Don't get pregnant in Texass

[Lutherf]

Pregnancy and childbirth arent safe. It doesnt matter if all these increased deaths/near misses of pregnant women are because of lack of abortion access.

What they prove is that preg/chilbirth IS a significant risk every single time. It's only being focused on more now in the media because of the limits and increased dangers of new abortion restrictions...but it's ALWAYS a danger to the woman, death and major, permanent systems damage cannot be predicted nor always prevented.

ALWAYS dangerous. Never to be taken for granted. Women that want a baby willingly accept this risk...but it's immoral to demand women take this risk without their consent. The state is replacing the slave owner, taking away a woman's right to consent to her own life, health, reproduction, self-determination, bodily autonomy, due process, etc.

Isnt that exactly what slave owners did to their slaves? If not, explain how it's different and be specific. In the US, nowhere else do we deny people safer medical procedures because they have accidents performing normal social behaviors like skiing or driving.

And a recent judge in GA also drew this same comparison when he overturned a new GA abortion law. As have other judges considered it in the past.

Right. Like I said, pregnancy is a death sentence and men that get women pregnant should all be prosecuted for attempted murder. It's the only way we can save democracy.

 

[Lursa]

Right. Like I said, pregnancy is a death sentence and men that get women pregnant should all be prosecuted for attempted murder. It's the only way we can save democracy.

Thanks for showing your belly, and no capability to refute it. I'm glad that both your post and mine are there to consider. One has facts and one has misogynistic dismissal of women's lives. (and if you respond, I know exactly what you'll post. Please do.)

 

[Mika-El]

...And how about the number of embryo, zygote, and fetal deaths? I’d like to see the overall total deaths accounted for. Each abortion typically causes a death.

To be specific, a unionized egg (zygote) evolves into a blastocyst, then morula, then embryo, then fetus.
Once the zygote begins to divide by mitosis, which is then called the stage of cleavage,this single cell subdivides into smaller cells at anywhere from its 5th to 11th week, its now referred to as an embryo then at the 12th week a fetus.

Today there is a debate as to when life starts. Is it at the moment of fertilization or at some point further on when the organism can live independently outside the womb. There is general consensus that it is only after the 24th week of development the fetus is sufficiently capable of living outside the womb in an incubator.

My info can be backed up at: https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC5499222/

Today because of mri's the size and development of the organism can be accurately monitored and it can tell us quite early on for example if there are serious issues, i.e., the embryo or fetus has no brain, heart, vital organs or severe deformities and is technically not able to live inside the womb. So medicine now has the ability to say it can give a mother the option to terminate pregnancy very early on so a child is not born dead or with severe medical issues that it would cause them only pain then death or be forced to give full term to a child of incest or rape if they did not want to.

As for me, I worked in the criminal and family law systems as a lawyer and mediator. I have seen the results of botched abortions, had to cross examine rape and incest victims, deal with women drinking or taking drugs or engaging in dangerous sex while pregnant and refusing to stop, pregnant persons without sufficient mental capacity to understand what happened. Its a complex world and it has no easy solutions.

I believe the state should only intervene when the patient is without sufficient competency to make decisions and even then the decision should be made within the sanctity of the patient doctor privileged relationship that should not be pierced by government.

I also believe a physician should not be forced to provide an abortion if another doctor is available to do so or delay in getting a doctor who will does NOT endanger the woman in any way.

I think trying to force anyone to full term with a still born baby or a situation that could kill them or give birth to a child forced to suffer inhumanely until inevitable death is NOT humane and makes a mockery of the sanctity of life.

I argue physicians are properly trained to provide all the options without moral judgement to a woman so she exercises free choice and understands she has options not just the option of termination or full term birth.

I believe at this time because of the overthrowing of Wade v. Row, unnecessary maternal deaths and illegal back alley abortions will rise in the US in specific states and this will disproportionally impact on the poor who cannot afford to travel to another state.

I want all women to be safe and free to make clear decisions without feeling guilty, coerced, morally judged and where their privacy is protected. I do not want any woman feel compelled to give birth or terminate for any reasons other than their own free will.

 

[Lutherf]

Thanks for showing your belly, and no capability to refute it. I'm glad that both your post and mine are there to consider. One has facts and one has misogynistic dismissal of women's lives. (and if you respond, I know exactly what you'll post. Please do.)

Look, woman have been having kids to a couple of million years. We've got the system pretty much figured out and, while it isn't perfect, it generally works. Yes, being pregnant adds the potential for complications that don't occur when a woman isn't pregnant but you're coming at this like it's the greatest threat a woman could ever experience. For most women that isn't the case and I've even heard rumors that some women feel like pregnancy is kind of a special thing because that means they're going to have a baby. They tend to LIKE that idea.

There is risk involved in everything we do. Driving a car, walking to the store and stepping into a bathtub are all dangerous. While you might WANT to legislate all risk away that isn't really a practical idea because it means that all of us would be forced to sit around with our thumbs up our asses every day and even THAT presents health risks. We have doctors that specialize in caring for people in general and withing the set of doctors we even have doctors that specialize in reproductive health. Like in every profession, some doctors are good at what they do and others...not so much.

You or someone else in this thread was talking about an increase in maternal mortality. I'd kind of like to see the data behind that because I really suspect that fear of abortion laws has a LOT less to do with that than drug abuse does. Also, how many women go to an abortion clinic, get prescribed the baby killer cocktail and then don't get proper follow-up care? How many get prescribed the cocktail without a decent checkup ahead of time to catch risks that might be associated with the cocktail? The left is coming at this issue like abortion is perfectly safe and pregnancy is the most dangerous thing a woman can do. I'm no doctor but I suspect that's complete bullshit.

 

[Mika-El]

The number of people that believe "conservatives" on this issue is dwindling, it is not "pro-life" only pro-control.

Let us be clear, conservatism does not want state intervention based on religious beliefs being imposed. Those who are anti abortionist and so believe in using the state to impose religious beliefs on the individual are not advocating a conservative view in the traditional and accurate sense although no doubt today we have watered down the true meaning of conservative to mean Trump supporters and anti abortionists.

 

[Lursa]

Look, woman have been having kids to a couple of million years. We've got the system pretty much figured out and, while it isn't perfect, it generally works. Yes, being pregnant adds the potential for complications that don't occur when a woman isn't pregnant but you're coming at this like it's the greatest threat a woman could ever experience. For most women that isn't the case and I've even heard rumors that some women feel like pregnancy is kind of a special thing because that means they're going to have a baby. They tend to LIKE that idea.

There is risk involved in everything we do. Driving a car, walking to the store and stepping into a bathtub are all dangerous. While you might WANT to legislate all risk away that isn't really a practical idea because it means that all of us would be forced to sit around with our thumbs up our asses every day and even THAT presents health risks. We have doctors that specialize in caring for people in general and withing the set of doctors we even have doctors that specialize in reproductive health. Like in every profession, some doctors are good at what they do and others...not so much.

You or someone else in this thread was talking about an increase in maternal mortality. I'd kind of like to see the data behind that because I really suspect that fear of abortion laws has a LOT less to do with that than drug abuse does. Also, how many women go to an abortion clinic, get prescribed the baby killer cocktail and then don't get proper follow-up care? How many get prescribed the cocktail without a decent checkup ahead of time to catch risks that might be associated with the cocktail? The left is coming at this issue like abortion is perfectly safe and pregnancy is the most dangerous thing a woman can do. I'm no doctor but I suspect that's complete bullshit.

That's all I read, the bold. The facts that you are admitting to are the REALITY. Pregnancy/childbirth is dangerous, it's ALWAYS a significant risk, and it cannot always be predicted or prevented.

I'm not directly addressing abortion, I'm discussing the anti-abortite minimization of "pregnancy is safe! Abortion always kills!" Pregnancy kills and maims a great deal...and when you reduce this to numbers, you dehumanize BOTH. Is that your intention? Because you are certainly reducing women to breeding vessels...that "just have to take their chances". That's disgusting.

Even moreso when the state demands the woman take that risk without her consent and you 100% ignored what I wrote about the state as slave owner? Why? Here it is again. Can you prove it's wrong?

The state is replacing the slave owner, taking away a woman's right to consent to her own life, health, reproduction, self-determination, bodily autonomy, due process, etc.​

​

Isnt that exactly what slave owners did to their slaves? If not, explain how it's different and be specific. In the US, nowhere else do we deny people safer medical procedures because they have accidents performing normal social behaviors like skiing or driving.​

Judges have already drawn similar conclusions. We just need to get this into another challenge case.

 

[Lutherf]

That's all I read, the bold. The facts that you are admitting to are the REALITY. Pregnancy/childbirth is dangerous, it's ALWAYS a significant risk, and it cannot always be predicted or prevented.

I'm not directly addressing abortion, I'm discussing the anti-abortite minimization of "pregnancy is safe! Abortion always kills!" Pregnancy kills and maims a great deal...and when you reduce this to numbers, you dehumanize BOTH. Is that your intention? Because you are certainly reducing women to breeding vessels...that "just have to take their chances". That's disgusting.

Even moreso when the state demands the woman take that risk without her consent and you 100% ignored what I wrote about the state as slave owner? Why? Here it is again. Can you prove it's wrong?

The state is replacing the slave owner, taking away a woman's right to consent to her own life, health, reproduction, self-determination, bodily autonomy, due process, etc.​

​

Isnt that exactly what slave owners did to their slaves? If not, explain how it's different and be specific. In the US, nowhere else do we deny people safer medical procedures because they have accidents performing normal social behaviors like skiing or driving.​

Judges have already drawn similar conclusions. We just need to get this into another challenge case.

Well, part of what you said is valid. Abortion pretty much always results in death.

No state is demanding that women get pregnant. Those of us on the pro-life side, however, are suggesting that a wee bit of responsibility is a good idea and that somebody somewhere along the line recognize that the mother's life isn't the only one we're dealing with when it comes to abortion.

 

[I'm Immemorial]

Texans, for women's sake, vote blue!

I have no doubt that they're trying their damndest, Phys, but they've been gerrymandered to death and cretins like Paxton are trying to stop them at every step...

 

[Lursa]

Well, part of what you said is valid. Abortion pretty much always results in death.

So what? Who says abortion is wrong? Why is that strangers' business?

No state is demanding that women get pregnant.

I covered that, you conveniently ignored it. In the US, when else do we deny people safer medical procedures because they have accidents performing normal social behaviors like skiing or driving? Consensual sex is a normal, legal, social behavior. Why should women be denied the safer medical procedure?

Are you just intentionally going to take us around in circles so you can avoid the tough questions?

Those of us on the pro-life side, however, are suggesting that a wee bit of responsibility is a good idea and that somebody somewhere along the line recognize that the mother's life isn't the only one we're dealing with when it comes to abortion.

So 'those of you' may act in any way you choose. How do you get to be the state "slave owners?"

No one says the unborn has any value or rights that supersede those of persons. That's why the rest of us support 'choice.' What we see is the abject hypocrisy of the right that continually blames most of society's ill on single mothers, and then denies women the chance to avoid single motherhood. How irrational is that? Please explain that thinking?

 

[Fearandloathing]

Every person in this country should have access to proper medical care.

Free.

access to free medical care

 

[coyote505]

It will get worse because obgyn residents need to go out if state to get the proper training and many are going elsewhere including family physicians. Medical care will get much worse. New Mexico had a 300% increase in out of state patients.

Wonder when Texas Planned Parenthood etc will start compensating NM for this patient load. In a state with a severe lack of rural health care, and lack of docs even in our cities, our PC Governor did the PC thing, spending $10,000,000 on a drop shop in Las Cruces, primarily for fugitive Texans. I guess she wants a job with Kamala.

 

[coyote505]

Wasn’t Texas talking about building a border between Texas and New Mexico?

Some Texans started such a campaign a couple decades ago. Build a wall to keep out riff-raff. Each donation buys you an engraved brick. They gave it up when it turned out that 2/3 of their donations were from out-of-staters wating to keep the Texans IN.

 

[coyote505]

Well, part of what you said is valid. Abortion pretty much always results in death.

No state is demanding that women get pregnant. Those of us on the pro-life side, however, are suggesting that a wee bit of responsibility is a good idea and that somebody somewhere along the line recognize that the mother's life isn't the only one we're dealing with when it comes to abortion.

If we were talking about elective abortions of viable fetuses, you might have a point. However, in practice, elective abortions overwhelmingly involve things that only have "potential" to become human beings, like my sperm. That doesn't tip any scales against the rights of women. So, the Pope can kiss my ass when it comes to his proclamations.

 

[Lursa]

If we were talking about elective abortions of viable fetuses, you might have a point. However, in practice, elective abortions overwhelmingly involve things that only have "potential" to become human beings, like my sperm. That doesn't tip any scales against the rights of women. So, the Pope can kiss my ass when it comes to his proclamations.

Apparently using birth control isnt "responsible." The Pope still says no to that...but yeah, screw the Pope.

Then he denies that abortion is "responsible" when it keeps the state and the taxpayers from having to pay for it's upkeep. Of course it's a responsible option. Many anti-abortites only have one tune tho..."they're killing baybees!" And women and taxpayers and the good of society arent even considered.

 

[Phys251]

I have no doubt that they're trying their damndest, Phys, but they've been gerrymandered to death and cretins like Paxton are trying to stop them at every step...

State boundaries can't be gerrymandered. Ted Cruz is up for reelection!

 

[Lutherf]

If we were talking about elective abortions of viable fetuses, you might have a point. However, in practice, elective abortions overwhelmingly involve things that only have "potential" to become human beings, like my sperm. That doesn't tip any scales against the rights of women. So, the Pope can kiss my ass when it comes to his proclamations.

The "potential to be human" thing is a damned sickness. There is nothing else that a fertilized human egg is other than human. It's not going to develop into a tree, a bologna sandwich or the number 3. It's human from the moment of conception. The liberal idea that humanity is subjective is the core of all ideologies that lead to genocide.

 

[Gordy327]

Well, part of what you said is valid. Abortion pretty much always results in death.

No more so than taking antibiotics results in death of bacteria or chemo results in the death of cancer.

No state is demanding that women get pregnant.

The problem are the states demanding women remain pregnant.

Those of us on the pro-life side, however, are suggesting that a wee bit of responsibility is a good idea and that somebody somewhere along the line recognize that the mother's life isn't the only one we're dealing with when it comes to abortion.

Utilizing abortion is being responsible, especially if a woman knows she is unable or unwilling to adequately raise a child. And what about women who used birth control that failed? Clearly they were being responsible by using BC. Why should they be denied an abortion? The woman's life or health is directly affected by a gestational parasite feeding off her body. Why should she forced to do so against her will and in violation of her bodily autonomy?

 

[Gordy327]

The "potential to be human" thing is a damned sickness. There is nothing else that a fertilized human egg is other than human. It's not going to develop into a tree, a bologna sandwich or the number 3. It's human from the moment of conception. The liberal idea that humanity is subjective is the core of all ideologies that lead to genocide.

No one is arguing whether a ZEF is a "human" or not. It's simply not relevant. Every cell in tbe body is "human." "Human" is simply a scientific designation based on DNA. But a ZEF is certainly not an actual born person.

 

[Luce]

The "potential to be human" thing is a damned sickness. There is nothing else that a fertilized human egg is other than human. It's not going to develop into a tree, a bologna sandwich or the number 3. It's human from the moment of conception. The liberal idea that humanity is subjective is the core of all ideologies that lead to genocide.

But it might miscarry and cause a shitload of damage.

If that happens in Texas, you know, thoughts & prayers. Because that's all the woman is going to get.

 

[Lutherf]

No more so than taking antibiotics results in death of bacteria or chemo results in the death of cancer.

The problem are the states demanding women remain pregnant.

Utilizing abortion is being responsible, especially if a woman knows she is unable or unwilling to adequately raise a child. And what about women who used birth control that failed? Clearly they were being responsible by using BC. Why should they be denied an abortion? The woman's life or health is directly affected by a gestational parasite feeding off her body. Why should she forced to do so against her will and in violation of her bodily autonomy?

"It isn't a baby. It's a bacteria or a cancer"

Science!!!

That's pretty damned sick.

 

[Lursa]

"It isn't a baby. It's a bacteria or a cancer"

Science!!!

That's pretty damned sick.

All emotions and no arguments.

 

[Lutherf]

All emotions and no arguments.

If someone requires scientific proof that a fertilized human egg is something other than human then there isn't any sense in discussing the matter further.

 

[Gordy327]

"It isn't a baby. It's a bacteria or a cancer"

Science!!!

It's a ZEF, and akin to a parasite or cancer.

Science!

It's not a legal person with rights.

Law!

That's pretty damned sick.

Emotionalism.

If someone requires scientific proof that a fertilized human egg is something other than human then there isn't any sense in discussing the matter further.

Who said it wasn't human? You seem to miss the point and make some emotional attachment on the term "human." Science says nothing about the abortion issue other than the process.

 

[Gordy327]

All emotions and no arguments.

Typical too.

 

[Lursa]

If someone requires scientific proof that a fertilized human egg is something other than human then there isn't any sense in discussing the matter further.

You've been told many times that biology doesnt determine value or rights. Homo sapiens is a species categorization. The unborn are a stage of that species. Science recognizes no value or rights for any species.

So your dependence on that straw is useless. Remember this? Me: "Who says abortion is wrong? Why is that strangers' business?"

Your "because it's a human" isnt the answer. Science doesnt decide "right and wrong."

So, so far all you have is your feelings or belief. Anything else that would be justifiable to impose on American women that dont believe the same? If so, justify away....