Virginia late-term abortion bill labelled 'infanticide'

[j-mac]

The Democratic bill sought to change current law to allow for late-term abortions if the mother's physical or mental safety are at risk.Under current Virginia law, third-trimester abortions are only permitted if the risk to the mother's life is "substantial and irremediable" - language that Democrats wanted removed.
It also would have required the sign-off of only one doctor rather than three before the procedure is performed.

"The infant would be delivered, the infant would be kept comfortable, the infant would be resuscitated if that's what the mother and the family desired. And then a discussion would ensue between the physicians and the mother." - Governor Northam

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-47066307

This is truly sick stuff....What the hell is the matter with people?

 

[trouble13]

This is truly sick stuff....What the hell is the matter with people?

I believe parents should have the right to abort up until their 18th birthday

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk

 

[Keridan]

Mental safety? Post partum depression is now grounds for justifiable homicide.

 

[Jezcoe]

How many threads does it have to be explained in that Gov Northam was speaking of a child that is born nonviable or or with severe deformities that will lead to death? And if the family and their doctor believe that palliative was care is the best course that that is their right to do so?

How many threads?

 

[Keridan]

How many threads does it have to be explained in that Gov Northam was speaking of a child that is born nonviable or or with severe deformities that will lead to death? And if the family and their doctor believe that palliative was care is the best course that that is their right to do so?

How many threads?

I actually thought that part was covered. I was just cringing hard on the mothers mental health as a reason for late term abortion.

He phrased it badly, but the gov was referring to exceptional births of children who are basically vegetables imo.

 

[lwf]

This is truly sick stuff....What the hell is the matter with people?

The more salacious an article sounds, the less likely it is to be factual. According to his explanation, he was talking about non-viable pregnancies with severe fetal abnormalities. And this is already what happens, by the way. We call it "discontinuing life-support." People who give birth to alive babies with no brain activity are allowed to discontinue life-support. Nobody actually wants to allow a mother to have the choice to "abort" healthy babies already born.

Let's tone down the hysteria here.

 

[Jezcoe]

I actually thought that part was covered. I was just cringing hard on the mothers mental health as a reason for late term abortion.

He phrased it badly, but the gov was referring to exceptional births of children who are basically vegetables imo.

Well... I don’t think he phrased it poorly if one listens to the entire thing.

Think of the issue as the same as a DNR and taking someone off of life support.

I think that the usual suspects are ginning up controversy on purpose and people are reacting without putting too much thought into it because apparently that is what the internet does or something.

 

[nota bene]

From Fox News:

A Democratic co-sponsor of a controversial Virginia bill that would repeal restrictions on third-trimester abortions is apologizing to her constituents for supporting the legislation, saying she didn’t read the bill or know how far it went.

...“By now you have heard about the abortion bill, or seen the video,” Adams said in the email [to her constituents]. “I vaguely remember signing on to this, and I did this in solidarity with my colleague and as a symbolic gesture for a woman’s right to choose.”

Adams said she didn’t know what was in the legislation before adding her name to it. “I did not read a bill I agreed to co-patron and that wasn’t smart or typical. I will work harder and be better for it.” https://www.foxnews.com/politics/de...ill-apologizes-says-she-did-not-read-the-bill

 

[Lutherf]

Mental safety? Post partum depression is now grounds for justifiable homicide.

This bill failed. The one in NY that does the same thing passed...to great applause.

 

[Lutherf]

From Fox News:

A Democratic co-sponsor of a controversial Virginia bill that would repeal restrictions on third-trimester abortions is apologizing to her constituents for supporting the legislation, saying she didn’t read the bill or know how far it went.

...“By now you have heard about the abortion bill, or seen the video,” Adams said in the email [to her constituents]. “I vaguely remember signing on to this, and I did this in solidarity with my colleague and as a symbolic gesture for a woman’s right to choose.”

Adams said she didn’t know what was in the legislation before adding her name to it. “I did not read a bill I agreed to co-patron and that wasn’t smart or typical. I will work harder and be better for it.” https://www.foxnews.com/politics/de...ill-apologizes-says-she-did-not-read-the-bill

Why bother to read what you sign? If your party says it's good then you really need to sign on anyway. Got to be a team player and all!

 

[No Soup For You]

How many threads does it have to be explained in that Gov Northam was speaking of a child that is born nonviable or or with severe deformities that will lead to death? And if the family and their doctor believe that palliative was care is the best course that that is their right to do so?

How many threads?

The title of the thread is about the abortion bill that was put forth by the Virginia Democratic lawmaker and not some repeat about the governor's comments. The bill was sponsored by two Democratic lawmakers, one of whom has already said that had she known how far it went for allowing abortion she would not have agreed to it.

It is the bill itself that is truly sick. Gov. Northam didn't help it at all with his comments either. So you can try and use him as a scapegoat to spin or interpret his words in as many ways as you want to try and water down the outrage, the proposed bill and what it horrifically allows will always remain stuck to the party that introduced it.

 

[Jezcoe]

The title of the thread is about the abortion bill that was put forth by the Virginia Democratic lawmaker and not some repeat about the governor's comments. The bill was sponsored by two Democratic lawmakers, one of whom has already said that had she known how far it went for allowing abortion she would not have agreed to it.

It is the bill itself that is truly sick. Gov. Northam didn't help it at all with his comments either. So you can try and use him as a scapegoat to spin or interpret his words in as many ways as you want to try and water down the outrage, the proposed bill and what it horrifically allows will always remain stuck to the party that introduced it.

A question about Kathy Tran’s comments, do you think that if a woman who carries to term would ask for an abortion during labor? And if she did do you think that the doctor would perform it?

Is this something that people actually think happens?

 

[No Soup For You]

A question about Kathy Tran’s comments, do you think that if a woman who carries to term would ask for an abortion during labor? And if she did do you think that the doctor would perform it?

Is this something that people actually think happens?

This is not about whether a certain scenario will or will not happen or the odds of it. This is about the latitude/leniency that her bill gives. Just watch the video of her answering that question. Her response was "Yes" to a general question.

If your scenario and odds was what she truly meant then she had every opportunity to elaborate or expand on during that testimony. She did not. Instead we got a very long moment of silence before and after her response. I am sure she was also questioning herself in her mind about it at that moment whether it's right or wrong...

 

[lwf]

The title of the thread is about the abortion bill that was put forth by the Virginia Democratic lawmaker and not some repeat about the governor's comments. The bill was sponsored by two Democratic lawmakers, one of whom has already said that had she known how far it went for allowing abortion she would not have agreed to it.

It is the bill itself that is truly sick. Gov. Northam didn't help it at all with his comments either. So you can try and use him as a scapegoat to spin or interpret his words in as many ways as you want to try and water down the outrage, the proposed bill and what it horrifically allows will always remain stuck to the party that introduced it.

I read through the bill:

In brief:

"Neither the state nor any of its political subdivisions shall:

Restrict an individual person from preventing, commencing, continuing, or terminating that individual's pregnancy prior to fetal viability.

Restrict an individual person from terminating that individual's pregnancy after fetal viability when necessary to preserve the health or life of that individual.

"fetal viability" means that stage of gestation where the attending physician, taking into account the particular facts of the case, has determined that there is a reasonable likelihood of the fetus' sustained survival outside of the womb with or without artificial support.

The state of Rhode Island or any city or town shall not include in any health insurance contracts, plans, or policies covering employees, any provision which shall provide coverage for induced abortions (except where the life of the mother would be endangered if the fetus were carried to term, or where the pregnancy resulted from rape or incest)."

Hardly the treatise on infanticide it's been made out to be.

 

[Jezcoe]

This is not about whether a certain scenario will or will not happen or the odds of it. This is about the latitude/leniency that her bill gives. Just watch the video of her answering that question. Her response was "Yes" to a general question.

If your scenario and odds was what she truly meant then she had every opportunity to elaborate or expand on during that testimony. She did not. Instead we got a very long moment of silence before and after her response. I am sure she was also questioning herself in her mind about it at that moment whether it's right or wrong...

I think that the pause was that she knew that no matter what she said it would be used against her.

The facts of the matter are that the vast vast vast majority of late term abortions are for women who want the baby but are unable to keep it to term.

It is a tragedy. I take umbrage at the thought that not only is their tragedy being painted as some sort of moral failing but also that there are those who believe it right to insert the State into that tragedy so they can feel better about themselves yet have zero skin in the game.

 

[No Soup For You]

I read through the bill:

In brief:

"Neither the state nor any of its political subdivisions shall:

Restrict an individual person from preventing, commencing, continuing, or terminating that individual's pregnancy prior to fetal viability.

Restrict an individual person from terminating that individual's pregnancy after fetal viability when necessary to preserve the health or life of that individual.

"fetal viability" means that stage of gestation where the attending physician, taking into account the particular facts of the case, has determined that there is a reasonable likelihood of the fetus' sustained survival outside of the womb with or without artificial support.

The state of Rhode Island or any city or town shall not include in any health insurance contracts, plans, or policies covering employees, any provision which shall provide coverage for induced abortions (except where the life of the mother would be endangered if the fetus were carried to term, or where the pregnancy resulted from rape or incest)."

Hardly the treatise on infanticide it's been made out to be.

Not sure how you read through the bill when what you are quoting is from Rhode Island...

 

[Acadia]

Mental safety? Post partum depression is now grounds for justifiable homicide.

Or, how about a lawsuit if mother is depressed in 3rd trimester and doctor refused to abort the healthy baby. After birth, she has PPD. Lawsuit for refusing to terminate? Could she claim she was well within her rights but didn't get proper or available care?

 

[Acadia]

I actually thought that part was covered. I was just cringing hard on the mothers mental health as a reason for late term abortion.

He phrased it badly, but the gov was referring to exceptional births of children who are basically vegetables imo.

His response dodged the question. Northam thought he could baffle her with bullchit and walk away without addressing the issue. His defensive remark when the chitstorm blew up today was even worse.
Deflection looks like none of them wants to say the words: We are supporting aborting a viable, otherwise healthy, late-term baby in the womb because the mother wants it.

 

[digsbe]

Oh Democrats... the party that wants to tell us it's immoral to have a border wall to keep out illegal immigrants and try to cut back on drug crimes/human trafficking while also trying to pass bills legalizing infanticide and celebrate legalizing atrocities like late term abortion. When a similar bill passed in New York the World Trade Center was lit up in pink.

 

[lwf]

Not sure how you read through the bill when what you are quoting is from Rhode Island...

Do you have a link to the bill?

 

[No Soup For You]

Do you have a link to the bill?

Here you go:

Bill Tracking - 2019 session > Legislation

 

[Khalix]

A question about Kathy Tran’s comments, do you think that if a woman who carries to term would ask for an abortion during labor? And if she did do you think that the doctor would perform it?

Is this something that people actually think happens?

What happens when they are denied?

 

[ClaraD]

Ok, this is personal to me, because I almost died during a pregnancy...because I was pigheaded and thought at the time that 'God' would save me if I didn't have an abortion. My baby was attached to my intestines and the exterior of my fallopian tube and uterus. It survived to the 4th month, then my fallopian tube ruptured and was ripped away from my ovary and the baby also damaged and perforated my uterus....I nearly died. I spent 2 weeks in the hospital, half of it in ICU. Did I want an abortion? No, I was pig headed to the end...I wanted my child desperately...and now I can no longer have children, because I wanted to save a child that was not going to survive. Luckily, I had children previously, but my stupid belief nearly cost me my life...instead of listening to my doctor who knew best. Apparently, some here think letting a mother live when it is clear the child won't survive and she may not as well...is something we shouldn't do....they think God will intervene...and they couldn't be more wrong.

 

[Lursa]

This is not about whether a certain scenario will or will not happen or the odds of it. This is about the latitude/leniency that her bill gives. Just watch the video of her answering that question. Her response was "Yes" to a general question.

If your scenario and odds was what she truly meant then she had every opportunity to elaborate or expand on during that testimony. She did not. Instead we got a very long moment of silence before and after her response. I am sure she was also questioning herself in her mind about it at that moment whether it's right or wrong...

Lattitude? Leniency?

Who needs legislation for things that dont happen? Do we need a law that forbids people from riding unicorns?

No women have elective abortions of viable fetuses.

 

[Deuce]

What happens when they are denied?

They aren't denied because they don't ask.

Women who carry a baby for 8.5 months don't suddenly decide to have an abortion.