9,200 Fewer Abortions in Texas After Passage of Pro-Life Law

[I.P.Freely]

More strict Abortion laws save lives.

A year after the passage of a controversial bill restricting abortion in Texas, there will be an estimated 9,200 fewer abortions performed in the state, according to a report published earlier this month by the Texas Policy Evaluation Project.

"Compared to Period 1 [the six months prior to the bill's debate], there was a 13% decline in the state's abortion rate in Period 3 (the same six-month period one year later), corresponding to about 9,200 fewer abortions annually," according to the report, entitled “Change in Abortion Services After Implementation of a Restrictive Law in Texas.”

It also says that Texas had 41 abortion clinics as of May 2013. By November 2013, that number had been reduced to 22 and is expected to fall as low as six by September, when all abortion clinics in Texas must follow ambulatory surgical center (ASC) requirements.

The number of chemical abortions also decreased by 70 percent.

The legislation, which was passed and signed into law by Gov. Rick Perry last July, prohibits most abortions after 20 weeks, requires that all abortionists have admitting privileges at a local hospital, and mandates that all chemical abortions be performed according to FDA regulations.

Report Estimates 9,200 Fewer Abortions in Texas After Passage of Pro-Life Law | CNS News

Israel does provide a nice Twin destination holiday for all you Texans in need. 1 day in the clinic and seven at the beach
Historical abortion statistics, Israel

 

[Freewill]

So we have a deal? We'll make sure their daddiy supports them or have daddy's ass in a penitentiary.

Why should he do that?

What if he thought in good faith she was using contraception?

What if he wore a rubber and it broke.

So really, he should be on the hook for 18 years of child support for a child neither he nor his partner wanted because it offends YOUR religious sensibilities?

What if she thought he was using condom?

What if he told her he had a vasectomy?

So really the unborn child is no one's responsibility because you don't give a shit?

 

[NYcarbineer]

Au contraire, ErroneousJoe....


It is imperative to both point out that intercourse is the precursor, a fact over which one almost always has control....

....and to indicate evil to our Liberal pals who seem unable to recognize same.

sure.

You have control.

If you want to have sex, you can.

If you want to suck "that little problem" into a sink, you can.

And no religious asshole has jack-shit to say about it.

What a fucking country.

Truly, 'erroneous.'


What does religion have to do with whether or not murder is an acceptable passtime?


By what logic does one individual have the right to end the life of a totally innocent stranger that they don't even know?

Since abortion is not murder and not even you believe that it is, that question is not relevant.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Based on the consideration you've given to the life of the baby, one might conclude that you'd be fine with shooting the Brinks guard if said woman needed a new pair of alligator boots and matching wallet......

"Those sound like excellent reasons...."

They might to someone who can't tell the difference between a zygote and an adult human being in a uniform.

Now....see if you can follow this: zygotes-> foetuses->babies.


Too difficult for you to comprehend?


Not too difficult for those who purchase condoms to comprehend.

When you state for the record that you believe a woman should go to prison for life because she's used the morning after pill to terminate a pregnancy because you believe a fertilized egg is a person and that abortion therefore is murder,

THEN you'll have, right or wrong, a coherent and consistent point.

Until then you're just spewing horseshit.

 

[Jroc]

We can't take in those brown kids when there are white fetuses to save?

the argument was these poor aborted babies if born might be a burden on the welfare system.....Why is it you liberals don't have any problem with bringing in unlimited numbers of poor kids from other countries?...hypocritical?

 

[ThoughtCrimes]

It seems that you frequently require my aid in understanding reality.

Well, noblesse oblige.....



1. Conservatism embraces this brand of pro-choice sentiment: we fully acknowledge a woman’s ability to make choices about her own body, and to prevent unwanted pregnancies.
The choice that operates is this: contraceptives may fail…the decision to engage in sexual intercourse is to accept the possibility that pregnancy may occur. This means the decision to accept all of the responsibilities that may become necessary.


a. When deciding to buy a house, there is the implicit acceptance of future mortgage payments, upkeep, insurance, etc.

b. The choice to which an individual has the right of decision is to have sex or not, rather than to abort or not.

c. No unjust intrusion on the unborn child’s right of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness is allowed.



2. Based on this position, the obligation of government is to protect the lives of the unborn by restricting access to abortion only to those situations in which the mother’s life is in danger, or to cases of rape or incest.



3. The conservative rejects the view that inconvenience of a mother’s informed choice outweighs the unalienable right to life of the child she bears by virtue of that choice.

On-demand abortion is antithetical to the ideas and ideals upon which America was built.
“We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.”
Thomas Jefferson.

“Voices of the Damned,” found in “Reinventing the Right,” by Robert Wheeler, pp. 89-99.

Your typical obfuscation and avoidance!

Again, what is the Constitutional authority for a government entity to place ANY control on a woman's vagina in any wise? I don't give a tinkers damn about your contrived moralistic quotes...they ain't law. What is your basis in the law of the land for the People to trample on their Amendment IX & XIV retained non-enumerated and due process rights?

Cite the Constitutional Authority for any government entity to impede or obstruct a woman's choice to terminate a pregnancy in the first trimester, little one. I can't make it any clearer. The easy response would be that there is none!

I've given you your instruction.

Try to learn from it.

You're quite the fraud you know. You make a claim and every time when push comes to shove, you fail to support your assertions. You can't cite the Constitutional authority because NONE EXISTS!

 

[RKMBrown]

Interesting.

The question I have is why? What has this law don’t to reduce abortions? Has it simply restricted access and if that is the case (as I think it is) are you banking on this being a good thing? I have serious issues with the government interceding with anyone’s body – even in the case of pregnancy. I can also see this as essentially killing the bill in the courts – limiting access based on arbitrary rules.

I actually agree with the 20 weeks part – it makes sense to me that abortion should be regulated within the gestational period BUT I would doubt that is the barrier that reduced abortions overall. Closing all the clinics down – that is the likely cause.

It did not restrict access, it simply set a bar for safety that was a bit higher than the coat hanger shops the abortion mills were running. The coat hanger shop owners apparently left to go to other states where they can get more profit per abortion.

Well, just flatly stating that really doesn’t mean anything. It did interest me though and it seems there are some numbers behind that.

Court Records Indicate Nearly 1,000 Abortion Patients Likely Hospitalized Annually in Texas

The problem? I can’t find any of this from a legitimate source. Operation rescue, right to life or nay other advocacy group is not really an objective and believable source with this type of information. Do you have anything more concrete?

I don't understand the question. All of the facilities in question did not have sufficient procedures to properly provide emergent care for their patients. These procedure are standard outpatient surgical / ambulatory procedures. This is why the law was written. You're asking for concrete proof that the facilities in question were not providing the new level of care? The proof is in the pudding. They left.

 

[RKMBrown]

More strict Abortion laws save lives.

A year after the passage of a controversial bill restricting abortion in Texas, there will be an estimated 9,200 fewer abortions performed in the state, according to a report published earlier this month by the Texas Policy Evaluation Project.

"Compared to Period 1 [the six months prior to the bill's debate], there was a 13% decline in the state's abortion rate in Period 3 (the same six-month period one year later), corresponding to about 9,200 fewer abortions annually," according to the report, entitled “Change in Abortion Services After Implementation of a Restrictive Law in Texas.”

It also says that Texas had 41 abortion clinics as of May 2013. By November 2013, that number had been reduced to 22 and is expected to fall as low as six by September, when all abortion clinics in Texas must follow ambulatory surgical center (ASC) requirements.

The number of chemical abortions also decreased by 70 percent.

The legislation, which was passed and signed into law by Gov. Rick Perry last July, prohibits most abortions after 20 weeks, requires that all abortionists have admitting privileges at a local hospital, and mandates that all chemical abortions be performed according to FDA regulations.

Report Estimates 9,200 Fewer Abortions in Texas After Passage of Pro-Life Law | CNS News

There will be fewer abortions that you know of, you mean. Abortions will happen regardless. They will simply be unsafe abortions - which is what you conservatives want.

Yeah cause increasing safety is the same as forcing unsafe abortions. How many times have you been dropped on your haid?

 

[chikenwing]

Abortion, all hail Satan.

My opinion is that Noah's flood was real, a flood story has been passed down from many civilizations, the details can be argued.

No. It's a myth. Never fucking happened.

My opinion is that perhaps by making abortion harder that women MIGHT be taking better care of themselves. Using contraception properly. Or just abstaining from behavior that causes the liberal curse of pregnancy. Would that not be a good result? Instead of just taking little responsibility and letting the death of the unborn be the result.

Your whole premise is contingent on the belief that a kidney-bean sized fetus is the moral equivalent of a newborn. Even people who want babies don't think that.

People, myself very included, are like water or electricity they take the path of least resistance. People won't always do the right thing, such as a simple thing as wear a seat belt. For whatever reason the 2 seconds it takes to put it on is just too much for some people. So they receive more severe injuries when they do in fact have an accident. So laws are passed to try and get people to do the right thing. Will anyone argue that abortions is the right thing?

yeah, I'd argue that it is the right thing for some people who aren't financially or emotionally cut out to be parents.

As for the BS about choice. ALL laws are about restricting choice. You do not have the choice to kill someone. You do not have the choice to inflict harm onto yourself. You do not have the choice, without consequences, not to wear a seat belt.

Again, I find it amusing that someone who calls himself "Freewill" wants the government regulating what people do with their sex organs.

Its what people do with other people,but ignoring that fact is convenient for people like yourself. The sex organ thing is a lame distraction attempt try again.

You have zero proof that the flood never happened zero,but people like yourself,can't have people with other thoughts opinions and knowledge,just cant happen for your type sad but true.

 

[RKMBrown]

Your typical obfuscation and avoidance!

Again, what is the Constitutional authority for a government entity to place ANY control on a woman's vagina in any wise? I don't give a tinkers damn about your contrived moralistic quotes...they ain't law. What is your basis in the law of the land for the People to trample on their Amendment IX & XIV retained non-enumerated and due process rights?

Cite the Constitutional Authority for any government entity to impede or obstruct a woman's choice to terminate a pregnancy in the first trimester, little one. I can't make it any clearer. The easy response would be that there is none!

I've given you your instruction.

Try to learn from it.

You're quite the fraud you know. You make a claim and every time when push comes to shove, you fail to support your assertions. You can't cite the Constitutional authority because NONE EXISTS!

You asked for a "cite [on] the Constitutional Authority for any government entity to impede or obstruct a woman's choice to terminate a pregnancy in the first trimester..."

The fourteen amendment states in part:
"..nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws."

Thus, this explicitly states that the states have the right to deprive any person of life, liberty, or property with due process of law and no you don't have to be a criminal or even accused of being a criminal for this to come into effect. This due process clause is not the same as the due process clause in the bill of rights. This due process is any damn thing the government says it is. The feds through intimidation force the states to bend to the fed's will if they want to continue to receive money from the federal government.

Note the clause that states "nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws" would appear to apply to the children being aborted. Of course the current SCOTUS rulings only agree a child is protected if partly outside the womb and / or if the mother has not asked for the child to be murdered.

Further the 16th amendment allows the government to take all of your income to use as it sees fit. For example, to spend on abortions and/or to spend on forcing people to not have abortions.

In short, the due process clause of the 14th amendment closed the coffin on liberty for all future generations and the 16th provided for a steady stream of funds for the nails.

 

[Spoonman]

Classic Republican moronic logic at work: If you pretend it no longer exists that means it ceases to exist! POOF! No more abortions because we restricted access!

By the fallacy of that logic, NO ONE was drinking during the prohibition era because alcohol was banned!

How utterly stupid of anyone to think that abortions will magically stop because Texas restricted access to them. Texas sent them underground or out of state is all.

and no criminals will have guns if we pass tougher gun laws

 

[ThoughtCrimes]

I've given you your instruction.

Try to learn from it.

You're quite the fraud you know. You make a claim and every time when push comes to shove, you fail to support your assertions. You can't cite the Constitutional authority because NONE EXISTS!

You asked for a "cite [on] the Constitutional Authority for any government entity to impede or obstruct a woman's choice to terminate a pregnancy in the first trimester..."

The fourteen amendment states in part:
"..nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws."

Thus, this explicitly states that the states have the right to deprive any person of life, liberty, or property with due process of law and no you don't have to be a criminal or even accused of being a criminal for this to come into effect. This due process clause is not the same as the due process clause in the bill of rights. This due process is any damn thing the government says it is. The feds through intimidation force the states to bend to the fed's will if they want to continue to receive money from the federal government.

Note the clause that states "nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws" would appear to apply to the children being aborted. Of course the current SCOTUS rulings only agree a child is protected if partly outside the womb and / or if the mother has not asked for the child to be murdered.

Further the 16th amendment allows the government to take all of your income to use as it sees fit. For example, to spend on abortions and/or to spend on forcing people to not have abortions.

In short, the due process clause of the 14th amendment closed the coffin on liberty for all future generations and the 16th provided for a steady stream of funds for the nails.

Foolishness!

Twisting existing law and Court established precedent to fit your purpose does no create new law. Regarding Amendment XIV, SCOTUS says you are dead WRONG; see Roe v. Wade.

 

[hazlnut]

More strict Abortion laws save lives.

A year after the passage of a controversial bill restricting abortion in Texas, there will be an estimated 9,200 fewer abortions performed in the state, according to a report published earlier this month by the Texas Policy Evaluation Project.

"Compared to Period 1 [the six months prior to the bill's debate], there was a 13% decline in the state's abortion rate in Period 3 (the same six-month period one year later), corresponding to about 9,200 fewer abortions annually," according to the report, entitled “Change in Abortion Services After Implementation of a Restrictive Law in Texas.”

It also says that Texas had 41 abortion clinics as of May 2013. By November 2013, that number had been reduced to 22 and is expected to fall as low as six by September, when all abortion clinics in Texas must follow ambulatory surgical center (ASC) requirements.

The number of chemical abortions also decreased by 70 percent.

The legislation, which was passed and signed into law by Gov. Rick Perry last July, prohibits most abortions after 20 weeks, requires that all abortionists have admitting privileges at a local hospital, and mandates that all chemical abortions be performed according to FDA regulations.

Report Estimates 9,200 Fewer Abortions in Texas After Passage of Pro-Life Law | CNS News

You say it likes its a good thing women are forced to carry to term babies they don't want or can't care for.

No lives were saved -- livers were likely ruined. And the crime rate will skyrocket in about 15-18 years.

 

[Contumacious]

Au contraire, ErroneousJoe....


It is imperative to both point out that intercourse is the precursor, a fact over which one almost always has control....

....and to indicate evil to our Liberal pals who seem unable to recognize same.

sure.

You have control.

If you want to have sex, you can.

If you want to suck "that little problem" into a sink, you can.

And no religious asshole has jack-shit to say about it.

What a fucking country.

Truly, 'erroneous.'


What does religion have to do with whether or not murder is an acceptable passtime?


By what logic does one individual have the right to end the life of a totally innocent stranger that they don't even know?

When that entity INSIDE HER BODY is eating her food, using her blood, her air, her space.

When the woman has decided that she can NOT afford either emotionally or financially to take care of the FETUS.

.

 

[RKMBrown]

sure.

You have control.

If you want to have sex, you can.

If you want to suck "that little problem" into a sink, you can.

And no religious asshole has jack-shit to say about it.

What a fucking country.

Truly, 'erroneous.'


What does religion have to do with whether or not murder is an acceptable passtime?


By what logic does one individual have the right to end the life of a totally innocent stranger that they don't even know?

When that entity INSIDE HER BODY is eating her food, using her blood, her air, her space.

When the woman has decided that she can NOT afford either emotionally or financially to take care of the FETUS.

.

Yet it's perfectly fine when illegal immigrants and welfare queens use my money to eat my food that I produced with my blood. Why can't I just have you democrats who refuse to support yourselves aborted?

What makes you think anyone owns breathable air space? OMFG

 

[Contumacious]

Truly, 'erroneous.'


What does religion have to do with whether or not murder is an acceptable passtime?


By what logic does one individual have the right to end the life of a totally innocent stranger that they don't even know?

When that entity INSIDE HER BODY is eating her food, using her blood, her air, her space.

When the woman has decided that she can NOT afford either emotionally or financially to take care of the FETUS.

.

Yet it's perfectly fine when illegal immigrants and welfare queens use my money to eat my food that I produced with my blood. Why can't I just have you democrats who refuse to support yourselves aborted?

Yo Vern, and I have supported that when, how?

What makes you think anyone owns breathable air space? OMFG

I had no idea that the EPA had finally nationalized oxygen.

.

 

[g5000]

Well, besides the fact that your source is CNS news, a Christian Website that reports Noah's Flood like that was a real thing.

How would they know how many chemical abortions occurred.

How many of those women just went to neighboring states to get abortions because it was less of a hassle?

abortion bans don't stop abortions guy.

My guess, your going to find the birth rate didn't go up in Texas.

abortion bans don't stop abortions guy.


bans never work out

Really? I'm pretty certain that even the worse case number of abortions in the U.S. prior to Roe V. Wade were far, far fewer than afterwards.

I used to believe that, too, and even started a topic on another forum some years ago to prove it.

However, as I investigated the facts, they ended up proving the abortion rate was just as high before Roe v. Wade as after. I had to eat some crow.

I did expose the myth about back alley abortions killing five to ten thousand women a year was a total lie, though.

Because of that investigation I did, I have decided that most pro-life efforts are wasted. Instead of focusing so much unproductive effort at overturning Roe v. Wade, we should be focusing on preventing unwanted pregnancies. This would be far more impactful on the abortion rate.

 

[g5000]

How utterly stupid of anyone to think that abortions will magically stop because Texas restricted access to them. Texas sent them underground or out of state is all.

This assertion will have to be supported by evidence of an increase in the number of abortions performed in surrounding states.

 

[RKMBrown]

[/B]

When that entity INSIDE HER BODY is eating her food, using her blood, her air, her space.

When the woman has decided that she can NOT afford either emotionally or financially to take care of the FETUS.

.

Yet it's perfectly fine when illegal immigrants and welfare queens use my money to eat my food that I produced with my blood. Why can't I just have you democrats who refuse to support yourselves aborted?

Yo Vern, and I have supported that when, how?

What makes you think anyone owns breathable air space? OMFG

I had no idea that the EPA had finally nationalized oxygen.

.

Make up your mind. Is it "her air, her space" or shared air and shared space? You think proximity to air and space gives one ownership?

How can you defend the right of a woman to kill a baby based on emotion and/or financial hardship, then turn around and not defend the same for dependent adults?

Again make up your mind, we can be forced to take care of people or not?

Do you not see that your statements are inconsistent with your beliefs? If anyone should be defended, nurtured, and taken care of... why not start with babies? And if no one should and murder is ok for babies, why have laws on killings at all? What's the frigging point if murderers can get their rocks off by aborting babies?

 

[Contumacious]

abortion bans don't stop abortions guy.


bans never work out

Really? I'm pretty certain that even the worse case number of abortions in the U.S. prior to Roe V. Wade were far, far fewer than afterwards.

I used to believe that, too, and even started a topic on another forum some years ago to prove it.

However, as I investigated the facts, they ended up proving the abortion rate was just as high before Roe v. Wade as after. I had to eat some crow.

I did expose the myth about back alley abortions killing five to ten thousand women a year was a total lie, though.

Because of that investigation I did, I have decided that most pro-life efforts are wasted. Instead of focusing so much unproductive effort at overturning Roe v. Wade, we should be focusing on preventing unwanted pregnancies. This would be far more impactful on the abortion rate.

And you are going to accomplish that how?

The welfare state sends conflicting messages

Do not get pregnant.

But if you do the TAXPAYERS will

1- pay for your pregnancy expenses, ie, OB , hospital

2- the taxpayers will feed, insure, clothe and quench the children thirst - ask "dadtoseven" if you have any doubts