable to survive birth, doesn't sound like morality to me.

Pro-choice people should not be made morally responsible for that travesty of justice, but they are every time some ignorant, uneducated legislature tries to make bans like this one. Thank God I do not live in Texas.

 

[JayDubya]

Since you're a woman, and you apparently want to use the physical violence that underpins the enforcement of law to coerce women and girls into continuing pregnancies they do not want, perhaps you are willing to take moral responsibility for advocating the crime of rape against them.

Yeah Josie, why do you like rape so much?

:roll:

Thank God I do not live in Texas.

You determine where you want to live, but I concur in giving glad tidings that I share a very tenuous connection at best with you. If only we adhered strongly to the federalist system set up at our nation's founding, such that it would be even more minimal.

 

[AGENT J]

Is it okay for a woman to be forced to carry their child at any stage in her pregnancy?

IMO it is but never before viability and never if the odds are against her life

 

[nota bene]

Second session #2 has been called, starts Monday.

:applaud

Sometimes I love my state, sometimes I don't understand my state. This is one of those <3 moments. To hell with Cecille Richards and her stooge, and to hell with disruptive Austinites.

Even Democrats were shocked by the breach in decorum. Senators weren't allowed to do their jobs--finishing voting. Doesn't matter who did it or over what particular issue; it was unacceptable. I'm glad the special session will begin immediately and hope it ends quickly. Maybe that will save Texas taxpayers a little money and time. It wasn't just the abortion provider vote that "fell by the wayside." The Austin American Statesman with inexcusable typos in the article, identify the remaining work:

- “Legislation relating to the regulation of abortion procedures, providers and facilities.”

- “Legislation relating to the funding of transportation infrastructure projects.”

- “Legislation relating to establishing a mandatory sentence of life with parole for a capital felony committed by a 17-year-old offender.”

Gov. Perry calls special session to start Monday on abortion,... | www.statesman.com

 

[Scrabaholic]

Darnit! They should still have the right to slaughter this inconvenient unborn child. 20 weeks...WHAT were they thinking??!!!

Yep, they absolutely should have that right - and they do.

 

[Slyfox696]

Just because you're small government doesn't mean you have to support murder.

But Texas does support it. If someone comes at you in what you believe to be an unlawful manner, you can shoot them. They execute more people than most other states combined. Texas has no problem with killing.

Whether or not you consider it murder is irrelevant.

Yeah, that's a big BULL...dung

Whether it's considered murder is completely relevant. Because while you may consider it murder, not everyone does, and telling people that your belief makes it illegal to exercise their belief is wrong.

You don't need to agree with the position to be honest about it. The idea is that the law here is being used to protect an Individual from being killed. A position I am sure most people support in other contexts.

It's government stepping in and telling people what they can do with their own bodies. It's exactly the type of big government Republicans claim to hate. That is honesty.

 

[Scrabaholic]

The rule requires that the Senator must stand unaided

Wouldn't this go against the Americans with Disabilities act? What if a senator physically cannot stand for that long due to a medical condition?

 

[nota bene]

Wouldn't this go against the Americans with Disabilities act? What if a senator physically cannot stand for that long due to a medical condition?

Didn't you know? Part of last night's theater was the senator putting on a back brace.

 

[VanceMack]

Yep, they absolutely should have that right - and they do.

Yep...and some of them are even honest and up front about it. Slaughter at 8 months and 3 weeks...whatever...its their right.

 

[minnie616]

Nope. I don't know anyone who would choose to put her own life in danger just to kill her baby.

First of all I disagree with your term baby.
It is not a baby/ person /child until it is born.

They put their life in danger because they cannot bear the thought of contining a pregnancy.
To many scared women with unwanted pregnancies the thought of dying is less horrid than the thought of continuing a pregnancy and giving birth.

My aunt was a frontier nursing midwife in the late 1930's early 1940's in the hills of Kentucky.
She rode horseback to visit patients in their homes many were just shack like
places.
Besides giving schoolchildren vaccinations and delivering babies she sometimes had to try to repair the damage done by women who tried to self abort.
here is a little history about Frontier nursing.
FNS History

There were many women who had unsafe abortions before Roe Vs Wade.

Here are a few <SNIPS> from Repairing the Damage, Before Roe

Repairing the Damage, Before Roe

< SNIP>
I am a retired gynecologist, in my mid-80s. My early formal training in my specialty was spent in New York City, from 1948 to 1953, in two of the city’s large municipal hospitals.

There I saw and treated almost every complication of illegal abortion that one could conjure,
done either by the patient herself or by an abortionist — often unknowing, unskilled and probably uncaring. Yet the patient never told us who did the work, or where and under what conditions it was performed. She was in dire need of our help to complete the process or, as frequently was the case, to correct what damage might have been done.
< SNIP>
The worst case I saw, and one I hope no one else will ever have to face, was that of a nurse who was admitted with what looked like a partly delivered umbilical cord. Yet as soon as we examined her, we realized that what we thought was the cord was in fact part of her intestine, which had been hooked and torn by whatever implement had been used in the abortion.
It took six hours of surgery to remove the infected uterus and ovaries and repair the part of the bowel that was still functional.

It is important to remember that Roe v. Wade did not mean that abortions could be performed. They have always been done, dating from ancient Greek days.

What Roe said was that ending a pregnancy could be carried out by medical personnel, in a medically accepted setting, thus conferring on women, finally, the full rights of first-class citizens — and freeing their doctors to treat them as such.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/06/03/h...=1&adxnnlx=1337817945-qUmxUKfKUDcWQfT4MEbi5A&

The nurse with the intestine who was admitted knew that illegal abortions were dangerous.
She knew that she was risking her life but the thought of contining the pregnancy drove her to have an illegal abortion.
She was desperate so desperate she saw no other way out.

 

[Scrabaholic]

By week 20, your baby-to-be is gearing up for the next phase in his development—filling out. His organs are getting into their proper places. His kidneys are now in position with their familiar bean shape. His testes (or ovaries for girls) have reached their position. His brain continues to form and grow. His teeth are beginning to appear, and he can swallow. If you haven't been able to feel him move, chances are you'll be feeling him move more and more over the coming weeks.

What's wrong with making it illegal to kill this little one? ^^

Because doing so is a violation of the woman's right to security of the person.

 

[yobarnacle]

"We hold these rights to be self evident, LIFE, LIBERTY, and PURSUIT of HAPINESS"

Apparently the not yet born have no right to LIFE.

I believe anyone wanting abortion should receive it, retroactive one generation.

 

[Removable Mind]

"We hold these rights to be self evident, LIFE, LIBERTY, and PURSUIT of HAPINESS"

Apparently the not yet born have no right to LIFE.

I believe anyone wanting abortion should receive it, retroactive one generation.

So you do believe in abortion...

Thanks..

 

[nota bene]

But Texas does support it. If someone comes at you in what you believe to be an unlawful manner, you can shoot them. They execute more people than most other states combined. Texas has no problem with killing.

See Post #161 above: One of the issues is about the killing. Or not. Very important in a state known for its executions, including tonight's: Dallas woman becomes Texas' 500th execution - Houston Chronicle

 

[nota bene]

"We hold these rights to be self evident, LIFE, LIBERTY, and PURSUIT of HAPINESS"

Apparently the not yet born have no right to LIFE.

I believe anyone wanting abortion should receive it, retroactive one generation.

That's a hideous thing to say.

 

[Scrabaholic]

If I was to support a cut-off date for abortion it would be the third trimester, I'm glad my country struck down abortion laws and parliament refuses to pass new ones even my Conservative MP voted it down.

I don't have the option to 'like' this post

My conservative MP took a referendum of the constituency and he said he'd vote with what the majority wanted - he kept his word and voted against it.

 

[Removable Mind]

Texas Idiocracy Round 2 coming up. Perry is a determined fanatic...indeed.

More extremism. More radicalism. More oppression. More discrimination. More Misogyny.

 

[nota bene]

When are you going to get that pro-choice people like me are not "rationalizing" anything because we truly just THINK DIFFERENTLY from you? What's so difficult about accepting that millions of people just don't agree with how you perceive fetuses? Why must you assume that we believe what you do and we're just rationalizing it away? Please explain.

I was referring to these rationalizations: That abortion deliberately extinguishes a human life and that it doesn't matter.