Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
U.S. District Judge James Teilborg said the statute may prompt a few pregnant women who are considering abortion to make the decision earlier. But he said the law is constitutional because it doesn't prohibit any women from making the decision to end their pregnancies.
The judge also wrote that the state provided "substantial and well-documented" evidence that an unborn child has the capacity to feel pain during an abortion by at least 20 weeks.
While North Carolina has long had a 20-week ban, Nebraska in 2010 was the first state to recently enact one. Five more states followed in 2010: Alabama, Idaho, Indiana, Kansas and Oklahoma.
Along with Arizona, Georgia and Louisiana approved 20-week bans this year, though Georgia's doesn't take effect until 2013.
The Center for Reproductive Rights said none of the 20-week bans have so far been blocked by courts.
i looked around the board, and abortion related threads are everywhere, so I just put this here. Mods, feel free to move if desired.
Judge says Arizona's abortion ban can take effect | Fox News
U.S. District Judge James Teilborg said the statute may prompt a few pregnant women who are considering abortion to make the decision earlier. But he said the law is constitutional because it doesn't prohibit any women from making the decision to end their pregnancies.
The judge also wrote that the state provided "substantial and well-documented" evidence that an unborn child has the capacity to feel pain during an abortion by at least 20 weeks.
While North Carolina has long had a 20-week ban, Nebraska in 2010 was the first state to recently enact one. Five more states followed in 2010: Alabama, Idaho, Indiana, Kansas and Oklahoma.
Along with Arizona, Georgia and Louisiana approved 20-week bans this year, though Georgia's doesn't take effect until 2013.
The Center for Reproductive Rights said none of the 20-week bans have so far been blocked by courts.
discuss
i looked around the board, and abortion related threads are everywhere, so I just put this here. Mods, feel free to move if desired.
Judge says Arizona's abortion ban can take effect | Fox News
U.S. District Judge James Teilborg said the statute may prompt a few pregnant women who are considering abortion to make the decision earlier. But he said the law is constitutional because it doesn't prohibit any women from making the decision to end their pregnancies.
The judge also wrote that the state provided "substantial and well-documented" evidence that an unborn child has the capacity to feel pain during an abortion by at least 20 weeks.
While North Carolina has long had a 20-week ban, Nebraska in 2010 was the first state to recently enact one. Five more states followed in 2010: Alabama, Idaho, Indiana, Kansas and Oklahoma.
Along with Arizona, Georgia and Louisiana approved 20-week bans this year, though Georgia's doesn't take effect until 2013.
The Center for Reproductive Rights said none of the 20-week bans have so far been blocked by courts.
discuss
i looked around the board, and abortion related threads are everywhere, so I just put this here. Mods, feel free to move if desired.
Judge says Arizona's abortion ban can take effect | Fox News
U.S. District Judge James Teilborg said the statute may prompt a few pregnant women who are considering abortion to make the decision earlier. But he said the law is constitutional because it doesn't prohibit any women from making the decision to end their pregnancies.
The judge also wrote that the state provided "substantial and well-documented" evidence that an unborn child has the capacity to feel pain during an abortion by at least 20 weeks.
While North Carolina has long had a 20-week ban, Nebraska in 2010 was the first state to recently enact one. Five more states followed in 2010: Alabama, Idaho, Indiana, Kansas and Oklahoma.
Along with Arizona, Georgia and Louisiana approved 20-week bans this year, though Georgia's doesn't take effect until 2013.
The Center for Reproductive Rights said none of the 20-week bans have so far been blocked by courts.
discuss
i looked around the board, and abortion related threads are everywhere, so I just put this here. Mods, feel free to move if desired.
Judge says Arizona's abortion ban can take effect | Fox News
U.S. District Judge James Teilborg said the statute may prompt a few pregnant women who are considering abortion to make the decision earlier. But he said the law is constitutional because it doesn't prohibit any women from making the decision to end their pregnancies.
The judge also wrote that the state provided "substantial and well-documented" evidence that an unborn child has the capacity to feel pain during an abortion by at least 20 weeks.
While North Carolina has long had a 20-week ban, Nebraska in 2010 was the first state to recently enact one. Five more states followed in 2010: Alabama, Idaho, Indiana, Kansas and Oklahoma.
Along with Arizona, Georgia and Louisiana approved 20-week bans this year, though Georgia's doesn't take effect until 2013.
The Center for Reproductive Rights said none of the 20-week bans have so far been blocked by courts.
discuss
how many threads do we need on this topic?
no offense.
i looked around the board, and abortion related threads are everywhere, so I just put this here. Mods, feel free to move if desired.
Judge says Arizona's abortion ban can take effect | Fox News
U.S. District Judge James Teilborg said the statute may prompt a few pregnant women who are considering abortion to make the decision earlier. But he said the law is constitutional because it doesn't prohibit any women from making the decision to end their pregnancies.
The judge also wrote that the state provided "substantial and well-documented" evidence that an unborn child has the capacity to feel pain during an abortion by at least 20 weeks.
While North Carolina has long had a 20-week ban, Nebraska in 2010 was the first state to recently enact one. Five more states followed in 2010: Alabama, Idaho, Indiana, Kansas and Oklahoma.
Along with Arizona, Georgia and Louisiana approved 20-week bans this year, though Georgia's doesn't take effect until 2013.
The Center for Reproductive Rights said none of the 20-week bans have so far been blocked by courts.
discuss
None taken. I search on the following...i looked around the board, and abortion related threads are everywhere, so I just put this here. Mods, feel free to move if desired.
Judge says Arizona's abortion ban can take effect | Fox News
U.S. District Judge James Teilborg said the statute may prompt a few pregnant women who are considering abortion to make the decision earlier. But he said the law is constitutional because it doesn't prohibit any women from making the decision to end their pregnancies.
The judge also wrote that the state provided "substantial and well-documented" evidence that an unborn child has the capacity to feel pain during an abortion by at least 20 weeks.
While North Carolina has long had a 20-week ban, Nebraska in 2010 was the first state to recently enact one. Five more states followed in 2010: Alabama, Idaho, Indiana, Kansas and Oklahoma.
Along with Arizona, Georgia and Louisiana approved 20-week bans this year, though Georgia's doesn't take effect until 2013.
The Center for Reproductive Rights said none of the 20-week bans have so far been blocked by courts.
discuss
how many threads do we need on this topic?
no offense.
None taken. I search on the following...i looked around the board, and abortion related threads are everywhere, so I just put this here. Mods, feel free to move if desired.
Judge says Arizona's abortion ban can take effect | Fox News
discuss
how many threads do we need on this topic?
no offense.
AZ, arizona, abortion, law
...and did not see it.
As stated in the OP, please feel free to move, or in this case, merge, as appropriate.
When do we draw the line?
And why isn't this woman charged with murder?
Mother of two admits aborting baby a week before its due date
A mother of two aborted her own baby just a week before she was due to give birth after taking drugs bought on the internet, a court has heard.
lets call this what it is and why are her two other children allowed in her care?
When do we draw the line?
And why isn't this woman charged with murder?
Mother of two admits aborting baby a week before its due date
A mother of two aborted her own baby just a week before she was due to give birth after taking drugs bought on the internet, a court has heard.
lets call this what it is and why are her two other children allowed in her care?
link?
None taken. I search on the following...how many threads do we need on this topic?
no offense.
AZ, arizona, abortion, law
...and did not see it.
As stated in the OP, please feel free to move, or in this case, merge, as appropriate.
nah...i have higher hopes for yours than some of the others.
as for the Arizona law, amniocentesis is performed between the 15th and 20th week of pregnancy. limiting abortion to prior to 20 weeks limites the ability to get tested and have the tests read before a decision would have to be made... which is intentional on the part of the legislature.
I have come to the conclusion that punishing an idiot by saddling them with a child is not a good idea even if you consider adoption as an option. If they discovered late they probably have not taken care of themselves during the pregnancy.
The mothers that cannot decide are clearly not prepared to deal with 18 years of child care at that moment.
In the end the law does what most abortion laws do. It tries to punish unwilling, unprepared, or even unable people with a baby.
As a younger person I supported bans like this. The logic seems to be there to say if you cannot decide in 20 weeks to abort then you should not be allowed an abortion, and to some extent it does make sense.
Then when you actually think about it you realize it actually does not make sense. Think about the mom who makes this decision later in the pregnancy. You have a couple of types.
First you have the idiot. They either cannot decide or do not realize they are pregnant. I have come to the conclusion that punishing an idiot by saddling them with a child is not a good idea even if you consider adoption as an option. If they discovered late they probably have not taken care of themselves during the pregnancy. This means they might have done drugs, failed to give themselves proper nourishment, and endangered the health of their child. Since these women are unprepared and unaware they are not prepared to raise a child, and the child might have many health problems due to this. The mothers that cannot decide are clearly not prepared to deal with 18 years of child care at that moment. There is a reason they cannot decide, and you should probably take that into account too.
Then you have mothers who face a large change of life, most likely from a huge problem of some sort. Perhaps it is divorce, or maybe they had a financial disaster, or for some reason they find themselves changing their mind about their ability to take care of their child. Who is best to know about their change in capabilities or willingness to take care of a child. Is it an arbitrary law that takes nothing into account but the opinions of others who are not in their circumstance and don't even care to know about them, or is it the mother who is dealing with whatever it is? The law is simply not even paying attention to their life, nor does it care to when it sets these arbitrary numbers. In the laws defense, it is not capable of doing so. Life changes and if the mom can no longer deal with it then let her the fuc out.
In the end the law does what most abortion laws do. It tries to punish unwilling, unprepared, or even unable people with a baby. It is just not a good system for dealing with the problems. A child should be a wanted responsibility that prepared people decide to take on. It is not a punishment on women for having sex. It is not a punishment for women who are not responsible with their sexual activity. It is also not a burden society should be saddled with as even the pro-life people are unwilling to care for the born.
I have moved on from abortion restrictions to allowing the choice to be made by the person who is living the choice and not the rest of the people who really are not going to deal with it.
I have come to the conclusion that punishing an idiot by saddling them with a child is not a good idea even if you consider adoption as an option. If they discovered late they probably have not taken care of themselves during the pregnancy.
You think it takes some women over four months to discover that they're pregnant?
The mothers that cannot decide are clearly not prepared to deal with 18 years of child care at that moment.
Ever hear of adoption? People are so desperate to adopt babies that they pay kidnappers to get babies from 3rd-world countries.
In the end the law does what most abortion laws do. It tries to punish unwilling, unprepared, or even unable people with a baby.
Yet, the vast majority of the time liberal shitheads like you are fans of blunt laws, more of the one-size-fits-all laws the better. 90% percent of all new laws restricting liberty are supported by liberals.
