Texas Senate passes sweeping new abortion restrictions[W:240]

RabidAlpaca said:

It's not. Go down to Wal-Greens and pick up your prescription or OTC.

Click to expand...

joko104 said:

That is outlawed under the Texas law. In fact, under the new Texas no facility in the State of Texas can do so. Essentially those pills are outlawed in Texas by outlawing all 24 facilities that offered them.

Click to expand...

joko104 said:

Since the law effectively outlaws all abortion facilities, under the law there is no facility for any abortions - chemical or surgical - including rape or to save the mother - or to remove a dead fetus or any reason.

19 of the 24 facilities in a state larger than all of New England by nearly double are summarily closed for not being surgical facilities - which no "emergency clinic" is required to be - and the other 5 do not have hospital admitting rights - for which the threat of terrorist attacks by radical ProLifers no rational hospital administration would allow.

Click to expand...

RabidAlpaca said:

Short little ambiguous one-liners are not a rebuttal. I don't even know what you're talking about. None of what? Abortion clinics? Morning after pills? Abortions? Abortion pills? Laws?

Click to expand...

joko104 said:

No facilities to do abortions or administer chemical abortion. MAPs work 3 ways, including as the 3rd safeguard by preventing attachment to the placenta. If "single cell conception" could even theoretically be determined, MAPs are also illegal in Texas under the new law and any conception that can be determined

Click to expand...

RabidAlpaca said:

Correct me if I'm completely wrong on this, but it seems like both of you wouldn't necessarily find it a bad thing for an earlier elective cutoff if 100% of medical/deformity situations could be exempted, correct? It seems far more that you are concerned about abnormal conditions.

My plan would be such:

- Any elective abortions up to 12 weeks completely legal
- Any abortions after 12 weeks must be either for major fetus deformities or for real medical danger for the mother. The applicability in these situations would be determined by doctors bound by a loose legal framework.

What would be the problem with this? Any extraneous situations would be covered, and normal elective abortions would be limited after 12 weeks. Is there any reason why a perfectly healthy woman with a perfectly healthy baby needs to wait 12-24 weeks to make a decision?

Click to expand...

RabidAlpaca said:

1) Reducing it to 5 does not effectively outlaw it, there'd be 5.

2) You have zero proof that 19 abortion clinics will now close because of this.

Click to expand...

joko104 said:

Easy for a person who doesn't have sex to propose? :roll:

Click to expand...

RabidAlpaca said:

Correct me if I'm completely wrong on this, but it seems like both of you wouldn't necessarily find it a bad thing for an earlier elective cutoff if 100% of medical/deformity situations could be exempted, correct? It seems far more that you are concerned about abnormal conditions.

My plan would be such:

- Any elective abortions up to 12 weeks completely legal
- Any abortions after 12 weeks must be either for major fetus deformities or for real medical danger for the mother. The applicability in these situations would be determined by doctors bound by a loose legal framework.

What would be the problem with this? Any extraneous situations would be covered, and normal elective abortions would be limited after 12 weeks. Is there any reason why a perfectly healthy woman with a perfectly healthy baby needs to wait 12-24 weeks to make a decision?

Click to expand...

ecofarm said:

The article was clear: there is NO CAUSATION between legal abortion and the rate of abortions. The only causation illustrated by the study is that of access to birth control decreasing unwanted pregnancies and thus abortions - which any moron could deduce without a study.

The study is useless. Everyone knows that access to birth control will reduce unwanted pregnancies.

It's nothing but a misleading title. Correlation does not equal causation. Do you understand?

Click to expand...

Texas Republicans’ actions are insincere and will hinder women’s access to health care.
If Republicans truly wanted to reduce abortions in Texas, they would invest in reproductive health care and comprehensive sexual education across the state.
Yet the anti-choice legislation under consideration could forcibly close three dozen licensed health centers in Texas where women may receive abortions, reproductive health services and cancer screenings.

I am not pro-abortion, but I do believe a woman should be able to make intensely personal decisions about her pregnancy with the counsel of her doctor, her family and her faith — and without the interference of politicians. The Constitution guarantees all of us a right to privacy and freedom of religion. I believe a woman must be free to make the difficult decision about the future of her pregnancy in conjunction with her family and health care professionals.

Women must also have access to the information and health care necessary to prevent an unwanted pregnancy.

Women who are knowledgeable about reproductive health and have access to contraception are more likely to avoid unwanted pregnancies, precluding the need for many abortions. Texas Republicans have not connected the dots.

Instead of supporting access to reproductive health care, Republicans chose to cut the state’s family-planning budget by two-thirds in 2011. These cuts were projected to cause 284,000 women to lose access to family-planning services and to add $273 million in costs to taxpayers because of unplanned pregnancies in Texas.

Texas has the fifth-highest teen pregnancy rate of any state in the country,
but Republicans have consistently opposed one of the best tools we have to reduce teen pregnancy: comprehensive sex education. Comprehensive sex education programs are demonstrably effective in helping youth delay sexual activity, reduce the number of sexual partners and increase the use of contraception. In fact, researchers using data from the National Survey of Family Growth found that teens who received comprehensive sex education were 50 percent less likely to get pregnant than teens who received abstinence-only education.

So why aren’t Texas Republicans actively supporting access to education and reproductive health care?

Click to expand...

Tigger said:

Something like that. Maybe some of us just put our principles in front of our pleasure.

Click to expand...

Removable Mind said:

RA...I hope you don't mind if I inject a bit more in our exchange...but related to your suggestion above...

Obviously...this isn't a black or white issue. And you know that. It's not a one-shoe-fits-all-sizes situation. Not all women's bodies respond to conception exactly the same way. Actually some women don't even know that they're pregnant at 12 week. And actually there's other mitigating situations.

I know that you are a reasonable, logical, compassionate person. But I feel compelled to ask you: Do you "honestly" believe that the remaining 15% of abortions performed outside the most common stage of pregnancy (12 weeks and under)...that most of these women get abortions simply out of convenience...or just abortion on demand, which involves terminating a healthy fetus?

We already know that 1.5% are 20 plus week abortions which are due to defective fetal issues and health/life of the woman.

Given your feelings and beliefs on the matter...I suggest that the only real number to look at with any genuine scrutiny is the 3.8% of abortions between 13 weeks and 19 weeks. There are so many reasons that can be involved in this matter and things that we can't imagine as men. But even for women, this has to be one of the hardest decisions ever.

I think it would be, by far, the exception, and not the rule, that women just have no feelings or self-regard as to the seriousness of abortion and means no more than like getting their nails done.

But...we realistically know....that for the vast majority of women who have abortions...don't frivolously abort mature fetuses... according to publicly available information.

Yes. Anything is possible. Anything that can happen will happen, but when we've looked at legitimate forms of information that tells us women aren't having late term abortions who have healthy fetuses. Why assume otherwise?

Why assume that anything that anybody does in our laws or hospital/doctors/clinic policies would stop "the exception - the woman who would abort a health fetus 20 weeks and up". Just like all other human behaviors...regardless of laws, if someone is determine to do something they will.

In the case of abortion...while it could happen...it's just not the norm.

Women who don't want to have an unwanted pregnancy don't delay anymore than they have to. Most women take this matter with a heavy burden to consider... and with great stress and concern.

I am not charged as keeper of my brothers and sisters for good reason. I can't control what anybody else does with their lives. But...MOST IMPORTANTLY...I have to trust that all women have the capacity to make sound choices and decisions for themselves. And they have to trust us as men to do the same.

Thus far...humanity as a whole...hasn't created even the beginning of what might be the impetus for the extinction of humankind caused by reproduction, much less abortion. Thanks...

Click to expand...

joko104 said:

19 of the 24 are not "surgical facilities." Therefore they are illegal. None of the remaining 6 have hospital practice privileges and the threat of terrorist, murderous ProLifers make that unlike.

If you could not vote without traveling over 1000 miles and spending $2000+, for most people that would be effectively outlawing voting for most people.

ProLife Republicans did not pass this legislation to facilitate women getting abortions.

Click to expand...

Tigger said:

Something like that. Maybe some of us just put our principles in front of our pleasure.

Click to expand...

Thirty-seven of 42 Texas abortion facilities do not currently meet ASC standards.

“Forcing clinics to become ASC’s doesn’t make any medical, logistical sense,” says Tilton-Jones of the provision. “Family planning clinics keep costs low with general anesthesia. They make no incisions. That’s the risky stuff.

Ambulatory care costs three to five times more to operate. These clinics only have two years to meet the standards of a mini-hospital. There’s no way they can pull it off.”

Imposing a blanket restriction on abortion would be one travesty.

But the ASC provision in SB1 will not only effectively end the practice of abortion in most of the state of Texas,
it will also force the closure of medical facilities that provide free or low-cost healthcare services specifically geared toward women.

Thirty-one percent of Texan women are currently uninsured. For many poor and rural women, family planning clinics are their only source for sexually transmitted disease screenings, contraception, pap smears and screenings for diabetes and high blood pressure.

“For many Texas women, their annual women’s health checkup at these clinics is the only access to medical care they’ll get all year,” says Tilton Jones.

Worse yet, a cynical pall hangs over SB1’s ASC provision.

As the Texas Observer first reported, Texas Governor Rick Perry’s sister Milla Perry Jones is vice president of government relations at United Surgical Partners International. Her role for that company is to lobby on behalf of ASC’s.

Click to expand...

RabidAlpaca said:

I've never made any claim that most, or even a lot of late abortions happen out of convenience, just that when they do occur, they should be illegal. As I pointed out with my analogy before, just because not a lot of people stab other people in the face with a pencil, doesn't mean it needs to be legal.

My plan accounts for all of these situations. If a doctor determines the abortion isn't "willy-nilly", and had a fundamental medical reasoning, then that exception would be entirely legal. The only group of people you and I don't agree on are elective abortionists after 12 weeks. THIS is the only category we disagree on. So looking at ONLY elective abortions after 12 weeks, what real reasoning does someone need 20+ weeks instead of 12 weeks to make a decision?



These facilities have not closed yet. You have not looked at their books or queried their investors about their financial situation. You're somehow pushing the fantasy that it is impossible for a clinic to get within regulations. Every hospital and plastic surgeon in the country meets these standards, and I don't see you saying every one of them is "illegal".

Click to expand...

Removable Mind said:

Gosh, Tigger...I'm really starting to get concerned for you.

Click to expand...

joko104 said:

Your should change "our" in your second sentence to "other people's."

Click to expand...

joko104 said:

But, as Tigger stated, the solution is simple. 13 year old girls should not get themselves raped. It's the girl's fault. So if she dies of such desperate toxins - that maybe the girl learned about online or from a friend - that girl deserved to die anyway (according to JayDubya) as her just punishment for murdering her uncle's or step-father's rape baby.

Welcome to Texas, the rapist's favorite state.

Click to expand...

minnie616 said:

No that is not my solution.
No most abortion restriction laws in the USA do not take into account a malformed fetus.

I miscarried a very malformed fetus at 20 weeks gestation.
I was very lucky that my body went into early labor and expelled it naturally or I would have had to a late term abortion or taken the chance I would have had an infection that would made me sterile or even perhaps have cost me my life.

Click to expand...

ecofarm said:

The article was clear: there is NO CAUSATION between legal abortion and the rate of abortions. The only causation illustrated by the study is that of access to birth control decreasing unwanted pregnancies and thus abortions - which any moron could deduce without a study.

The study is useless. Everyone knows that access to birth control will reduce unwanted pregnancies.

It's nothing but a misleading title. Correlation does not equal causation. Do you understand?

Click to expand...

Tigger said:

Why would that be? It's most definitely not needed.



If these people could be responsible in dealing with the consequence of the act, I'd personally have no problem letting them do whatever they damn well pleased, joko. However, a large percentage of them have categorically proven an inability to deal with the potential consequences of their actions. Instead they either commit a major moral crime (abortion), or in many cases they allow themselves to be put in a position where YOU and I end up paying for the child instead.

My fiance and I choose not to engage in sexual activity for two reasons.... 1. We are not at a point where we can afford to be dealing with the costs of a pregnancy as we prepare for our wedding next year and 2. The fact that we do not believe that having a child prior to marriage is appropriate. Yes, there are things we could do to REDUCE the chance of a pregnancy occuring, but there is only one thing we can do to ENSURE it doesn't happen - remain celebate.

Click to expand...

Tigger said:

Why would that be? It's most definitely not needed.

If these people could be responsible in dealing with the consequence of the act, I'd personally have no problem letting them do whatever they damn well pleased, joko. However, a large percentage of them have categorically proven an inability to deal with the potential consequences of their actions. Instead they either commit a major moral crime (abortion), or in many cases they allow themselves to be put in a position where YOU and I end up paying for the child instead.
My fiance and I choose not to engage in sexual activity for two reasons.... 1. We are not at a point where we can afford to be dealing with the costs of a pregnancy as we prepare for our wedding next year and 2. The fact that we do not believe that having a child prior to marriage is appropriate. Yes, there are things we could do to REDUCE the chance of a pregnancy occuring, but there is only one thing we can do to ENSURE it doesn't happen - remain celebate.

Click to expand...

RabidAlpaca said:

I don't think any of us are pretending this is about women's health. It's about protecting those that can't protect themselves.

Click to expand...

digsbe said:

Texas Senate passes sweeping new abortion restrictions | Fox News

The hotly contested bill appears to have passed in the Texas state senate and is being sent to the governor's desk. It appears that we've inched a little bit closer to progressing as a nation.

Click to expand...