Supreme Court to Temporarily Hold Abortion Pill Ban Until Friday

[ActionJackson]

Why is the woman the slut and not the man?

He is as well, but he's not the one killing his baby.

 

[SweetSue92]

Projecting much? You want to play God, or have a “God-awful” State play God, and force women to carry unwanted pregnancies for nine months and then give birth to totally unwanted children! You want women (and men) totally unprepared for their responsibilities to raise unwanted children! That is almost “Satanic.” It is certainly undemocratic, cruel and not befitting a modern “civilized” society.

You project (maybe even sound a bit jealous?) when you assume that accidental pregnancies all come from “unfettered sex.” Very few women are “ho-hum” about getting “in trouble.” I’ve known many women in that situation, and believe me you are talking through your hat. Have you no daughters, granddaughters, sisters, close female friends?

But it is true women in states with legal abortion no longer need have to fear having their whole lives ruined by having an unwanted child or tying themselves to some miserable pushy “father knows best” type. In reality, becoming pregnant is a fear millions of single and married women regularly live with and worry deeply about — but you wouldn’t know or don’t care about all that. Many women married to men like you probably won’t even speak honestly of these matters. Many even have abortions but refuse to tell their husbands or “boyfriends” about them!

I think you are “pompous, arrogant, and callus” about the sacrifices you expect women to take up. In my eyes you are no better and certainly not much more rational than an “animal” yourself, though I would point out that animals often kill their own young when they sense that is necessary. You are morally base to tell women they must suffer “for their sins” — this is you playing God again.

You talk about an “upside down world,” but your sense of morality is terribly skewed. You have no respect for women who understand that they could easily prevent suffering to all involved (including existing family members or future children) by doing what seems best to them — stopping an unwanted pregnancy as early as possible. Indeed, the handicaps your politicians put in women’s way are brutal and cruel, and prevent women from ending pregnancies as quickly and simply as taking “day after pills” or abortion medication at home or in their doctor’s office.

All of this sound and fury might have passed muster before we had the SCIENCE to look inside the womb. Far from a "clump of cells", the fetus has a beating heart and unique human DNA.

So there are two human beings to consider: the mother, and the unique human being that in almost all cases, she WILLINGLY created.

 

[Tom Paine 1949]

That would not bring about a scientific answer….

I know what I think a baby is. I have two children, from the moment we found out my wife was pregnant with both of them they were our babies and I loved them as much as I did they day they were born and every day after.

But the person I responded to said that scientific evidence overwhelmingly concludes the "thing" in the womb is a baby. For this to be accurate there has to a scientific definition of what a baby is.

For most of these hysterical religious nuts and cynical anti-abortion politicians, things like “scientific language,” “reproductive rights for women” and even “common sense” … are irrelevant.

For them, an acorn is the same as a giant oak tree. A pupa or caterpillar is a butterfly. A fertlized egg — even frozen for years in liquid nitrogen — is a “pre-born living human being” with the “God-given right” to grow up!

Even after the biological contributors of the DNA for such an in vitro fertilized, frozen and inactive zygotic pre-embryo pass away, even after the social and legal contracts providing for its cryogenic maintenance expire and monthly payments for storage end, disposing of this potentially valuable material or donating it to research is nothing less than … murder!

We humans are deeply emotional creatures, especially about “our own” families. (Also “our own” possessions!) All this is well known and natural …

That’s why we should never deny to prospective parents (or to ourselves) the satisfaction of using ordinary language like “our baby” to describe a healthy unborn fetus … or even a tiny little embryo in a happy expectant mother’s womb.

That’s also why I appreciate your comment very much, Golfing Gator !

The thing that all these moral hysterics and religious absolutists lack is above all human empathy, human experience, and “common sense.”

They can’t accept that the majority of Americans, and even more so modern American women, have very different, deeply “moral” views of their own on this subject … and see rightwing anti-abortion absolutists as cruel, perverse and authoritarian.

 

[ActionJackson]

All of this sound and fury might have passed muster before we had the SCIENCE to look inside the womb. Far from a "clump of cells", the fetus has a beating heart and unique human DNA.

So there are two human beings to consider: the mother, and the unique human being that in almost all cases, she WILLINGLY created.

These eggheads are all about "the science" until the science contradicts their asinine beliefs. Then the science becomes miraculously incorrect.

 

[Tom Paine 1949]

All of this sound and fury might have passed muster before we had the SCIENCE to look inside the womb. Far from a "clump of cells", the fetus has a beating heart and unique human DNA.

So there are two human beings to consider: the mother, and the unique human being that in almost all cases, she WILLINGLY created.

The fetus stage does not begin until around week ten after conception, when the fetus itself is still less than 2 inches long. At this stage the “heart” is not developed, though a pulsing of nerves that will become the heart often is. Your “clump of cells” usually refers to the earlier zygotic stages called a morula or blastula — but “clump of cells” is definitely not a useful scientific term for the amazing reality of a healthy evolving zygote or embryo in the womb.

Of course in talking about a woman’s right to have an abortion we are mainly discussing the right of a developed human being — a woman — to take action to end her own pregnancy. Scientifically, one could say she is preventing the further development of an embryo or fetus, which in most cases she did not want conceived and is not “willing” to nurture in her womb or give birth to.

Of course many abortions are done for medical reasons, because the pregnant woman’s life is threatened or because — thanks to scientific screening — the mother and her doctors discover the fetus will die before birth, or be born and die shortly after, or “may” be born but live with terrible deformities. In cases like the latter one mentioned, the mother’s decision may be agonizing … but should be determinative.

 

[protectionist]

Yet David is honored for the thousands that he killed.

in self defense ?

 

[protectionist]

That would not bring about a scientific answer.

And why not a father?

I know what I think a baby is. I have two children, from the moment we found out my wife was pregnant with both of them they were our babies and I loved them as much as I did they day they were born and every day after.

But the person I responded to said that scientific evidence overwhelmingly concludes the "thing" in the womb is a baby. For this to be accurate there has to a scientific definition of what a baby is.

These are just word games.

 

[protectionist]

Nice scenario, right now flooding seems to be the problem, from the climate change atmospheric river system that formed over most of California this year. Dealing with one problem at a time seems the best we can do, with a knack of doing nothing about the really big ones. Will human beings ever change.

Doing nothing would be better than throwing billion$ away on reparations for no reason at all. Or giving welfare $$ to illegal aliens.

 

[protectionist]

Notice how you refuse to discuss the topic of the thread, Judge Matt's dogshit ruling, that ruling being predictably stopped on appeal, and the Supreme Court tossing it back?

Your reluctance to discuss the dogshit ruling form Judge Matt is understandable. Its quite ridiculous.

I'll discuss whatever I choose to discuss. I'm not your employee.

 

[protectionist]

Abortion isn't killing, of it were it would have been at least mentioned in the bible. Science is on my side. Hocus Pocus religion is on your side. Why do you think most Americans wanted Roe vs Wade to stay in place. So they wouldn't have to deal with fools like you again. You do more harm than good with your ignorance and hatred. It has no place in America maybe that's why religion is dying here and around the world, people are finally seeing it for what it is, the greatest lie ever told.

You are a pathetic sad case. Maybe some day you'll discover how absurd you are.

 

[Tom Paine 1949]

I'll discuss whatever I choose to discuss. I'm not your employee.

No, nobody ever said you were anybody’s employee. You may not even be employable. What is clear is only that you were off-topic, and also seem totally unable to understand what Golfing Gator was saying when you characterized his pertinent and personal remarks in comment #164 as … “just word games.”

 

[Harpy Eagle]

in self defense ?

Did he kill them or not?

According to you the Bible says "DO NOT KILL"

 

[candycorn]

WASHINGTON — The Supreme Court said Friday evening that the abortion pill mifepristone would remain widely available for now, delaying the potential for an abrupt end to a drug that is used in more than half of abortions in the United States.

The order halted two rulings that had sought to curb the availability of the mifepristone as an appeal in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit moves forward: one from a federal judge in Texas who suspended the drug from the market entirely and another from the appeals court that had imposed significant barriers on the pill, including blocking access by mail.

The one-paragraph order, which was unsigned, is the second time in a year that the Supreme Court has considered a major effort to sharply curtail access to abortion. In overturning Roe v. Wade in June, a conservative majority said that it was leaving the issue of abortion to elected officials.

• Two justices, Clarence Thomas and Samuel A. Alito Jr., dissented publicly. Justice Thomas gave no reasons. Justice Alito wrote that he was aware that the court had been criticized for issuing orders through the emergency applications docket, what critics call the “shadow docket.”
• Reaction from abortion-rights groups was swift. “The Supreme Court’s decision is a huge relief, but we’re not out of the woods yet,” said Nancy Northup, head of the Center for Reproductive Rights, adding that the Texas ruling blocking access to mifepristone had “sowed chaos, confusion and panic.”
• The order was in one sense no surprise, as members of the Supreme Court’s conservative majority have generally supported the F.D.A.’s authority to make decisions about drug safety.

Abortion Ruling: Supreme Court Ensures, for Now, Broad Access to Abortion Pill

The order halts a sweeping ruling by a federal judge in Texas as an appeal moves forward in a case that could have profound implications for abortion access and the F.D.A.’s regulatory authority.

www.nytimes.com

Alito and Thomas dissent. Alito talks out of both sides of his face, and the fact Thomas took the time away from his vacation bribes from his right wing billionaire handler, was curious.

Another win for the good guys.

 

[Catsnmeters]

You must not have seen all the references to litigation in the article.

Aren't you the guy who stopped reading when an article started with MTG?

How objective of you......

Yes, I objectively disregard the opinion of someone who believe Jewish space lasers start forest fires.

 

[Lastamender]

WASHINGTON — The Supreme Court said Friday evening that the abortion pill mifepristone would remain widely available for now, delaying the potential for an abrupt end to a drug that is used in more than half of abortions in the United States.

The order halted two rulings that had sought to curb the availability of the mifepristone as an appeal in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit moves forward: one from a federal judge in Texas who suspended the drug from the market entirely and another from the appeals court that had imposed significant barriers on the pill, including blocking access by mail.

The one-paragraph order, which was unsigned, is the second time in a year that the Supreme Court has considered a major effort to sharply curtail access to abortion. In overturning Roe v. Wade in June, a conservative majority said that it was leaving the issue of abortion to elected officials.

• Two justices, Clarence Thomas and Samuel A. Alito Jr., dissented publicly. Justice Thomas gave no reasons. Justice Alito wrote that he was aware that the court had been criticized for issuing orders through the emergency applications docket, what critics call the “shadow docket.”
• Reaction from abortion-rights groups was swift. “The Supreme Court’s decision is a huge relief, but we’re not out of the woods yet,” said Nancy Northup, head of the Center for Reproductive Rights, adding that the Texas ruling blocking access to mifepristone had “sowed chaos, confusion and panic.”
• The order was in one sense no surprise, as members of the Supreme Court’s conservative majority have generally supported the F.D.A.’s authority to make decisions about drug safety.

Abortion Ruling: Supreme Court Ensures, for Now, Broad Access to Abortion Pill

The order halts a sweeping ruling by a federal judge in Texas as an appeal moves forward in a case that could have profound implications for abortion access and the F.D.A.’s regulatory authority.

www.nytimes.com

Alito and Thomas dissent. Alito talks out of both sides of his face, and the fact Thomas took the time away from his vacation bribes from his right wing billionaire handler, was curious.

Party up!!! More baby murder.

 

[Concerned American]

It’s just a stay pending further court determinations. Actually, a reasonable action by the Court.

But good old knee-jerk Jay Inslee, WA dem gov., ran right out and wasted taxpayer $$ on 30K doses to be distributed by the dept. of prisons pharmacy. Can unprotected convict conjugal visits be far behind?

 

[Concerned American]

Indeed.

This is a Court dominated by blind partisan conservative ideologues who seek to increase the authority of the state at the expense of individual liberty, pursuing an agenda hostile to privacy and reproductive rights.

You morons are hilarious. The court overwhelmingly makes the decision that you've been whining for and STILL you whine more. SMFH.

 

[Delldude]

For this to be accurate there has to a scientific definition of what a baby is.

No, it would be a SCOTUS decision.

 

[BackAgain]

But good old knee-jerk Jay Inslee, WA dem gov., ran right out and wasted taxpayer $$ on 30K doses to be distributed by the dept. of prisons pharmacy. Can unprotected convict conjugal visits be far behind?

Knee jerk indeed. In fact he’s basically all jerk.

 

[Harpy Eagle]

No, it would be a SCOTUS decision.

One more time.....

the person I responded to said that scientific evidence overwhelmingly concludes the "thing" in the womb is a baby.

For this to be accurate there has to a scientific definition of what a baby is.