Democrats vote down late term abortion restrictions in D.C.

[hortysir]

It's not your right to impose your beliefs on anyone and prevent them from making their own choices.

Then don't pop me for child support, later on.

Deal?

 

[Papageorgio]

Democrats want Abortion at any stage of pregnancy...Sick

House lawmakers vote down bill on DC abortion restrictions


House lawmakers Tuesday voted down a bill that would ban abortions in the District of Columbia after 20 weeks of pregnancy

The bill, which would have sharply curtailed a policy that currently allows abortions in almost every circumstance, failed in a 220-154 vote. Seventeen Democrats joined 203 Republicans to support it, but because it was considered under special rules requiring a 2/3 vote for passage, the bill won't proceed to the Democratic-controlled Senate, where it was unlikely come up for a vote.

The bill, authored by Rep. Trent Franks, R-Ariz., was based on the disputed claim that fetuses can feel pain at a gestational age of 20 weeks or older.

House lawmakers vote down bill on DC abortion restrictions | Fox News

Why is a Rep from Arizona trying to make laws for Washington DC?

You must be one of the most blissful people in the world.

 

[Clementine]

I can't believe some find it a good idea to do late term abortions. Even if the mother's life is at stake, there is still no reason to kill the baby.

They induce labor, then when the baby's head is out, they kill it before it's little arms and legs can come out through the birth canal. As long as it's still partially in the womb, it's merely a medical procedure. If the entire baby came out, it would be murder. But, at the time the baby is nearly out, any danger the pregnancy posed to the mother is over. A few seconds after the head comes out, the body comes out and it's all over. I think the actual birth takes longer and makes it more dangerous when they stop midway to puncture the baby's brain with a sharp instrument before allowing it to be fully born.

And this is done long after the current 20 week limit. Baby's born early often survive.

Here's a photo, if your conscience can handle it, of a 20 week old baby that survived and went home.

In the photo, a writing pen is placed next to the 20 week old "fetus" to demonstrate how tiny it is. It may be small, but sure looks like a human baby. To think that some would wait even longer to abort is astounding.

It's no wonder that liberals prefer to talk about fetuses as if they are nothing but masses of fat or other non-descript matter. If people were educated on things and fully understood how developed the fetus was, would they still be able to go through with the abortion? If they knew that babies after 20 weeks had a decent chance of surviving and that the baby is just a helpless and adorable little thing, who likely resembles the parents, would they reconsider their stance on the issue?

Those who refuse to look at pictures of premature babies, or the horror of a late term abortion, must be trained to chant "choice" and not look at the reality of the situation. It's easy doing something if you convince yourself that it's really nothing. Do as you will as long as it's legal, but don't be a hypocrite. At least be honest about what it is you're really doing.

Now, I know I'll piss some people off here and this post will quickly get buried because the left hates this sort of thing. I am merely of the mind that people should be educated on things and find it intolerable when people proceed with things and choose to remain ignorant. I am just here to enlighten. Sorry if you can't handle the truth.

World's most premature baby set to leave hospital - life - 20 February 2007 - New Scientist

 

[ClosedCaption]

Democrats want Abortion at any stage of pregnancy...Sick





House lawmakers vote down bill on DC abortion restrictions | Fox News

Why is a Rep from Arizona trying to make laws for Washington DC?

You must be one of the most blissful people in the world.

A simple "I dont know" would do yanno..

 

[Noomi]

Democrats support the rights of women.

And even if a fetus does feel pain at 20 weeks, just put the woman to sleep before the abortion, and the fetus is asleep as well so it won't feel anything. That it what I would prefer anyway, because no one wants to think of abortion as being painful.

JUST PUT THE CHILDREN TO SLEEP BEFORE MURDERING THEM.

Got it!!!!!!

Abortion isn't murder. Get your facts right.

Sorry, on this I cannot agree. I support the right of a woman to abort a pregnancy, but at some point, the line needs to be drawn. I think 20 weeks is more than reasonable outside of special circumstances such as the mother's life being in danger. Actually, that's about the only reason I can think of that a woman should have an abortion after 20 weeks. If she can't figure out she's pregnant or she can't decide that she wants to abort by 20 weeks, then she needs to carry to term.

I support a woman's right to abort; however, 20 weeks is more than enough time to figure it out. Do you support a woman's right to cut that baby out and throw it in the garbage if it is 30 weeks? My son was born at 30 weeks and is alive and well today. Some kids are born as early as 24 weeks and survive. I have not problem with a woman aborting a pregnancy early on, but at some point that fetus becomes a human being that needs to be protected.

Let me respond to both posts at once:

20 weeks is a fair time to make that decision - over here it is 24 weeks, but 20 is a fair compromise.
You say a line needs to be drawn. Well, you oppose abortion after week 20. What about aborting a 19 weeks and 6 days? What changes in that 24 hours that makes you go from supporting abortion to being opposed to it? See, that is the line. The line we draw is often something we can't explain.
We can't explain why we support abortion up to a certain point but not 24 hours before. At least, that is how I see it.
I look at this debate and I think about the line I have drawn. My line is drawn at birth, it is not drawn at any time the fetus is within the womb. I have thought about whether to draw the line at 6 months, but then I asked myself what was different about the fetus that it changed so much in the 24 hours beforehand? And if I allowed myself to support abortion up to the next day, what difference is there 24 hours after that?
I just felt I had to pick a point to well and truly justify drawing the line, which is why I draw the line at birth - because birth is a hugely significant change, and simply being in the womb isn't.

While I dont think you should abort at anytime outside or life of mother or rape/incest.....it's called an arbitrary number, which is better than having anytime. Remember Roe vs Wade was first trimester ONLY.....and if you dont like the number, I guess you dont like consential laws??? 12 year olds having sex with 30 year olds ok? People like you are clowns, it's so easy to poke holes in your extremist policies

You cannot pick a point and stick to it without having to justify why abortion the day before is acceptable. As to your query on consent, that is another thread, and I do not have the same beliefs.

Democrats support the rights of women.

And even if a fetus does feel pain at 20 weeks, just put the woman to sleep before the abortion, and the fetus is asleep as well so it won't feel anything. That it what I would prefer anyway, because no one wants to think of abortion as being painful.

Guess what idiot - you don't own a baby or a fetus. Fetus' and babies aren't body parts - they're individuals...

Understand that??

Also remember where that sperm came from... It's not YOUR fetus or baby...

So fuck your vagina monologue bullshit...

Not my fetus or baby So a woman who gives birth isn't a mother?

Perhaps we should abort those irresponsible "mothers" making all those "mistakes" so they wont face the choice between murdering a child or having someone else raise their mistake...............

I think we should force anti choicers to adopt a baby.

I can't believe some find it a good idea to do late term abortions. Even if the mother's life is at stake, there is still no reason to kill the baby.

They induce labor, then when the baby's head is out, they kill it before it's little arms and legs can come out through the birth canal. As long as it's still partially in the womb, it's merely a medical procedure. If the entire baby came out, it would be murder. But, at the time the baby is nearly out, any danger the pregnancy posed to the mother is over. A few seconds after the head comes out, the body comes out and it's all over. I think the actual birth takes longer and makes it more dangerous when they stop midway to puncture the baby's brain with a sharp instrument before allowing it to be fully born.

And this is done long after the current 20 week limit. Baby's born early often survive.

Here's a photo, if your conscience can handle it, of a 20 week old baby that survived and went home.

In the photo, a writing pen is placed next to the 20 week old "fetus" to demonstrate how tiny it is. It may be small, but sure looks like a human baby. To think that some would wait even longer to abort is astounding.

It's no wonder that liberals prefer to talk about fetuses as if they are nothing but masses of fat or other non-descript matter. If people were educated on things and fully understood how developed the fetus was, would they still be able to go through with the abortion? If they knew that babies after 20 weeks had a decent chance of surviving and that the baby is just a helpless and adorable little thing, who likely resembles the parents, would they reconsider their stance on the issue?

Those who refuse to look at pictures of premature babies, or the horror of a late term abortion, must be trained to chant "choice" and not look at the reality of the situation. It's easy doing something if you convince yourself that it's really nothing. Do as you will as long as it's legal, but don't be a hypocrite. At least be honest about what it is you're really doing.

Now, I know I'll piss some people off here and this post will quickly get buried because the left hates this sort of thing. I am merely of the mind that people should be educated on things and find it intolerable when people proceed with things and choose to remain ignorant. I am just here to enlighten. Sorry if you can't handle the truth.

World's most premature baby set to leave hospital - life - 20 February 2007 - New Scientist

Partial birth abortions are illegal in the US, so your entire post is not worth responding to.

 

[Noomi]

That's called infanticide you're a sick women

Infanticide is when the baby is born and then killed.

I love educating the anti choicers.

 

[TheGreatGatsby]

Democrats support the rights of women.

And even if a fetus does feel pain at 20 weeks, just put the woman to sleep before the abortion, and the fetus is asleep as well so it won't feel anything. That it what I would prefer anyway, because no one wants to think of abortion as being painful.

Get help.

 

[Noomi]

Sorry, on this I cannot agree. I support the right of a woman to abort a pregnancy, but at some point, the line needs to be drawn. I think 20 weeks is more than reasonable outside of special circumstances such as the mother's life being in danger. Actually, that's about the only reason I can think of that a woman should have an abortion after 20 weeks. If she can't figure out she's pregnant or she can't decide that she wants to abort by 20 weeks, then she needs to carry to term.

I support a woman's right to abort; however, 20 weeks is more than enough time to figure it out. Do you support a woman's right to cut that baby out and throw it in the garbage if it is 30 weeks? My son was born at 30 weeks and is alive and well today. Some kids are born as early as 24 weeks and survive. I have not problem with a woman aborting a pregnancy early on, but at some point that fetus becomes a human being that needs to be protected.

Let me respond to both posts at once:

20 weeks is a fair time to make that decision - over here it is 24 weeks, but 20 is a fair compromise.
You say a line needs to be drawn. Well, you oppose abortion after week 20. What about aborting a 19 weeks and 6 days? What changes in that 24 hours that makes you go from supporting abortion to being opposed to it? See, that is the line. The line we draw is often something we can't explain.
We can't explain why we support abortion up to a certain point but not 24 hours before. At least, that is how I see it.
I look at this debate and I think about the line I have drawn. My line is drawn at birth, it is not drawn at any time the fetus is within the womb. I have thought about whether to draw the line at 6 months, but then I asked myself what was different about the fetus that it changed so much in the 24 hours beforehand? And if I allowed myself to support abortion up to the next day, what difference is there 24 hours after that?
I just felt I had to pick a point to well and truly justify drawing the line, which is why I draw the line at birth - because birth is a hugely significant change, and simply being in the womb isn't.

See, the same argument is used by those who are pro-life but in reverse. The problem of using "at birth" as your cutoff is that you are allowing for the actual murder of babies who can live outside the mother's womb. It means the child must be extracted and then killed. You really need to rethink this, because you are saying that a woman who is due to give birth tomorrow could decide she doesn't want the child and abort it today. But again, the problem is you cannot abort a child so late in the pregnancy, because the child is fully developed; therefore you must murder the child.

As for the need for a cutoff, it is very simple. If we are to allow abortion, there must be some cutoff. Without one, we get your view that it is okay to abort at any stage regardless of whether the baby could live outside the mother's womb on its own. I think 20 weeks is a reasonable time because the fetus cannot live outside the mother's womb on it's own at 20 weeks without extraordinary measures being taken, and even with those, the child, if it makes it, will have lifelong problems. However, shortly after 20 weeks, a fetus can make it with some help.

Thank you for being the only person to give a respective response. It is appreciated.

That said, let me just clear up one thing - to abort after 20 weeks does not require the fetus to be delivered. Abortion must always take place while the fetus resides in the woman, if it occurred outside the womb, that would, and should, be considered murder.

The earliest time a baby has lived is at 21 weeks and 6 days, so we may as well say 22 weeks. No baby has lived outside the womb after being born at just 20 weeks, so if your line is drawn at 20 weeks because you think a baby could live outside the womb, you are wrong, as medical science has not progressed far enough to keep a baby alive at such an early stage.

When I draw the line at birth, it doesn't mean I am happy about a woman having a late term abortion. I have stated before that she should be encouraged to carry it for a few more weeks, so it can be delivered alive. I think a late term abortion should be a last resort, and the woman should be greatly encouraged to give birth. Its not like I shrug my shoulders when a woman wants an abortion, it should always be an option, but not the first option.

Lifers are ignoring that, though.

 

[Noomi]

Democrats support the rights of women.

And even if a fetus does feel pain at 20 weeks, just put the woman to sleep before the abortion, and the fetus is asleep as well so it won't feel anything. That it what I would prefer anyway, because no one wants to think of abortion as being painful.

Get help.

Get the hell out of my damned ovaries.

 

[TheGreatGatsby]

Democrats support the rights of women.

And even if a fetus does feel pain at 20 weeks, just put the woman to sleep before the abortion, and the fetus is asleep as well so it won't feel anything. That it what I would prefer anyway, because no one wants to think of abortion as being painful.

Get help.

Get the hell out of my damned ovaries.

I don't want anything to do with your damned ovaries; but I'm going to protect people from murder. I don't go rape women and then say that a man should have the right to do what he wants with his body.

 

[jillian]

Democrats want Abortion at any stage of pregnancy...Sick

House lawmakers vote down bill on DC abortion restrictions


House lawmakers Tuesday voted down a bill that would ban abortions in the District of Columbia after 20 weeks of pregnancy

The bill, which would have sharply curtailed a policy that currently allows abortions in almost every circumstance, failed in a 220-154 vote. Seventeen Democrats joined 203 Republicans to support it, but because it was considered under special rules requiring a 2/3 vote for passage, the bill won't proceed to the Democratic-controlled Senate, where it was unlikely come up for a vote.

The bill, authored by Rep. Trent Franks, R-Ariz., was based on the disputed claim that fetuses can feel pain at a gestational age of 20 weeks or older.

House lawmakers vote down bill on DC abortion restrictions | Fox News

20 weeks isn't late term... it's barely enough time to have an amnio and get the results.

disingenuous much?

 

[Papageorgio]

Let me respond to both posts at once:

20 weeks is a fair time to make that decision - over here it is 24 weeks, but 20 is a fair compromise.
You say a line needs to be drawn. Well, you oppose abortion after week 20. What about aborting a 19 weeks and 6 days? What changes in that 24 hours that makes you go from supporting abortion to being opposed to it? See, that is the line. The line we draw is often something we can't explain.
We can't explain why we support abortion up to a certain point but not 24 hours before. At least, that is how I see it.
I look at this debate and I think about the line I have drawn. My line is drawn at birth, it is not drawn at any time the fetus is within the womb. I have thought about whether to draw the line at 6 months, but then I asked myself what was different about the fetus that it changed so much in the 24 hours beforehand? And if I allowed myself to support abortion up to the next day, what difference is there 24 hours after that?
I just felt I had to pick a point to well and truly justify drawing the line, which is why I draw the line at birth - because birth is a hugely significant change, and simply being in the womb isn't.

See, the same argument is used by those who are pro-life but in reverse. The problem of using "at birth" as your cutoff is that you are allowing for the actual murder of babies who can live outside the mother's womb. It means the child must be extracted and then killed. You really need to rethink this, because you are saying that a woman who is due to give birth tomorrow could decide she doesn't want the child and abort it today. But again, the problem is you cannot abort a child so late in the pregnancy, because the child is fully developed; therefore you must murder the child.

As for the need for a cutoff, it is very simple. If we are to allow abortion, there must be some cutoff. Without one, we get your view that it is okay to abort at any stage regardless of whether the baby could live outside the mother's womb on its own. I think 20 weeks is a reasonable time because the fetus cannot live outside the mother's womb on it's own at 20 weeks without extraordinary measures being taken, and even with those, the child, if it makes it, will have lifelong problems. However, shortly after 20 weeks, a fetus can make it with some help.

Thank you for being the only person to give a respective response. It is appreciated.

That said, let me just clear up one thing - to abort after 20 weeks does not require the fetus to be delivered. Abortion must always take place while the fetus resides in the woman, if it occurred outside the womb, that would, and should, be considered murder.

The earliest time a baby has lived is at 21 weeks and 6 days, so we may as well say 22 weeks. No baby has lived outside the womb after being born at just 20 weeks, so if your line is drawn at 20 weeks because you think a baby could live outside the womb, you are wrong, as medical science has not progressed far enough to keep a baby alive at such an early stage.

When I draw the line at birth, it doesn't mean I am happy about a woman having a late term abortion. I have stated before that she should be encouraged to carry it for a few more weeks, so it can be delivered alive. I think a late term abortion should be a last resort, and the woman should be greatly encouraged to give birth. Its not like I shrug my shoulders when a woman wants an abortion, it should always be an option, but not the first option.

Lifers are ignoring that, though.

I thought I was respectful in this debate. I also am respectful to the mother and the child in this debate. I don't see why siding on the side of safety wouldn't be prudent for all involved.

 

[TheGreatGatsby]

See, the same argument is used by those who are pro-life but in reverse. The problem of using "at birth" as your cutoff is that you are allowing for the actual murder of babies who can live outside the mother's womb. It means the child must be extracted and then killed. You really need to rethink this, because you are saying that a woman who is due to give birth tomorrow could decide she doesn't want the child and abort it today. But again, the problem is you cannot abort a child so late in the pregnancy, because the child is fully developed; therefore you must murder the child.

As for the need for a cutoff, it is very simple. If we are to allow abortion, there must be some cutoff. Without one, we get your view that it is okay to abort at any stage regardless of whether the baby could live outside the mother's womb on its own. I think 20 weeks is a reasonable time because the fetus cannot live outside the mother's womb on it's own at 20 weeks without extraordinary measures being taken, and even with those, the child, if it makes it, will have lifelong problems. However, shortly after 20 weeks, a fetus can make it with some help.

Thank you for being the only person to give a respective response. It is appreciated.

That said, let me just clear up one thing - to abort after 20 weeks does not require the fetus to be delivered. Abortion must always take place while the fetus resides in the woman, if it occurred outside the womb, that would, and should, be considered murder.

The earliest time a baby has lived is at 21 weeks and 6 days, so we may as well say 22 weeks. No baby has lived outside the womb after being born at just 20 weeks, so if your line is drawn at 20 weeks because you think a baby could live outside the womb, you are wrong, as medical science has not progressed far enough to keep a baby alive at such an early stage.

When I draw the line at birth, it doesn't mean I am happy about a woman having a late term abortion. I have stated before that she should be encouraged to carry it for a few more weeks, so it can be delivered alive. I think a late term abortion should be a last resort, and the woman should be greatly encouraged to give birth. Its not like I shrug my shoulders when a woman wants an abortion, it should always be an option, but not the first option.

Lifers are ignoring that, though.

Earliest surviving premature baby goes home to her parents | Mail Online

21 weeks and 5 days now.

But the point isn't whether the baby can survive on its own. Its whether it is a viable breathing entity.

If a woman doesn't want to have a baby at all costs then she get her fucking tubes tied. But killing is not her right. It is an offense against humanity and she cannot run from it.

 

[JDzBrain]

Why is a Rep from Arizona trying to make laws for Washington DC?

You must be one of the most blissful people in the world.

A simple "I dont know" would do yanno..

Well...I do. It's because IT'S HIS JOB!

Washington DC is in the District of Columbia. It is NOT a state. It is the ONLY kind of 10 square mile parcel of land that the federal government is SUPPOSE to own according to the Constitution and is therefore under the direct jurisdiction of the Congress and Federal government. He did it because he is CONSTITUTIONALLY OBLIGATED TO!

Here is a question for you. WHY did Barack Obama, almost immediately upon being sworn in as President of the United States, END the School Voucher system in Washington DC and THEN send his girls to the very schools that the canceling of those programs now denies low and middle class kids the opportunity to attend?

Answer...HE'S A PROGRESSIVE HYPOCRITE!

Thank you for being the only person to give a respective response. It is appreciated.

That said, let me just clear up one thing - to abort after 20 weeks does not require the fetus to be delivered. Abortion must always take place while the fetus resides in the woman, if it occurred outside the womb, that would, and should, be considered murder.

The earliest time a baby has lived is at 21 weeks and 6 days, so we may as well say 22 weeks. No baby has lived outside the womb after being born at just 20 weeks, so if your line is drawn at 20 weeks because you think a baby could live outside the womb, you are wrong, as medical science has not progressed far enough to keep a baby alive at such an early stage.

When I draw the line at birth, it doesn't mean I am happy about a woman having a late term abortion. I have stated before that she should be encouraged to carry it for a few more weeks, so it can be delivered alive. I think a late term abortion should be a last resort, and the woman should be greatly encouraged to give birth. Its not like I shrug my shoulders when a woman wants an abortion, it should always be an option, but not the first option.

Lifers are ignoring that, though.

You must have a LOT of people on your IGNORE list!

As to the discussion about 20, 21, 24 weeks...whatever. As I pointed out, a fetus...BABY...at 20 weeks not only has fingers and toes...just like you, it has a frontal and pre-frontal lobs. It's brain functions EXACTLY like YOURS. At 20 weeks, it's brain waves already cycle between REM sleep, deep sleep, and waking activity JUST LIKE YOURS!

Now you guys can choose to ignore the science and defend this crap all you want, but when a HUMAN fetus...BABY...develops a brain that is not only capable of, but IS functioning JUST LIKE MINE...it IS A HUMAN and deserves the same respect and protections as YOU!

20 weeks isn't late term... it's barely enough time to have an amnio and get the results.

disingenuous much?

WHAT century are you from? ;~0

You can whiz on a piece of paper and find out if you are pregnant within HOURS in some cases of becoming pregnant and never leave your house!

A woman's body begins producing the hormone the test detect INSTANTLY, at the moment an egg becomes fertilized. The only restrictions for how soon home test work are how much hormone the individual woman produces and how sensitive the test she buys is...PERIOD!

But they will ALL work within a matter of a few days...NOT weeks!

 

[hortysir]

Democrats support the rights of women.

And even if a fetus does feel pain at 20 weeks, just put the woman to sleep before the abortion, and the fetus is asleep as well so it won't feel anything. That it what I would prefer anyway, because no one wants to think of abortion as being painful.

Get help.

Get the hell out of my damned ovaries.

I've noticed that women that are strongly in favor of "choice" are hogs you wouldn't want to fuck in the first place

 

[Too Tall]

Do you assume to have any credibility on this issue with your stated support of abortion anytime prior to "birth"?
When does personal responsibility kick in in your mind...if ever?

Rape, incest, the health of the mother... all irrelevant to the simple question I pose to you.

I have as much credibility as you do on this issue.
Personal responsibility kicks in when the baby is born.

Well, if you are a woman you actually have much more credibility than any man on the issue. Seriously, why do men even get to tell women what they can and cannot do with their body? I don't even want men telling me what to do with my body because too many of them are fucked up, and none of them live my life. I don't tell you when to die, though there have been many cases where I might want to, So stop telling me what i am allowed to do with my penis, who i can date, what I can put into my body, what I can do with my body, and stop telling it to women too.

look, if every person who wants to ban abortion agrees to take care of the unwanted babies personally, and we get a system to dump these unwanted children on you and force you to take care of them, then I might consider forcing a woman to carry her mistake for 9 months so you can care for it. Otherwise shut the fuck up about it. If you are not willing to step in and take full care for the child then you do not get a decision on whether or not that child is born.

We had three children and adopted two more that no one wanted. So I walk the walk. Do you?

 

[ConservaDerrps]

Any bill that doesn't allow a rape victim to get an abortion is a travesty and is cruel and unusual punishment. You can argue the cut off point until you're blue in the face, but not allowing a woman who was raped, or even worse raped by a family member, to terminate that pregnancy is disgusting on a human level.

 

[JDzBrain]

Any bill that doesn't allow a rape victim to get an abortion is a travesty and is cruel and unusual punishment. You can argue the cut off point until you're blue in the face, but not allowing a woman who was raped, or even worse raped by a family member, to terminate that pregnancy is disgusting on a human level.

I saw a statistic somewhere that while nearly 80% of Americans don't personally believe in abortion...the exact same percentage believe the same thing as you. So you are in the majority on that.

But the truth is, you can bet your butt that rape victims do NOT wait 20 days, little on 20 weeks to have an abortion. As a matter of fact, the common practice nowadays is the morning after pill is given right away.

 

[Noomi]

Any bill that doesn't allow a rape victim to get an abortion is a travesty and is cruel and unusual punishment. You can argue the cut off point until you're blue in the face, but not allowing a woman who was raped, or even worse raped by a family member, to terminate that pregnancy is disgusting on a human level.

I saw a statistic somewhere that while nearly 80% of Americans don't personally believe in abortion...the exact same percentage believe the same thing as you. So you are in the majority on that.

But the truth is, you can bet your butt that rape victims do NOT wait 20 days, little on 20 weeks to have an abortion. As a matter of fact, the common practice nowadays is the morning after pill is given right away.

It would suck if the hospital in her local area was a Catholic hospital and they refused to give her the morning after pill because she has no right to murder a rapists baby.

 

[Noomi]

Any bill that doesn't allow a rape victim to get an abortion is a travesty and is cruel and unusual punishment. You can argue the cut off point until you're blue in the face, but not allowing a woman who was raped, or even worse raped by a family member, to terminate that pregnancy is disgusting on a human level.

I agree, but there are people out there who think that the woman should suffer because enduring a forced pregnancy is better than giving her the pill to terminate a 2 hour pregnancy.