Supreme Court has voted to overturn abortion rights per draft opinion (Update: Dobbs opinion official) (1 Viewer)

[LovesMusic7360]

Not long ago Kari Lake proclaimed Arizona's abortion law was a great law and wanted it the law of the state.

Now that she has gotten her way, she is lobbying for it to be repealed.

As I have been saying since 2022, the overwhelming vast majority of women aren't going to vote for the man who proudly boasts that he got rid of Roe V. Wade. Nor are those women going to vote for a forced birther politician.

Turns out, republican belief in "pro life" was all just lies to get votes. Who is surprised? I sure am not.

How many forced birthers will do the same about face?

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/other/ka ... r-BB1ltx3I.

Arizona Republican Senate candidate Kari Lake is actively lobbying state lawmakers to overturn a 160-year-old law she once supported that bans abortion in almost all cases, a source with knowledge of her efforts told CNN.

 

[MT15]

Yes, Lindsey, we all know this.

 

[Farb]

Yes, Lindsey, we all know this.

Don't we have to at this point? Don't you guys want abortion legal on the federal level? If so, that is where the fight is to be had. Right now it is at the state level.

 

[MT15]

Don't we have to at this point? Don't you guys want abortion legal on the federal level? If so, that is where the fight is to be had. Right now it is at the state level.

No, we just need to go back to Roe and restore women’s bodily autonomy. It was working well for around 50 years.

In absence of that, yes, I want women to have the right of controlling their own bodies right up until there is a viable fetus. And after that, I want doctors and patients to be free to deal with catastrophic problems in a way that will protect the woman’s life. It needs to be codified at this point because of the radical anti-abortion movement.

I don’t like it when women are sent home from Emergency Departments with a dead or dying fetus, which poses a direct threat to their life and health, and they are told to deal with it on their own. I don’t like it when women are forced to miscarry into toilets at home because of draconian laws that target them.
BTW, they are going after IVF and birth control now. This is legislative theocracy. It’s wrong.

 

[MT15]

Oh, and multiple anti-abortion advocates said, it just needs to be a state decision. Now that states are protecting women, they don’t like it and want a national ban. In other words they were always lying. They have always been lying.

 

[Optimus Prime]

This week, Louisiana moved to expand the criminalization of abortion further than any state has since before Roe v Wade was decided. On Thursday, the state legislature passed a bill that would reclassify mifepristone and misoprostol – the two drugs used in a majority of American abortions – as dangerous controlled substances.

Under both state and federal classifications, the category of controlled substances includes those medications known to cause mind-altering effects and create the potential for addictions, such as sedatives and opioids; abortion medications carry none of this potential for physical dependence, habit-forming or abuse.

The move from Louisiana lawmakers runs counter to both established medical opinion and federal law. Jeff Landry, the anti-choice Republican governor, is expected to sign the bill. When he does, possession of mifepristone or misoprostol in Louisiana will come to carry large fines and up to 10 years in prison.

Louisiana already has a total abortion ban, with no rape or incest exceptions. But the Louisiana lawmakers are pursuing this new additional criminalization measure because while abortion bans are very good at generating suffering for women, they are not very good at actually preventing abortions.

Data from the Guttmacher Institute suggests that the United States saw an 11% increase in abortions between 2020 and 2023 – a possible indication that pregnant people are still managing to obtain abortions in spite of post-Dobbs bans.

As was the case in the pre-Roe era, women have continued to seek out ways to end their pregnancies, even in defiance of abortion ban laws…….

The criminalization measure, then, is part of an expanding horizon of invasive, sadistic and burdensome state interventions meant to do the impossible: to stop women from trying to control their own lives.

The Louisiana bill nominally will not apply to pregnant women – they’re exempted from criminal punishments for possession of the medications.

But it will take square aims at the vital, heroic efforts of feminists, medical practitioners and mutual aid networks that have been distributing the pills in Louisiana: the people who have adhered to the principles of bodily autonomy and women’s self-determination even amid a hostile climate.

These people’s courage and integrity is the greatest threat to the anti-choice regime, and so it is these people whom Louisiana’s new medical criminalization law will be used against first.

But pro-abortion rights and women’s rights activists are not the only ones who will be hurt by the new law. For one thing, the criminalization of possession is likely to scare many Louisiana abortion seekers out of ordering the pills online, even if the bill itself technically excludes them from prosecution.

These abortion seekers, dissuaded and threatened out of seeking the most reliable and safe method of self-managed abortion, may then turn to less safe options…….

Louisiana’s move to criminalize abortion pills is cruel and medically senseless | Moira Donegan

Louisiana, with one of the US’s worst maternal mortality rates, wants to make abortion medication a ‘controlled substance’

www.theguardian.com

 

[Farb]

No, we just need to go back to Roe and restore women’s bodily autonomy. It was working well for around 50 years.

In absence of that, yes, I want women to have the right of controlling their own bodies right up until there is a viable fetus. And after that, I want doctors and patients to be free to deal with catastrophic problems in a way that will protect the woman’s life. It needs to be codified at this point because of the radical anti-abortion movement.

I don’t like it when women are sent home from Emergency Departments with a dead or dying fetus, which poses a direct threat to their life and health, and they are told to deal with it on their own. I don’t like it when women are forced to miscarry into toilets at home because of draconian laws that target them.
BTW, they are going after IVF and birth control now. This is legislative theocracy. It’s wrong.

At viability is your limit then. Then you would support a law that would also protect the life the viable infant, right?

 

[Farb]

Oh, and multiple anti-abortion advocates said, it just needs to be a state decision. Now that states are protecting women, they don’t like it and want a national ban. In other words they were always lying. They have always been lying.

Do the 'pro-choice' like the idea of states ruling to outlaw the killing of a human life? They don't so they are pushing for a federal law to protect the right to kill a human life. About the same battlefield, don't you think?

 

[Bigdaddysaints]

Oh, and multiple anti-abortion advocates said, it just needs to be a state decision. Now that states are protecting women, they don’t like it and want a national ban. In other words they were always lying. They have always been lying.

Not only that, the times when those states put it on a ballot, and the voters decide to protect the choice, some states are telling the voters F-YOU we aren't gonna listen and do the opposite anyway...
Farb and SFL are perfectly fine that the same Anti-Abortion people are now going after all birth control and want pregnancy registers.. they want people who have miscarrages imprisoned and they are OK with that.

 

[MT15]

Do the 'pro-choice' like the idea of states ruling to outlaw the killing of a human life? They don't so they are pushing for a federal law to protect the right to kill a human life. About the same battlefield, don't you think?

Nope. Your stance and mine are fundamentally different no matter how much you try to make them equivalent. I would never force anyone to adhere to my religious beliefs even if it harms them and takes away their bodily autonomy. Nobody will ever be forced to get an abortion.

 

[MT15]

At viability is your limit then. Then you would support a law that would also protect the life the viable infant, right?

Ideally, I don’t want any government involvement in medical affairs. Doctors are not aborting viable fetuses. It just doesn’t happen. It’s a lie that people who want to control women tell people like you to get you good and outraged. They need you to be outraged so you will go along with the deadly consequences of their need to control women’s lives.

 

[Farb]

Ideally, I don’t want any government involvement in medical affairs. Doctors are not aborting viable fetuses. It just doesn’t happen. It’s a lie that people who want to control women tell people like you to get you good and outraged. They need you to be outraged so you will go along with the deadly consequences of their need to control women’s lives.

So they are opening a new clinic with a big write up for things that don't happen? They do happen and are around 1%. Almost the same % as those rape and incest, so obviously they do happen.
As far as the government involvement, I too would like to see the need for government intervention go away in regards to abortion. I would like to see the idea of abortion viewed as so incredibly inconceivable that no one would want to have them at all. That is a long time coming but I think it might get there in time.

 

[MT15]

So they are opening a new clinic with a big write up for things that don't happen? They do happen and are around 1%. Almost the same % as those rape and incest, so obviously they do happen.
As far as the government involvement, I too would like to see the need for government intervention go away in regards to abortion. I would like to see the idea of abortion viewed as so incredibly inconceivable that no one would want to have them at all. That is a long time coming but I think it might get there in time.

You cannot possibly be so ignorant about this after all this time, can you? Show me where this clinic will abort viable fetuses. You cannot because it doesn’t happen. If a fetus is viable, that is a birth. I realize you’ve been lied to about this particular subject, but come on.

 

[cuddlemonkey]

So they are opening a new clinic with a big write up for things that don't happen? They do happen and are around 1%. Almost the same % as those rape and incest, so obviously they do happen.
As far as the government involvement, I too would like to see the need for government intervention go away in regards to abortion. I would like to see the idea of abortion viewed as so incredibly inconceivable that no one would want to have them at all. That is a long time coming but I think it might get there in time.

First, this article is nearly two years old.

Secondly, do you actually think that was a "big write-up"?

Third, this is what they said in the article about their expectations:

"When their all-trimester clinic opens, Horvath and Nuzzo expect to treat perhaps 10 people each week.

It could be someone whose fetus has serious anomalies, which are often only discovered later in pregnancy.

It could be a patient whose continued pregnancy threatens their health.

It could be someone who didn't discover they were pregnant until after the first trimester."

Please tell me where it says they expect to perform late-stage abortions on healthy fetuses.

 

[Optimus Prime]

Texas Republicans are open to applying the death penalty to abortion providers, a new proposal from the state party indicates.

Over the weekend, during the Texas GOP convention, Republican delegates voted on a party platform for 2024 that proclaims “abortion is not healthcare, it is homicide” and suggests striking a state law that protects abortion providers from being charged with homicide.

In Texas, capital murder is punishable by the death penalty. Killing a child under the age of 15 can qualify as capital murder, the most severe form of homicide.

Elsewhere in the platform, the Texas GOP calls for “legislation to abolish abortion by immediately securing the right to life and equal protection of the laws to all preborn children from the moment of fertilization”.


That language, as highlighted by the feminist writer Jessica Valenti, who first called attention to it earlier this week, draws from the rhetoric of “abortion abolitionists”, a fringe, hardline segment of the anti-abortion movement that has inched closer to the mainstream in recent years.

While the mainstream anti-abortion movement typically supports exempting women seeking abortions from punishment, abortion abolitionists adhere to what they consider a more consistent line of logic: if a fetus is a person and abortion is murder, then abortion patients deserve to be punished like murderers…….

Texas Republicans open to death penalty for abortion providers

GOP convention votes on wide-ranging platform including striking law protecting abortion providers from being charged with murder

www.theguardian.com

 

[Optimus Prime]

The Texas supreme court on Friday rejected a challenge from more than 20 women who said they were denied medically necessary abortions under the state’s near-total abortion ban, ruling in an unanimous opinion that the state’s ban can stand as is.

Two doctors had also joined the women’s case, which was the first post-Roe v Wade lawsuit to be filed by women who said that their health, lives or fertility had been endangered by abortions bans. Lawsuits filed by women in other states with near-total abortion bans, including Idaho and Tennessee, soon followed.

The case did not seek to overturn Texas’s near-total abortion ban, but to amend it to clarify when medically necessary abortions can be performed.


Although every US abortion ban technically permits abortions in medical emergencies, doctors in Texas and across the country have said that the wording of the bans – penned by politicians rather than medical professionals – is too vague and confusing to be workable in practice. Instead, these doctors say, they have been forced to wait and watch until patients get sick enough to intervene.

In its ruling, the Republican-dominated Texas supreme court disagreed with those doctors. “Texas law permits a life-saving abortion,” wrote Justice Jane Bland, who authored the court’s opinion.

Bland continued: “A physician who tells a patient, ‘Your life is threatened by a complication that has arisen during your pregnancy, and you may die, or there is a serious risk you will suffer substantial physical impairment unless an abortion is performed,’ and in the same breath states ‘but the law won’t allow me to provide an abortion in these circumstances’ is simply wrong in that legal assessment.”

The woman who lent her name to the case, Amanda Zurawski, was 18 weeks into a much-wanted pregnancy when her water broke early – a development that doomed her chances of delivering a healthy baby. Although continuing the pregnancy posed significant risks to Zurawski’s health, her doctors said that they could not perform an abortion under Texas law because the fetus still had cardiac activity. Zurawski ended up developing sepsis and spending days in the intensive care unit.

Other women who sued Texas said they were denied abortions even after their pregnancies were diagnosed with a litany of lethal conditions that would leave their fetuses with underdeveloped brains, skulls and other organs. Several fled the state for out-of-state abortions. One woman, Samantha Casiano, stayed in Texas and gave birth to a daughter, Halo, who struggled for air and died hours after birth. When Casiano recounted her experience in testimony last year, she threw up on the stand.

Lauren Miller, another plaintiff in the case, was pregnant with twins when she learned one of the fetuses had severe abnormalities and would probably never make it to birth. Her pregnancy caused Miller to throw up uncontrollably, sending her to the emergency room twice. Despite the risks to her health, her doctors did not suggest an abortion.


Miller ultimately received a fetal reduction, a procedure where doctors abort one fetus, in Colorado. She gave birth to a healthy son.

When she read the Texas court’s opinion on Friday, Miller was shocked by how little she and the other women were mentioned.

“I read it this morning. And then I reread it because I felt like something was missing. It was when I reread it and saw it the second time, I was like: ‘We’re missing. We are erased from our own case,’” Miller said. She said that, after reading the ruling, she gave her young son a hug. “It was just registration, once again, about how little not just my life mattered, but how little his life mattered to the Texas supreme court.”……..

Texas supreme court rejects challenge to abortion ban over medical exceptions

Court rules unanimously on challenge from over 20 women who say they were denied medically necessary abortions

www.theguardian.com

 

[MT15]

Everything is going as they intended. Women will die for no reason, as they assert their authority over them.

 

[MT15]

It’s always been about dominating and shaming women, always. Never about anything but that.

 

[MT15]

Everything is going as they intended. Women will die for no reason, as they assert their authority over them.

Yes, this tracks. Just when you think they cannot get more depraved, they do.

“Even though the plaintiffs suing for the right to flunk female students for abortion include boilerplate arguments in which they feign concern that abortion is "killing," the legal filing makes it clear that what really outrages Bonevac and Hatfield is that Title IX prevents them from controlling the private lives of students. Along with their anger about abortion, they grouse about not being allowed to punish students "for being homosexual or transgender." They also argue they should be able to penalize teaching assistants for "cross-dressing," by which they appear to mean allowing trans women to wear skirts.”

TX profs use abortion bans to punish "consensual sexual intercourse"

It's part of a larger pattern of men using the new law to control and abuse women in their lives

www.salon.com