Supreme Court has voted to overturn abortion rights per draft opinion (Update: Dobbs opinion official) (2 Viewers)

Users who are viewing this thread

    Brennan77

    Well-known member
    Joined
    Apr 30, 2019
    Messages
    126
    Reaction score
    152
    Age
    42
    Location
    New Orleans
    Offline
    A Texas man has filed a wrongful-death lawsuit against three women who allegedly helped his ex-wife obtain abortion pills and terminate her pregnancy, in the first case of its kind to be brought since the Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade.


    The lawsuit could signal a new phase in antiabortion strategy, with conservatives scrambling to crack down on growing abortion pill networks that have helped pregnant people access medication abortion in states where the procedure is banned.


    The plaintiff, Marcus Silva, is represented by Jonathan Mitchell, a conservative lawyer who was the architect of a novel 2021 Texas abortion ban, and Briscoe Cain, a Republican member of the Texas House.

    The lawsuit states that helping someone obtain an abortion qualifies as murder under the state’s pre-Roe abortion ban that took effect this summer, allowing Silva to sue under the wrongful-death statute.



    Silva’s civil case could result in the women being forced to pay over $1 million in damages.
    The district attorney in Galveston, Tex., will decide separately whether to charge the women in criminal court.


    Silva alleged that in July 2022, when the couple were still married, his wife became pregnant but concealed it from him…….

     
    First read this strikes me as complicated, and it's possible I'm out of my depth on the topic.

    First of all I don't like the idea of property, however these embryos are not yet people or entities with personhood rights, yet they jointly belong to this couple. Citing a law that involved slavery is a terrible idea, so just set that idea aside. I would want the Judge to sit down with these two people and force them to make a joint decision about their futures of these embryos, but it would have to be joint agreement, allow them to develop, donate them to a couple or a single woman who wants to have a child, but can't due to a fertility issue, or have them destroyed.

    If there is a better choice, I'd be happy to listen and consider it.
    I'm not a lawyer but here is my two cents. Multiple states have passed abortion laws based off the beliefs of the legislators. The recent Roe decision pretty much validates the fact that what people believe matters and in some cases personal beliefs can allow someone to deny people of their lawful rights.If the wife believes that life begins at conception, then by definition, that embryo is a human entitled to all human rights. How is that argument any different than county clerks being able to deny people the right to marry based on their beliefs or cashiers refusing to sell abortion pills based on their beliefs?
     
    Stuff like this can pass because of gerrymandering at the state level.

    The state politicians are afraid that most of the people in the state might be against banning abortion, but know that they can win their districts by doing anything that can come off as pro-life.

    It should never be in the interest of an elected official to take the ability to self-govern away from the people. It's a sign of a systemic problem.
    Unrelated to the specific topic, but related, the State of a Texas is about to take away control of the Harris County School board, all elected by the community, and turn over control to an appointed person who answers only to the Governor. There is a broad agenda here of reshaping the education system into a Right Wing entity.
     
    Last edited:
    I'm not a lawyer but here is my two cents. Multiple states have passed abortion laws based off the beliefs of the legislators. The recent Roe decision pretty much validates the fact that what people believe matters and in some cases personal beliefs can allow someone to deny people of their lawful rights.If the wife believes that life begins at conception, then by definition, that embryo is a human entitled to all human rights. How is that argument any different than county clerks being able to deny people the right to marry based on their beliefs or cashiers refusing to sell abortion pills based on their beliefs?
    The problem is what 1) people believe, taking matters into their own hands and 2) shoving these restrictive, exclusively religious beliefs down other peoples throats just because they believe their belief trumps everyone else‘s who disagrees. I will admit it all boils down to what everyone believes, but it is the people in charge of writing laws that make them happen.

    Ironically these beliefs appear no where as statements of policy/belief in the Bible. My understanding is the tradional old world view of human life is that it starts at first breath. This is as far as religious scripture goes. What’s worse is when you have lay people writing laws, without the benefit of science knowledge who use terms like “heart beat” bill where there is no heart or heartbeat, besides the issue that “life” itself does not connotate or should not infer personhood.

    This is my belief, yet the more restrictive view connotes anything more lax as murder. If we put these people in charge, and they appoint judges who enforce this view, at least at the State level, than we end up where we are today, And you can be sure there will be an effort at the Federal Level to outlaw abortion Nationally.

    And If these embryos have personhood rights, they would need lawyers representing them. I don’t believe that myself, but am waiting for this suggestion to come from the Right. Of course if the parents are not interested, the State would have to be the ones to take responsibility, but the Right rarely has any interest in other people’s children after they are born. We’ll get you born, and then you are on your own, kid… :oops:
     
    Last edited:
    Another article

    It was reported today there is a lawsuit regarding Texas’s anti-abortion bill that now includes several doctors who claim that the vague way this law is written they can’t perform their duties as Doctors without putting themselves in legal jeopardy.

     
    It was reported today there is a lawsuit regarding Texas’s anti-abortion bill that now includes several doctors who claim that the vague way this law is written they can’t perform their duties as Doctors without putting themselves in legal jeopardy.


    Almost dead doesn't count. They gotta die. A lot of women will have to die. Then there'll be a class-action from the husbands that the State wrongfully killed all the children they *could have had* if the State didn't interfere with maintenance on their baby-machines.
    The women's rights have to be kept completely out of it because the GOP doesn't care. Argue until you're blue in the face, nothing will convince them to care.
     
    Members of the South Carolina State House are considering a bill that would make a woman who has an abortion in the state eligible for the death penalty.

    The “South Carolina Prenatal Equal Protection Act of 2023” would amend the state’s code of laws, redefining “person” to include a fertilized egg at the point of conception, affording that zygote “equal protection under the homicide laws of the state” — up to and including the ultimate punishment: death.

    The bill was authored by Rep. Rob Harris, a registered nurse and member of the Freedom Caucus; it has attracted 21 co-sponsors to date. (Two former co-sponsors — Rep. Matt Leber and Rep. Kathy Landing — asked to have their names removed as sponsors of the bill. Leber and Landing could not be reached for comment.)

    Rep. Nancy Mace, a Republican who represents South Carolina in the U.S. House, took to the floor on Friday to call attention to the bill, which she sees as part of a “deeply disturbing” trend. (Multiple Texas lawmakers have floated the idea of executing women who have abortions in the past. Those bills, proposed before the Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade, failed.)

    “To see this debate go to the dark places, the dark edges, where it has gone on both sides of the aisle, has been deeply disturbing to me as a woman, as a female legislator, as a mom, and as a victim of rape. I was raped as a teenager at the age of 16,” Mace said. “This debate ought to be a bipartisan debate where we balance the rights of women and we balance the right to life. But we aren’t having that conversation here in D.C. We aren’t having that conversation at home. We aren’t having that conversation with fellow state lawmakers.”

    Asked about exceptions for victims of rape, which Mace raised in her remarks on the floor, Harris told Rolling Stone, “There are other bills with exceptions, but will do little or nothing to save the lives of pre-born children.” He went on list exceptions the bill does contain, including: “a ‘duress’ defense for women who are pressured/threatened to have an abortion” and “medical care to save the mother’s life… The functional language in that scenario is whether the baby’s life is forfeited ‘unintentionally’ or ‘intentionally’.” (Asked if he saw any irony between being a member of the so-called “Freedom Caucus” while proposing such harsh restrictions on reproductive freedoms, Harris responded simply: “Murder of the pre-born is harsh.”)..............

     
    it’s not about the children either. It’s about controlling women.

     
    If it doesn't take that much money to feed kids, isn't that all the more reason to have free school lunches? Some of these idiot lawmakers have some nonsensical talking points.
    I think he is inferring that people don’t need free school lunches because it doesn’t cost much to feed their own kids. It’s the old - poor people are just lazy and don’t deserve any help, IMO.
     
    I think he is inferring that people don’t need free school lunches because it doesn’t cost much to feed their own kids. It’s the old - poor people are just lazy and don’t deserve any help, IMO.
    Yeah, they really do suck at empathy. That whole compassionate conservatism phase was a crock of sheet, and I'm embarrassed to admit I ate it up at the time.
     
    An Idaho hospital has planned to stop delivering babies, with the medical center’s managers citing increasing criminalization of physicians and the inability to retain pediatricians as major reasons.

    Bonner General Health, the only hospital in Sandpoint, Idaho, announced on Friday that it would no longer provide labor, delivery and a host of other obstetrical services.

    The more than 9,000 residents of Sandpoint are now forced to drive 46 miles for the nearest labor and delivery care, the Idaho Statesman reported.

    In a statement, the hospital’s leadership said that the decision to eliminate the obstetrics unit stemmed from the “political climate” in Idaho.

    “Highly respected, talented physicians are leaving. Recruiting replacements will be extraordinarily difficult,” hospital officials said in a press release……

     
    Arkansas will build a monument to mark the abortions performed in the state before Roe v Wade was struck down last year.

    Senate Bill 307 has already been signed into law by Republican Governor Sarah Huckabee Sanders. The bill allows the construction of a “monument to the unborn” near the state’s Capitol grounds.

    Anti-abortion groups and the Capitol Arts and Grounds Commission will choose artists and oversee the design of the privately-funded monument.

    The bill, sponsored by GOP state Senator Kim Hammer, claims that Arkansas was “prevented from protecting the life of unborn children by the decisions of the United State Supreme Court in Roe v Wade” from 1973 until it was overruled last year. It also states that around 236,243 “elective abortions” were performed during that period.

    Arkansas has one of the most draconian laws concerning abortion rights in the US. The trigger ban — which was drafted in 2019 and went into effect following the Roe v Wadedownfall — prohibits abortions at all stages of pregnancy unless the procedure is needed to save the pregnant individual’s life……

     
    Arkansas will build a monument to mark the abortions performed in the state before Roe v Wade was struck down last year.

    Senate Bill 307 has already been signed into law by Republican Governor Sarah Huckabee Sanders. The bill allows the construction of a “monument to the unborn” near the state’s Capitol grounds.

    Anti-abortion groups and the Capitol Arts and Grounds Commission will choose artists and oversee the design of the privately-funded monument.

    The bill, sponsored by GOP state Senator Kim Hammer, claims that Arkansas was “prevented from protecting the life of unborn children by the decisions of the United State Supreme Court in Roe v Wade” from 1973 until it was overruled last year. It also states that around 236,243 “elective abortions” were performed during that period.

    Arkansas has one of the most draconian laws concerning abortion rights in the US. The trigger ban — which was drafted in 2019 and went into effect following the Roe v Wadedownfall — prohibits abortions at all stages of pregnancy unless the procedure is needed to save the pregnant individual’s life……


    Feels like this has Jason Rapert's fingerprints all over it.
     
    An Idaho hospital has planned to stop delivering babies, with the medical center’s managers citing increasing criminalization of physicians and the inability to retain pediatricians as major reasons.

    Bonner General Health, the only hospital in Sandpoint, Idaho, announced on Friday that it would no longer provide labor, delivery and a host of other obstetrical services.

    The more than 9,000 residents of Sandpoint are now forced to drive 46 miles for the nearest labor and delivery care, the Idaho Statesman reported.

    In a statement, the hospital’s leadership said that the decision to eliminate the obstetrics unit stemmed from the “political climate” in Idaho.

    “Highly respected, talented physicians are leaving. Recruiting replacements will be extraordinarily difficult,” hospital officials said in a press release……


    That's what hospitals in those backwards states are going to have to start doing. Good for them for making the smart decision and stating the reason clearly. That's what he people of that state deserve for electing the government that they have.
     
    An Idaho hospital has planned to stop delivering babies, with the medical center’s managers citing increasing criminalization of physicians and the inability to retain pediatricians as major reasons.

    Bonner General Health, the only hospital in Sandpoint, Idaho, announced on Friday that it would no longer provide labor, delivery and a host of other obstetrical services.

    The more than 9,000 residents of Sandpoint are now forced to drive 46 miles for the nearest labor and delivery care, the Idaho Statesman reported.

    In a statement, the hospital’s leadership said that the decision to eliminate the obstetrics unit stemmed from the “political climate” in Idaho.

    “Highly respected, talented physicians are leaving. Recruiting replacements will be extraordinarily difficult,” hospital officials said in a press release……


    Newport, Washington is only 30 miles. They must mean the nearest hospital in Idaho.

    I imagine places like Newport, Liberty Lake/Spokane and Clarkston are going to start seeing a surge in medical refugees seeking the kinds of care they can't get at home.
     

    Create an account or login to comment

    You must be a member in order to leave a comment

    Create account

    Create an account on our community. It's easy!

    Log in

    Already have an account? Log in here.

    Advertisement

    General News Feed

    Fact Checkers News Feed

    Sponsored

    Back
    Top Bottom