Another young woman falls victim to GOP abortion laws. RIP

[Arlette]

What jury? Who are you going to sue? The law has already been tested in Texas courts several times and it still stands, and since Roe v Wade no longer exists, federal courts have no jurisdiction, so the only way to get rid of it is through the legislature, which is why proponents of looser abortion laws are pulling this stunt.

If you file suit in Texas it goes to a court. Even if it's just to dismiss the case. We know what we are doing - we are bringing extreme abortion laws in Texas to an end.

 

[martybegan]

So? why are your beliefs even relevant? why should your beliefs be imposed upon another human being?

Coming from someone that wants to Drive Jewish bodies into the Sea, that's ******* hilarious.

 

[Arlette]

So we agree, this is just a propaganda stunt.

No. This is a victim of Texas crying for justice.

 

[Zincwarrior]

Arent what?

Doctors who are ignorant about medicine?

The lawyers are stopping them.

That isn't an answer, it's a dodge.

Not hardly.

Society has decided this is an issue,

Yes, we did now.

 

[Mac-7]

The lawyers are stopping them.

You dont know that

Why dont you blame it on the insurance companies?

Or Ted Cruz

Anything but the quack abortion doctors, huh?

 

[martybegan]

The lawyers are stopping them.

Not hardly.


Yes, we did now.

Yes, it is. you won't answer the question. I've put my position out there for all to see. Why can't you do the same?

It's been an issue since the 1960's. what happened is Roe interrupted the development of the issue for decades, and now we are back to 1973, starting over again.

 

[toomuchtime_]

If the doctors truly felt the law was on their side they'd not be seeking to create propaganda because the law would already be on their side and there'd be no issue. So what motive can you dream up that would motivate a doctor to get permission to do something he is already allowed to do?

You are not thinking logically.

The only logical way to understand this case is to accept that the law truly is ambiguous and doctors truly are terrified of being prosecuted.

Bullshit. Clearly the doctors did not believe her condition constituted a medical emergency so there were no grounds for removing the fetus until its heart stopped beating, so they waited 40 hours until the fetus' heart stopped beating but the cause of death was sepsis from the incomplete abortion, and there is no evidence the abortion would have been more complete if it had been performed 40 hours sooner.

The law has been tested in Texas courts, including the Texas Supreme Court, over and over again, and the courts have found no legal problem with how the law is written, so again, this is nothing but a propaganda stunt.

 

[Rawley]

I did. This is a private issue between the woman and her medical staff. If women don't have the simple right to autonomy of their own personal body free from government oppression, then they and we have no rights whatsoever.

There is another life involved and literally at stake.

 

[Sherlock Holmes]

Coming from someone that wants to Drive Jewish bodies into the Sea, that's ******* hilarious.

I see, so you do not know the answer to my question.

 

[Sherlock Holmes]

Bullshit. Clearly the doctors did not believe her condition constituted a medical emergency so there were no grounds for removing the fetus until its heart stopped beating, so they waited 40 hours until the fetus' heart stopped beating but the cause of death was sepsis from the incomplete abortion, and there is no evidence the abortion would have been more complete if it had been performed 40 hours sooner.

The law has been tested in Texas courts, including the Texas Supreme Court, over and over again, and the courts have found no legal problem with how the law is written, so again, this is nothing but a propaganda stunt.

Where did you get your M.D. ?

 

[martybegan]

I see, so you do not know the answer to my question.

My answer is as an American Citizen I have every ******* right to an opinion on anything I want, and to vote accordingly.

I've stated that in plenty of posts before this.

 

[martybegan]

Where did you get your M.D. ?

 

[SweetTea]

That's a lie, liar. But who's surprised coming from MAGA who parrots the mindless grunting coming from their orange subhuman ape god.

Sure they are JoeB131 has already said as much. No restrictions. None. He is a die hard Democrat and is not alone.

 

[toomuchtime_]

If you file suit in Texas it goes to a court. Even if it's just to dismiss the case. We know what we are doing - we are bringing extreme abortion laws in Texas to an end.

Only Texas voters can overturn the law, and while bringing suit in this bizarre case may be satisfying to its opponents it will weaken the cause to independents because it is so obviously just a propaganda stunt.

But, tell me, what exactly makes you think this is an extreme abortion law?

 

[Sherlock Holmes]

My answer is as an American Citizen I have every ******* right to an opinion on anything I want, and to vote accordingly.

I've stated that in plenty of posts before this.

That's outburst doesn't explain why your beliefs should be imposed upon others. If a woman wants an abortion and believes it's not immoral then why do you think your beliefs are in any way relevant?

 

[Arlette]

But, tell me, what exactly makes you think this is an extreme abortion law?

Dead women

 

[martybegan]

That's outburst doesn't explain why your beliefs should be imposed upon others. If a woman wants an abortion and believes it's not immoral then why do you think your beliefs are in any way relevant?

We impose beliefs on others all the time, they are called laws.

The issue is the degree of support for the belief.

If I believe taking your stereo out of your car is not immoral, why are your beliefs otherwise relevant?

 

[Sherlock Holmes]

We impose beliefs on others all the time, they are called laws.

Not all the time, many things are not legislated, my question is why your beliefs about morality are relevant to a woman seeking an abortion. I know we can and do impose laws but I'm asking you to logically show why your beliefs about morality here are meaningful.

The issue is the degree of support for the belief.

That's nothing to do with my question. Once upon a time there was huge public support for children working down mines or children drinking alcohol so the degree of support is quite unrelated to the reason itself.

If I believe taking your stereo out of your car is not immoral, why are your beliefs otherwise relevant?

The stereo belongs to me not you.

You either have no idea why you care so much about other women or you do but you refuse to articulate it.

 

[martybegan]

Not all the time, many things are not legislated, my question is why your beliefs about morality are relevant to a woman seeking an abortion. I know we can and do impose laws but I'm asking you to logically show why your beliefs about morality here are meaningful.

That's nothing to do with my question. Once upon a time there was huge public support for children working down mines or children drinking alcohol so the degree of support is quite unrelated to the reason itself.

The stereo belongs to me not you.

You either have no idea why you care so much about other women or you do but you refuse to articulate it.

Logically because a percentage of the people in our society want to have laws on this.

The fetus' life belongs to itself, not the woman. And why have property laws at all? After all, it's none of the owners business if the thief really really wants it.

I am pointing out the logical flaws in your argument, that you are too stupid to figure out.

 

[Rawley]

Where did you get your M.D. ?

Prolly the same place you got your J.D.