Montana Supreme Court Nixes Extremist Anti Abortion laws, Citing onstitutional Privacy Rights

[elektra]

ActionJackson said:
Unfortunately, your cult has made it "legal" to "abort" a baby seconds before birth or even after birth. That will NEVER be ethical or valid.

Why do you believe these conspiracy theories.

A better question would be, why don't you educate yourself by looking up the laws, then you would see that ActionJackson is right, and that you are the fool expressing a wild opinion.

 

[elektra]

Another Moron. Actually republican women have more abortions than democrats do. Catholics don't agree with it and most Catholics are Democrats.

You are another moron, thank you for pointing that out.

Republicans and Democrats, so this is only about supporting the Democrat politics for you, regardless of the issue. Good to know.

 

[Stann]

A better question would be, why don't you educate yourself by looking up the laws, then you would see that ActionJackson is right, and that you are the fool expressing a wild opinion.

www.kff.org>abortions-later-in-pregnancy/kff I did the research, you guys are liars.

 

[Borillar]

Montana’s Republican-controlled legislature abrogated privacy rights guaranteed by the state constitution, the court ruled:

“nder Montana’s Constitution, the right of individual privacy—that is, the right of personal autonomy or the right to be let alone—is fundamental.

“It is, perhaps, one of the most important rights guaranteed to the citizens of this State, and its separate textual protection in our Constitution reflects Montanans’ historical abhorrence and distrust of excessive governmental interference in their personal lives.”

The high court sided with an advanced practice nurse practitioner and a clinician who challenged a 2005 law, styled “Control of Practice of Abortion,” that limited who could provide health services.

The health professionals also are called advanced practice registered nurses (APRNs), family nurse practitioners (FNPs), certified nurse-midwifes (CNMs), and physician assistants (PAs).

The district court ruled that the legislature violated a woman’s “fundamental right of privacy to seek abortion care from a qualified health care provider of her choosing” when enacting the 2005 law.

Montana Supreme Court nixes extremist anti-abortion laws, citing constitutional privacy rights

Montana’s highest court unanimously upheld a a district court ruling that overturned a 2005 law restricting who could provide abortion services. The 7-0 decision cited privacy rights enumerated in Montana’s constitution, in a ruling that likely also...

www.dailykos.com

Hang on America. We will get rid of these anti American extremist assholes, state by state. Election by election.

It's coming, and may take longer in certain areas of the country where the most extreme anti American fringe lunatics are. But it's coming.

Good to know that there are still people with common sense left in Montana who don't want the government to control all aspects of their lives.

 

[CarsomyrPlusSix]

Do you ever listen to yourself. You are an idiot !

Oh the ironing.

You literally said that, you freak!

 

[elektra]

www.kff.org>abortions-later-in-pregnancy/kff I did the research, you guys are liars.

You dont know how to link and quote and add commentary on the quote? A basic function of this message board.

The fact that you are linking and not quoting law, shows you do not know what you are talking about.

And of course, you link, links to nothing.

I dont care if you link, as long as you state the law you are citing. People never read the law and always search their opinion.

you failed

 

[Stann]

You dont know how to link and quote and add commentary on the quote? A basic function of this message board.

The fact that you are linking and not quoting law, shows you do not know what you are talking about.

And of course, you link, links to nothing.

I dont care if you link, as long as you state the law you are citing. People never read the law and always search their opinion.

you failed

And you continue to be a total asshole. Nit-picking about technical issues you could easily overcome IF you wanted to know the TRUTH. But of course, keep up all the lies. That's the only way you guys can win ( actually lose ).

 

[elektra]

And you continue to be a total asshole. Nit-picking about technical issues you could easily overcome IF you wanted to know the TRUTH. But of course, keep up all the lies. That's the only way you guys can win ( actually lose ).

nit picking? I just asked for you to tell me what the law is, the name of the law, which you do not know. that is not nit picking, it is not a technical issue.

Post the law, I will read it, and we will see who is right. You obviously searched, and returned with a link to nothing. Copying and pasting is easy. I do not see why you have such a problem with basic computer skills.

 

[Stann]

nit picking? I just asked for you to tell me what the law is, the name of the law, which you do not know. that is not nit picking, it is not a technical issue.

Post the law, I will read it, and we will see who is right. You obviously searched, and returned with a link to nothing. Copying and pasting is easy. I do not see why you have such a problem with basic computer skills.

All laws regarding abortion are an egregious over reach by government. They really shouldn't exist anymore. We are suppose to be all adults in the room.

 

[HikerGuy83]

Great fucking news. Make no mistake about this, abortion will be on the ballot next year. A clear majority of Americans support a Woman's Right To Choose. By passing these kinds of laws in other states, the ReNaziKlans are setting themselves up as losers.

I keep wondering where the effort is to amend the constitution to make abortion a guarantee at some level.

Seems like that would be the logical approach since so many Americans support this right to choose.

 

[elektra]

I keep wondering where the effort is to amend the constitution to make abortion a guarantee at some level.

Seems like that would be the logical approach since so many Americans support this right to choose.

You believe a fetus, aborted alive, living, should be killed? This is what the law was changed to protect, fetuses that are alive after abortions, which happens a lot.

 

[HikerGuy83]

You believe a fetus, aborted alive, living, should be killed? This is what the law was changed to protect, fetuses that are alive after abortions, which happens a lot.

I think I understand your position so I won't respond in a rude fashion.

I didn't say anything about what I believe about a fetus being aborted alive (although I suspect we'd agree).

What law was changed ? Just for my information.

What I was asking is that if the left thinks so many people are in agreement, why hasn't the amendment process started ? If they really have that MUCH support, it should be a slam dunk. I am guessing that maybe they don't have as much agreement as they think they do.

 

[otto105]

We can murder kids? Be lazy. Make excuses. Nice.

Kids?

 

[elektra]

I think I understand your position so I won't respond in a rude fashion.

I didn't say anything about what I believe about a fetus being aborted alive (although I suspect we'd agree).

What law was changed ? Just for my information.

What I was asking is that if the left thinks so many people are in agreement, why hasn't the amendment process started ? If they really have that MUCH support, it should be a slam dunk. I am guessing that maybe they don't have as much agreement as they think they do.

I was asking nicely, it may not of sounded that way. I like the laws, to be able to read them, instead of all this other stuff that clouds up a thread. Here is the law, that I found on montana's government website.

I read more into your comment than was there. Kind of the tone of the overall thread influencing me. But, I did ask for clarification. Anyhow,

50-20-108. Protection of premature infants born alive.

50-20-108. Protection of premature infants born alive. (1) A person commits an offense, as defined in 45-5-102 through 45-5-104, if he purposely, knowingly, or negligently causes the death of a premature infant born alive, if such infant is viable.
(2) Whenever a premature infant which is the subject of abortion is born alive and is viable, it becomes a dependent and neglected child subject to the provisions of state law, unless:
(a) the termination of the pregnancy is necessary to preserve the life of the mother; or
(b) the mother and her spouse or either of them have agreed in writing in advance of the abortion or within 72 hours thereafter to accept the parental rights and responsibilities of the premature infant if it survives the abortion procedure.
(3) No person may use any premature infant born alive for any type of scientific research or other kind of experimentation except as necessary to protect or preserve the life and health of such premature infant born alive.
(4) Violation of subsection (3) of this section is a felony.

 

[elektra]

I think I understand your position so I won't respond in a rude fashion.

I didn't say anything about what I believe about a fetus being aborted alive (although I suspect we'd agree).

What law was changed ? Just for my information.

What I was asking is that if the left thinks so many people are in agreement, why hasn't the amendment process started ? If they really have that MUCH support, it should be a slam dunk. I am guessing that maybe they don't have as much agreement as they think they do.

There is also this, to read through, when i get time, I think this is the changes proposed or some sort of revision

https://leg.mt.gov/bills/2023/billpdf/HB0432.pdf

 

[HikerGuy83]

I read more into your comment than was there. Kind of the tone of the overall thread influencing me. But, I did ask for clarification. Anyhow,

No worries.

Thanks for posting the law you were referrencing.

 

[John Edgar Slow Horses]

Nice, thoughtful deliberation by the state supreme court.

 

[Stann]

You believe a fetus, aborted alive, living, should be killed? This is what the law was changed to protect, fetuses that are alive after abortions, which happens a lot.

It doesn't happen very often at all, when it does the fetus is given palliative care, it is Not murdered. That's sick propaganda from the anti-abortion crowd.

 

[elektra]

It doesn't happen very often at all, when it does the fetus is given palliative care, it is Not murdered. That's sick propaganda from the anti-abortion crowd.

abortion is a very sick procedure

50-20-401. Offense of partial-birth abortion -- exception -- definitions -- penalties, MCA

leg.mt.gov

(ii) A procedure that constitutes a partial-birth abortion is one in which the following steps occur:

A) the living fetus is removed intact from the uterus until only the head remains in the uterus;
(B) all or a part of the intracranial contents of the fetus are evacuated;
(C) the head of the fetus is compressed; and
(D) following fetal demise, the fetus is removed from the birth canal.

 

[Stann]

abortion is a very sick procedure

50-20-401. Offense of partial-birth abortion -- exception -- definitions -- penalties, MCA

leg.mt.gov

Abortion is a medical procedure that is safe and effective with proper unobstructed medical care. The state, courts and / or parties are making it more dangerous and less effective. That is sick.