Over 200 Lawmakers Ask SCOTUS to Reconsider Roe v Wade

[Weatherman2020]

This

View attachment 298956

Is not this

View attachment 298957

No woman that has had an abortion killed a child.

24 weeks you can legally rip the limbs off of this child to kill it.

Educate yourself.

 

[SaxxyBlues]

i HAVE

The majority of abortions in 2016 took place early in gestation: 91.0% of abortions were performed at ≤13 weeks’ gestation; a smaller number of abortions (7.7%) were performed at 14–20 weeks’ gestation, and even fewer (1.2%) were performed at ≥21 weeks’ gestation. In 2016, 27.9% of all abortions were early medical abortions (a nonsurgical abortion at ≤8 weeks’ gestation). The percentage of abortions reported as early medical abortions increased 113% from 2007 to 2016, with a 14% increase from 2015 to 2016. Source: MMWR Surveill Summ 2019;68(No. SS-11).

 

[Weatherman2020]

i HAVE

The majority of abortions in 2016 took place early in gestation: 91.0% of abortions were performed at ≤13 weeks’ gestation; a smaller number of abortions (7.7%) were performed at 14–20 weeks’ gestation, and even fewer (1.2%) were performed at ≥21 weeks’ gestation. In 2016, 27.9% of all abortions were early medical abortions (a nonsurgical abortion at ≤8 weeks’ gestation). The percentage of abortions reported as early medical abortions increased 113% from 2007 to 2016, with a 14% increase from 2015 to 2016. Source: MMWR Surveill Summ 2019;68(No. SS-11).

What’s that have to do with your desire to kill babies?

13 week old black baby:

 

[SaxxyBlues]

Probably if "a" holes like you would get out of the middle of the abortion issue women could get them earlier. The more obstacles you put in her path the longer it takes to receive one. I think stupid *ucks like you create late term abortions.

 

[Weatherman2020]

Probably if "a" holes like you would get out of the middle of the abortion issue women could get them earlier. The more obstacles you put in her path the longer it takes to receive one. I think stupid *ucks like you create late term abortions.

Hilarious. What a pathetic liar who loves murdering babies.

 

[SaxxyBlues]

Probably if "a" holes like you would get out of the middle of the abortion issue women could get them earlier. The more obstacles you put in her path the longer it takes to receive one. I think stupid *ucks like you create late term abortions.

Hilarious. What a pathetic liar who loves murdering babies.

What? You imagine murdering babies when you hear the word abortion? Shows what a total farce you are. Do you have any idea how ridiculous you sound. Like a kid na na na that's what you are. Stupid.

 

[busybee01]

The time is nigh.

200 lawmakers urge Supreme Court to reconsider Roe vs. Wade

View attachment 298168

BTW- 207 lawmakers is less than half of the 535 members of congress. Apparently most lawmakers don’t want RvW overturned.

Democrats love dead babies.

Republicans are religious fanatics. Ayatollah Trump.

You Leftists weep over a dead terrorist while you cheer babies being slaughtered.

Sorry no leftists here. There is no evidence he was a terrorist and seeking out a justification is not weeping. The fact is that the number of abortions in this country has gone down without draconian laws to criminalize it. I support persuading women to not have a abortion rather than criminalizing it. I remember when the pro-life movement said jailing women for having a abortion was not the goal. Apparently it is now. At one time I supported reversing Roe vs Wade but because of the draconian laws that have been passed, I now oppose reversing Roe vs Wade. I suspect Roberts will be the fifth vote for keeping Roe vs Wade while supporting some restrictions.

 

[jknowgood]

The time is nigh.

200 lawmakers urge Supreme Court to reconsider Roe vs. Wade

View attachment 298168

BTW- 207 lawmakers is less than half of the 535 members of congress. Apparently most lawmakers don’t want RvW overturned.

Democrats love dead babies.

 

[JoeB131]

24 weeks you can legally rip the limbs off of this child to kill it.

Anyone terminating a pregnancy at 24 is doing it for a sound medical reason, like a deformed fetus or a threat to the woman's life.

 

[pknopp]

The time is nigh.

200 lawmakers urge Supreme Court to reconsider Roe vs. Wade

View attachment 298168

So Republicans can throw women in jail for having a abortion. Republican extremism will make this unlikely as Roberts will likely be the fifth vote to uphold Roe vs Wade.

I wouldn't be surprised to see Gorsuch vote to uphold either.

 

[pknopp]

The time is nigh.

200 lawmakers urge Supreme Court to reconsider Roe vs. Wade

View attachment 298168

BTW- 207 lawmakers is less than half of the 535 members of congress. Apparently most lawmakers don’t want RvW overturned.

Democrats love dead babies.

Republicans are religious fanatics. Ayatollah Trump.

You Leftists weep over a dead terrorist while you cheer babies being slaughtered.

To truly be pro-life you weep over the lives of those lost in useless wars also.

 

[pknopp]

24 weeks you can legally rip the limbs off of this child to kill it.

Anyone terminating a pregnancy at 24 is doing it for a sound medical reason, like a deformed fetus or a threat to the woman's life.

During the testimony when the debate of the law that would have ended the Intact Dialation and Extraction method of abortion Dr. Haskell was asked why he had performed such procedures. One reason he said was "maternal indications", When asked what this meant he explained the age of the mother. He explained how a 16 year old might hide her pregnancy until later term. When the procedure was done here it was not for a deformed fetus or life of the mother.

Now you can argue that was rare and relatively so it was. You can argue that is now illegal, and it is. But it shows the need for regulations. Regulations permitted under RvW.

 

[JoeB131]

During the testimony when the debate of the law that would have ended the Intact Dialation and Extraction method of abortion Dr. Haskell was asked why he had performed such procedures. One reason he said was "maternal indications", When asked what this meant he explained the age of the mother. He explained how a 16 year old might hide her pregnancy until later term. When the procedure was done here it was not for a deformed fetus or life of the mother.

Now you can argue that was rare and relatively so it was. You can argue that is now illegal, and it is. But it shows the need for regulations. Regulations permitted under RvW.

No. Here's the only two people who should make the decision.

The woman and her doctor. Period.

 

[pknopp]

During the testimony when the debate of the law that would have ended the Intact Dialation and Extraction method of abortion Dr. Haskell was asked why he had performed such procedures. One reason he said was "maternal indications", When asked what this meant he explained the age of the mother. He explained how a 16 year old might hide her pregnancy until later term. When the procedure was done here it was not for a deformed fetus or life of the mother.

Now you can argue that was rare and relatively so it was. You can argue that is now illegal, and it is. But it shows the need for regulations. Regulations permitted under RvW.

No. Here's the only two people who should make the decision.

The woman and her doctor. Period.

So you support the end of RvW?

 

[JoeB131]

So you support the end of RvW?

I think you are confused.

RvW does have provisions that allow for government interference after "viability"... but those were immediately struck down by the Doe. v. Boland decision that was issued the same day, that gives "health of the mother" priority over viability. Health of the mother was defined as anything the doctor claims is the health of the mother.

The reality, though, is that no one has abortions in the third trimester unless there is a damned good medical reason.

 

[pknopp]

So you support the end of RvW?

I think you are confused.

RvW does have provisions that allow for government interference after "viability"... but those were immediately struck down by the Doe. v. Boland decision that was issued the same day, that gives "health of the mother" priority over viability. Health of the mother was defined as anything the doctor claims is the health of the mother.

The reality, though, is that no one has abortions in the third trimester unless there is a damned good medical reason.

No they were not. I'm not the one confused. That is NOT what Doe did. Doe stated that if there is a "health" exemption it must include things like mental health or whatever that could be come up with. That is why the ban did not have a "health" exemption.

It's the reason we had the Hyde Amendment.

 

[JoeB131]

No they were not. I'm not the one confused. That is NOT what Doe did. Doe stated that if there is a "health" exemption it must include things like mental health or whatever that could be come up with. That is why the ban did not have a "health" exemption.

It's the reason we had the Hyde Amendment.

We have a Hyde Amendment because old Hank (who used to be my congressman) was a hypocritical sack of shit.

Point is, Doe v. Boland rendered viability regulations moot, leaving the decision ENTIRELY up to the doctors.

As it should be.

Now, that said, I'd like to see abortion rights codified into our law, so we aren't counting votes on SCOTUS to protect women from back alley abortions again.

 

[pknopp]

No they were not. I'm not the one confused. That is NOT what Doe did. Doe stated that if there is a "health" exemption it must include things like mental health or whatever that could be come up with. That is why the ban did not have a "health" exemption.

It's the reason we had the Hyde Amendment.

We have a Hyde Amendment because old Hank (who used to be my congressman) was a hypocritical sack of shit.

Point is, Doe v. Boland rendered viability regulations moot, leaving the decision ENTIRELY up to the doctors.

As it should be.

Now, that said, I'd like to see abortion rights codified into our law, so we aren't counting votes on SCOTUS to protect women from back alley abortions again.

You couldn't be further from wrong. Doe simply stated that if there was an exception what it had to include. It did not state that there had to be an exception. You are trying to argue that the justices made one ruling and then said, "nah just kidding" in the next.

The ban without an exemption was upheld.

 

[JoeB131]

You couldn't be further from wrong. Doe simply stated that if there was an exception what it had to include. It did not state that there had to be an exception. You are trying to argue that the justices made one ruling and then said, "nah just kidding" in the next.

The ban without an exemption was upheld.

But that's exactly what they did, because we have abortions up to the 8th month... no restrictions.

The big problem was when the Court passed Roe and Doe in 1973, they really didn't think it was going to be controversial.

They thought they were getting rid of dumb laws no one was following at that point, anyway. Which is why FIVE Republican justices joined 2 Democrats in striking down these laws

Little did they suspect the Evangelicals needed a bullshit issue to get the stupids to vote against their own economic interests.

 

[pknopp]

You couldn't be further from wrong. Doe simply stated that if there was an exception what it had to include. It did not state that there had to be an exception. You are trying to argue that the justices made one ruling and then said, "nah just kidding" in the next.

The ban without an exemption was upheld.

But that's exactly what they did, because we have abortions up to the 8th month... no restrictions.

The big problem was when the Court passed Roe and Doe in 1973, they really didn't think it was going to be controversial.

They thought they were getting rid of dumb laws no one was following at that point, anyway. Which is why FIVE Republican justices joined 2 Democrats in striking down these laws

Little did they suspect the Evangelicals needed a bullshit issue to get the stupids to vote against their own economic interests.

Republicans used to support privacy. Those days are over. They are ending for Democrats also outside of this one issue.