How to Pro Lifer feel about the Texas case

[FA_Q2]

It is rather telling that, after fighting abortion for decades, the right had exactly zero plans on what to do when they won the fight. If there ever was an example of pols simply spouting off BS to garner support from the base, abortion is it.

The fastest way to force abortions as a right up until birth is to create edge cases exactly like this. No one outside of the rabid partisans support this kind of idiocy. And is is not as though this was a surprise. These cases have existed forever and are extremely easy to deal with in the law - a basic exception for IDLH and severe medical complications is not complicated.

 

[Slade3200]

I have no dog in this fight, so my feelings are of no importance. I can only address what circumstances led to this unfortunate series of events. We (not necessarily me, or you) overvalue the pleasure of sex over the responsibility of caring for the consequences. When women casually have sex with other men who choose not to wear a condom, knowingly you have casually brought about a life. A lot of abortions are casual as opposed to medically necessary, 2/3 of them to be precise. And that is what creates an atmosphere for such laws to take hold. A casual debasement of an activity meant to bring life into the world, thus a casual disregard for personal responsibility and for the life the act of sex creates.

Once again, blame our society, not Texas. It wouldn't have come to this if personal responsibility in the bedroom were still practiced. Such extreme disregard for the consequences of sexual activity brought forth an extreme response, aka this law putting this poor woman in a tragic position. Cause. Effect.

If you want laws like this repealed, advocate for the teaching of more personal responsibility when it comes to sexual activity.

If you are a big government person who thinks politicians and law enforcement should be trying to influence sexual culture by punishing those who get pregnant by forcing them to have children when they are not ready or wanting to adequately raise them then I guess that’s a political position that a person has the right to have. My heart aches for those kids as raising children is not easy and requires love and dedication and commitment. It’s criminal IMO to force people into that who don’t want to do. Think of the neglect those poor babies experience. All caused by the government.
I stand more for liberty and personal choice.

 

[0311]

I feel that killing a child should not be used as a common birth control method.

Any more dumbass questions from you stupid Femianazis?

One more time. The fetus is NOT viable outside the womb. It will die a slow painful death. Abortion is NOT a "Common birth control Method", you told a lie.

Who are you to tell a Woman you've never what she can and cannot do with her body?

 

[bodecea]

Arlette once again demonstrating the warm heart of the true Progressive.

"Crippled ass", I give you.

I'm sure you objected to this also, right?

 

[bodecea]

Stop gaslighting me. I have cited facts here. FACT: the woman is already a parent, twice over, despite what CNN would have you believe. FACT: this woman chose to have another child knowing that she had two previous C sections, which is already risky. She wants to kill the "crippled" one, as Arlette called it, so she can maybe try for an upgrade.

You all are trying to distract from that but those are the facts.

That poster did NOT refer to the fetus as crippled. Read the post again.

 

[Slade3200]

I have nothing further to add, other than she should be allowed to have the abortion, and the Texas legislature should convene a special session to amend the law for medically extenuating circumstances.

Thank you

 

[Arlette]

That would depend on the situation. Like I would be ok with the law not allowing minors to do cosmetic surgery without the consent of their parents. You skirted my question though

What question did I skirt? I have been blunt about my opposition to the Texas abortion law.

 

[bodecea]

She took a chance on having a third child after two C sections. Now this third one is "crippled", and she wants a do-over, because of her two previous C sections.

Let's call this what it is.

"She took a chance"................no father responsibilities here, folks.

 

[bodecea]

1. She wants to kill the third because it's not the baby she wanted, and might "jeopardize" having that nice third she envisioned.

2. Thanks, dad. I know that, do you always talk down to women like this, or just online. Either way, why does Arlette need to point out that he's "crippled"?

"because it's not the baby she wanted".....................WHAAAAAAAAA?

 

[bodecea]

The misogyny from Progressives is something to behold.

Deal with it, grandpa

Where's the misogyny? Besides from so-called "right to lifers" who want to con-trol women's bodies all the time.

 

[Slade3200]

Hmm. She was admitted to the emergency room four times and was advised mere weeks into the pregnancy when she had time to perform the abortion legally, that the child was at risk for a fatal genetic defect. Either she chose to carry to 20 weeks despite her doctor's warnings, to bring about this case, or she was woefully ignorant of the abortion cutoff. If the latter is true, her doctors should be held liable for not educating her about the time frame for a legal abortion. If the former is true, she is a ghoul-slash-certifiably insane for using this tragedy to initiate a policy discussion or motivate legislative action, putting her life in danger to carry a child she was told carried a high risk of a fatal genetic abnormality would be sheer insanity.

I for one sincerely hope the latter is the case. Her doctors should be held liable for the damage this has caused her emotionally and physically, if they failed to educate her properly.

This is her decision to make. She wants to have a baby. Waiting to see if a possible fetal defect could be fixed is up to her and should not force her to carry an unviable pregnancy just because she waiting too long. It couldn’t be any more clear…. Her choice with her doc. Not the government.

 

[BrokeLoser]

Any Pro Lifers out there see something wrong with what’s happening in Texas? A woman who wants to be a mother has a non viable pregnancy… meaning the fetus will not survive and aborting the pregnancy is the best thing for her health and for her future ability to have kids.

I judge ruled that she can have the abortion and Paxton is petitioning the Texas Supreme Court to stop it… he is also threatening hospitals so they will not help this woman.

Anybody see something wrong with this situation??

But such draconian decisions were made in Texas by people outside the medical profession. Would you also endorse court ordered non treatment for any other medical emergency?

republicans hate women....simple as that

Right...blame the mother because after all white men should be able to dictate to women what they can do with their bodies. It has nothing to do with sex unless of course this is Paxton's punishment and warning to people that he has the right to impose his religious views on evert citizen of Texas.
Do you also blame rape victim's because of their clothing choice?

If the Dems are smart they will use this case in every campaign ad between now and the election.

Espically now that the TX SC has stepped in and overruled the lower court, at least temporarily

Promiscuity? She’s married you idiot

This craziness is why all or nothing laws cannot work. No level of authoritarianism on any issue is ever applicable. Common sense is nowhere to be found in this case.

This pregnancy is held by a married woman.

The fetus is nonviable. Carrying it poses a risk to the woman's health and life.

Paxton should be charged with attempted homicide.

Watch Texas get a severe shortage of Doctors soon.

Well at least not in a MAGAGATARD state!

Next up, laws against C sections.

It is rather telling that, after fighting abortion for decades, the right had exactly zero plans on what to do when they won the fight. If there ever was an example of pols simply spouting off BS to garner support from the base, abortion is it.

The fastest way to force abortions as a right up until birth is to create edge cases exactly like this. No one outside of the rabid partisans support this kind of idiocy. And is is not as though this was a surprise. These cases have existed forever and are extremely easy to deal with in the law - a basic exception for IDLH and severe medical complications is not complicated.

This is a case of Twilight Zone filth / Leftists pushing for extreme bullshit. All you disgusting abnormals have to do is stop with the…..”abortion used as contraception should be embraced”….the “abortions at delivery is acceptable”…..the “ABORTIONS ARE SO FUCKING COOL!” bunch of bullshit and you won’t see this extreme pushback against your filthy desires.
It’s time you become reasonable and logical like all legit human beings are.

 

[Flash]

These stupid Moon Bats are always talking about "common sense" gun control laws.

"Common sense" abortion is to only allow it when the mother's life is at risk.

 

[Slade3200]

But I like how you play the identity politics game and what a pro lifer should believe in or how to behave etc..

What did I say to make you think I was playing the identity politics game?

 

[Arlette]

It is rather telling that, after fighting abortion for decades, the right had exactly zero plans on what to do when they won the fight. If there ever was an example of pols simply spouting off BS to garner support from the base, abortion is it.

The fastest way to force abortions as a right up until birth is to create edge cases exactly like this. No one outside of the rabid partisans support this kind of idiocy. And is is not as though this was a surprise. These cases have existed forever and are extremely easy to deal with in the law - a basic exception for IDLH and severe medical complications is not complicated.

The Texas law allows exceptions to save the health/life of the mother if she can find a doctor to perform the medical procedure.

 

[Slade3200]

I cannot see anything that jeopardizes her "future ability to have kids". At her stage of pregnancy, she will labor and have that baby, whether naturally or through a late term abortion. In very rare cases, EITHER can damage future ability to have kids.

And shouldn’t that be her medical choice to make. Not the governments?

 

[Slade3200]

UPDATE:

This was a terribly worded article by CNN, the one I posted. She has two children that she birthed via C section. Repeated C sections are always risky; she must have known no matter what that after two, a third would be risky. And she is already a parent. So much reaching to make this worse than it is--and it is already bad.

One can be a parent and still want to parent another child.

 

[bodecea]

These stupid Moon Bats are always talking about "common sense" gun control laws.

"Common sense" abortion is to only allow it when the mother's life is at risk.

"allow it"...in other words, con-trolling women's bodies.

 

[Slade3200]

1. She wants to kill the third because it's not the baby she wanted, and might "jeopardize" having that nice third she envisioned.

The pregnant is not viable. You think this is easy for her? You loosely accused her of wanting to kill her baby?! Shame on you.

 

[Slade3200]

So we base the right to abort on odds? How would we define these odds? She perhaps wants to get pregnant again in the future. She will still have to go through this procedure.

In a future case it would be a baby she wants as opposed to this one. An argument any woman could use.

We base the right on what the mother wants to do. Or at least that what we should do. Texas wants legislators and courts deciding for her