Roe v Wade overturned????? Draft says so
- Thread starter TGHusker
- Start date
Scarlet
Well-known member
Just one example of the Republicans scrambling to cover their tracks. When you vote for laws stating life begins at conception this is what happens. They didn't think it through but now they're scrambling for two reasons.
1) people will hold them accountable at election time
2) this will affect people they know who need IVF if they want to have kids.
1) people will hold them accountable at election time
2) this will affect people they know who need IVF if they want to have kids.
Scarlet
Well-known member
https://www.businessinsider.in/politics/world/news/125-house-republicans-including-speaker-mike-johnson-back-a-life-at-conception-bill-without-any-ivf-exception/articleshow/107953568.cms
"Most House Republicans have cosponsored a bill declaring that life begins from the moment of conception, a position under increased scrutiny after the Alabama Supreme Court ruled that frozen embryos are "unborn children."
"This Congress, 125 House Republicans — including Speaker Mike Johnson — have cosponsored the "Life at Conception Act," which states that the term "human being" includes "all stages of life, including the moment of fertilization, cloning, or other moment at which an individual member of the human species comes into being."
"The bill does not include any exception for in vitro fertilization (IVF), a reproductive treatment that allows mothers to fertilize several eggs outside the womb in order to increase the chances of a viable pregnancy"
"Most House Republicans have cosponsored a bill declaring that life begins from the moment of conception, a position under increased scrutiny after the Alabama Supreme Court ruled that frozen embryos are "unborn children."
"This Congress, 125 House Republicans — including Speaker Mike Johnson — have cosponsored the "Life at Conception Act," which states that the term "human being" includes "all stages of life, including the moment of fertilization, cloning, or other moment at which an individual member of the human species comes into being."
"The bill does not include any exception for in vitro fertilization (IVF), a reproductive treatment that allows mothers to fertilize several eggs outside the womb in order to increase the chances of a viable pregnancy"
ZRod
Well-known member
I was specifically told this was a state's rights issue, why would Congress be sponsoring this kind of legislation?
BigRedBuster
Well-known member
I’m pretty close to this right now on the issue. There is no way in hell the government can figure out what’s best in each individual situation. I want to keep reducing the number of abortions like has happened since the 70s. But, we also need to recognize that there needs to be major programs helping families, single moms and kids born in these situations so they have a chance at a good life. AND….sex education and birth control easily available for young people.
DevoHusker
New member
Scarlet
Well-known member
These people are proposing that women who have abortions and doctors who perform those abortions be given the death penalty in the name of saving lives. Even those who report to the E.R. in the midst of a miscarriage could be prosecuted for murder because, according to these people, most who do so are lying about it.
The process of IVF will also be grounds for prosecution for murder because that egg that can frozen at -300f for 30 year is a human will full rights.
They also propose that there be no exceptions for rape or incest but you know if their 14 year old daughter was raped and impregnated they're headed to the nearest state that allows for abortions. Remember when we were all told sliding down this slippery slope was hyperbole?
The process of IVF will also be grounds for prosecution for murder because that egg that can frozen at -300f for 30 year is a human will full rights.
They also propose that there be no exceptions for rape or incest but you know if their 14 year old daughter was raped and impregnated they're headed to the nearest state that allows for abortions. Remember when we were all told sliding down this slippery slope was hyperbole?
Mierin
Donor
So humans can survive in -300 degress F for 30 years now? I guess I bought the wrong type of long johns.
TGHusker
Well-known member
:facepalm:
Teach, no need to add stupidity on top of stupidity - speaking of the bold above.
I'm pro-life and I surely don't agree with that non-sense in the video.
teachercd
Well-known member
funhusker
Active member
TGHusker
Well-known member
TGHusker
Well-known member
I agree with these:
Exceptions to state abortion bans generally fall into four general categories: to prevent the death of the pregnant person, when there is risk to the health of the pregnant person, when the pregnancy is the result of rape or incest, and when there is a lethal fetal anomaly.
https://www.kff.org/womens-health-policy/press-release/what-are-the-exceptions-to-state-abortion-bans/
I will add: I have know of situations where the mother did not abort the child that was a result of rape or incest. That should be her choice - good can come out of evil. Some people chose that possibility. The same could be true of fetal anomalies - we have known of individuals born with great handicaps/anomalies that have gone on to live productive and in many cases inspirational lives. Again - no one should be forced to 'chose' one way or the other.
From a practical perspective - in a pluralistic society, there will never be 100% agreement on this. So, I think we have to look at this from a compromised position. No side gets all that it wants. The alternative is that we become authoritarian which is the opposite of who we are as a nation. 1. We can either be like China where the govt dictates the one child per family policy - forced abortions or like 2. Honduras where abortions are banned in their totality by the govt since 1985.
The gray area for me is time limits. We've seen the draconian state laws that don't allow any abortions at all or limit them to 6 weeks.
Time limits: I'm still torn on time limits - 6 weeks is to restrictive especially if they preclude any of the above and because - in most cases one does not know of a pregnancy until 6 weeks at the earliest. 12 weeks seems reasonable for me.
Last edited by a moderator: