• Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
  • We have made minor adjustments to how the search bar works on ResetEra. You can read about the changes here.
Status
Not open for further replies.

DiK4

Banned
Nov 4, 2017
1,085
WTF

The bill allows a baby to be born and that afterwards the doctor and family can have a discussion.

The bill takes away a lot of the restrictions involved with having an abortion in the third trimester. I understand in most circumstances it's due to health risks for the woman.

But this bill would take away the provision that says the woman must be at a serious health risk. It literally to changes it to a basic health impaired.

The way it's stated just sounds insane to me, every pregnancy has risks.
 

Deleted member 12790

User requested account closure
Banned
Oct 27, 2017
24,537
the very first sentence in that article claims that the law only allows abortions prior to birth.

this:

Gov. Ralph Northam added gas to the fire Wednesday by describing a hypothetical situation in a radio interview where an infant who is severely deformed or unable to survive after birth could be left to die. That prompted accusations from prominent Republicans that he supports infanticide.

is not at all related to abortion.
 

Critch

Banned
Dec 10, 2017
1,360
WTF

The bill allows a baby to be born and that afterwards the doctor and family can have a discussion.

The bill takes away a lot of the restrictions involved with having an abortion in the third trimester. I understand in most circumstances it's due to health risks for the woman.

But this bill would take away the provision that says the woman must be at a serious health risk. It literally to changes it to a basic health impaired.

The way it's stated just sounds insane to me, every pregnancy has risks.


Opponents of the legislation, which has failed in both the state House and Senate, said it would give essentially allow for late abortions on demand.

So uh, if it's failed already, what's the issue?
 

Deleted member 4413

User requested account closure
Banned
Oct 25, 2017
2,238
Thread title is misleading.

Not sure how I personally feel about the law. I have a general policy to just abide by whatever the majority of women want. I don't have a uterus so my opinion shouldn't really matter and I'm perfectly okay with that.
 
OP
OP
DiK4

DiK4

Banned
Nov 4, 2017
1,085
the very first sentence in that article claims that the law only allows abortions prior to birth.
Read the whole article.

The governor backpeddles on the issue about having an abortion moments before birth, and in an interview that you can watch literally says the family can have a discussion with a doctor regarding the matter after the child is born instead.

EDIT: yeah people I know what an abortion is, technically this isn't. Infanticide is the word I guess, which is fucking disgusting and not something I really wanted to use.
 

Deleted member 12790

User requested account closure
Banned
Oct 27, 2017
24,537
Read the whole article.

The governor backpeddles on the issue about having an abortion moments before birth, and in an interview that you can watch literally says the family can have a discussion with a doctor regarding the matter after the child is born instead.

I did read the entire article. If a child is born and they are discussing letting the child die, by definition, it's not abortion. This is an issue of right to die, not abortion. Think terry schiavo.
 

Stinkles

Banned
Oct 25, 2017
20,459
OP has the most amazing account history ever and I'm four posts deep.

I ain't even mad.


This is quality.
 

Mona

Banned
Oct 30, 2017
26,151
Pretty soon pulling the plug on a grandparent will be considered an abortion
 

Kirblar

Banned
Oct 25, 2017
30,744
Late-term abortions are incredibly rare and need a medical sign-off. They are done for medical reasons only for obvious ethical reasons. This is aiming to streamline the process to make it less ridiculously cumbersome.

They are a massively positive thing to have available because it allows for parents to wait to see if abnormalities emerge if initial tests come back with the possibility of an awful ailment instead of having to gamble before an arbitrary time limit.
 
Oct 25, 2017
3,763
No doctor is ever going to do this.

I just read the article. Jesus fuck talk about mischaracterizing the statement.

There is a big difference between actively killing/aborting a live newborn and not hooking them up to machines to artificially prolong their life.
 
Last edited:

Autodidact

Member
Oct 25, 2017
18,729
The whole debate over late-term abortion is a prime example of conservative misinformation and fearmongering.

There is not a woman seven, eight, nine months pregnant who walks past an abortion clinic and says, "You know, there's something I've been meaning to get to."

If a woman's having an abortion at that stage, it's most likely a medical emergency; she's going to die, the baby's going to die, having the baby will profoundly damage her mental or physical health if she lives.

It is not something undertaken lightly. Don't let angry Republican men convince you that women use abortion as birth control, or that evil liberal abortion doctors are waiting to bash newborn infants with rocks the moment they exit the birth canal.

From the article:
Her legislation would reduce the number of doctors who would have to certify late-term abortions are needed from three to one. It would also delete the requirement that doctors determine that continuing a pregnancy would "substantially and irremediably" impair a woman's health. Instead doctors would only have to certify that the woman's health was impaired.

Supporters said the changes in law would help reduce the bureaucratic burdens women face when dealing with difficult decisions involving late-term abortions, which often involve serious medical complications.
So basically what I said and what VA Demcrats said - reducing some of the bureaucratic hoops to make it a bit simpler for woman who have to make this heartwrenching decision.

Don't buy into angry Republican male framing on abortion. Don't let them seize the issues to portray women and women's rights negatively. Let women control their own bodies; trust their judgment and autonomy. And mind your own fucking business.
 
OP
OP
DiK4

DiK4

Banned
Nov 4, 2017
1,085
Pretty soon pulling the plug on a grandparent will be considered an abortion
Does this mean I can still technically be aborted? This is huge.
You fuckers are hilarious. I know I screwed up sorry this shit shocked me.

I guess this is an outrage thread since it failed, ya know I just can't believe it was even considered.

Are ya'll ignoring the fact if this bill had passed a woman could technically use any symptom of pregnancy as a health impairment excuse to abort the baby 8 or 9 months in??

Removing the restriction about it severly impacting her health opens the door way too fucking wide for some really bad stuff. A health impairment by definition is way too vague.
 

Sei

Member
Oct 28, 2017
5,713
LA
It puts the power of what happens to the woman's body in the hands of the woman and her doctors, not legislators.

Seems pretty straight forward.
 

Kirblar

Banned
Oct 25, 2017
30,744
You fuckers are hilarious. I know I screwed up sorry this shit shocked me.

I guess this is an outrage thread since it failed, ya know I just can't believe it was even considered.

Are ya'll ignoring the fact if this bill had passed a woman could technically use any symptom of pregnancy as a health impairment excuse to abort the baby 8 or 9 months in??
You would need a doctor to risk their medical license over it. That's unlikely to happen.
 

woman

Banned
Oct 25, 2017
3,532
Atlanta
Are ya'll ignoring the fact if this bill had passed a woman could technically use any symptom of pregnancy as a health impairment excuse to abort the baby 8 or 9 months in??
tenor.gif
 

skullmuffins

Member
Oct 25, 2017
7,426
Read the whole article.

The governor backpeddles on the issue about having an abortion moments before birth, and in an interview that you can watch literally says the family can have a discussion with a doctor regarding the matter after the child is born instead.

EDIT: yeah people I know what an abortion is, technically this isn't. Infanticide is the word I guess, which is fucking disgusting and not something I really wanted to use.
he's talking about babies with severe conditions incompatible with life, ie, do you administer extreme measures to allow the child a very short life full of suffering, or do you let them pass naturally soon after birth.
 

Deleted member 12790

User requested account closure
Banned
Oct 27, 2017
24,537
Are ya'll ignoring the fact if this bill had passed a woman could technically use any symptom of pregnancy as a health impairment excuse to abort the baby 8 or 9 months in??

Every single example given in the article you yourself chose to post comes with extreme caveats. Example:

In the video recorded by the Republican Standard, Gilbert asks Tran whether her legislation would let a pregnant woman who is dilating request an abortion if a doctor certified that the woman's mental health was impaired.

So no, we don't believe your fear mongering fairy tale that this law will allow "any symptom of pregnancy" to abort babies 8 or 9 months in.
 

Autodidact

Member
Oct 25, 2017
18,729
Are ya'll ignoring the fact if this bill had passed a woman could technically use any symptom of pregnancy as a health impairment excuse to abort the baby 8 or 9 months in??
The fact you think a woman would be looking for an "excuse" at NINE MONTHS shows how little you think of women, I imagine.
 

Deleted member 8561

user requested account closure
Banned
Oct 26, 2017
11,284
You fuckers are hilarious. I know I screwed up sorry this shit shocked me.

I guess this is an outrage thread since it failed, ya know I just can't believe it was even considered.

Are ya'll ignoring the fact if this bill had passed a woman could technically use any symptom of pregnancy as a health impairment excuse to abort the baby 8 or 9 months in??

Removing the restriction about it severly impacting her health opens the door way too fucking wide for some really bad stuff. A health impairment by definition is way too vague.

It seems like you're ignoring the actual process of late term abortions and don't know how to do basic research on your own thread topic

no wait, yea it's really common for a women to go through the hell of a nine month pregnancy and then decide "lol nope"

god damn OP you got women all figured out
 

Subpar Scrub

Attempted to circumvent ban with alt account
Banned
Oct 25, 2017
3,576
Are ya'll ignoring the fact if this bill had passed a woman could technically use any symptom of pregnancy as a health impairment excuse to abort the baby 8 or 9 months in??

1. It's a fetus

2. Who gives a fuck? No woman will say "have a case of the sniffles, better abort this fetus 8.5 months in"

Stop trying to remove a woman's right to body autonomy OP. They can do what they want with their bodies.
 

Bakercat

Member
Oct 27, 2017
10,154
'merica
"How far along is the fetus?"

"8"

"8 weeks?"

"No, 8 years..."

I wish i could find the south park clip to this.
 
Last edited:

Deleted member 8561

user requested account closure
Banned
Oct 26, 2017
11,284
Ignorant men misunderstand women's reproductive issues and allow their opinions about them to be colored by their hateful stereotypes about women. News at 11.

I don't know, maybe OP is on to something.

Maybe there is an epidemic of women just craving to be pregnant full term and then abort the baby during labor.

It's just like ordering a meal and eating it all, then asking for a full comp, right? Women are just champing at the bit to get that full comp on their pregnancy

We should inquire more details from the OP
 
OP
OP
DiK4

DiK4

Banned
Nov 4, 2017
1,085
User Banned (2 Weeks): Sexism, fearmongering, and misrepresenting information
If men could have babies I'd be saying the same damn thing. How the fuck could it be considered legal to do this?

I know it's fearmongering, but it just doesn't seem right to forego most the restrictions and let you waltz right in and say hey doc, my head hurts. I want to do this.

You'd hope the doctor could talk some sense into them and refuse but, where does it say that? Health impairment is way too vague.

That that's even an option being discussed....I know most people wouldn't, but it just seems wrong.
 

Deleted member 32561

User requested account closure
Banned
Nov 11, 2017
3,831
Here's the thing though...

An abortion is literally just the end of a pregnancy before fetus can survive outside of the womb and the removal of the fetus. Technically, a fetus that dies in the womb and does not exit on it's own must be aborted. It need not involve a fetus's death, and in fact fetuses can die without being aborted.

Ending a pregnancy "minutes before birth" would not be an infanticide. Period. I mean, ending a pregnancy in the latter half of the 8th month or 9th month would amount to the same as a a baby being born that early which happens all the time, let alone minutes before birth, that in particular which is like... No big deal. Baby pops out, screams and breathes, just like it would minutes later.

There's no situation barring an already life threatening one or one where the fetus was already dead where a C-section wouldn't be possible in the situation given to Tran. The question levied at Tran is foolish and shows the Republican's colors- either that they know nothing regarding gestation and should shut the fuck up, or that they're trying to make women suffer. Take your pick.

But, supposing for some reason an abortion would be necessary, and somehow it would definitely mean the baby would die? Fuck yes it should be allowed. It's up to the woman/mother and their physician(s), no one else. Period.

But the hypothetical is like one in a billion, if not more unlikely. Where a mother is in severe mental harm from being in labor, and a doctor thinks a typical abortion procedure over typical birthing procedures is the only and best option to alleviate this harm. The number of miniscule factors that'd have to align for this to happen are... Just really hard if not impossible to come together.

The vast majority of latter-half third trimester termination of pregnancies would not end in the fetus's death, and certainly none would be intentional. And earlier half? Not much different from late second trimester.

This is how they'll try to get you. First restrict SOME abortions. Then some more. Then them all. Finally even removing the option for C-sections or inducement of labor. Conservatives want women to be pretty little Bible thumping baby makers who do things "As God Intended"

To be honest? I wouldn't be here if my grandmother didn't have an abortion after her first pregnancy ended with the fetus essentially exploding in her womb. People whinge and cry about the fetuses being potential humans- but what about the children who could come after? Why does a clump of cells that superficially resembles a human matter more than an actual human- both the mother and potential future children?

For this reason I unequivocally support a woman's right to choose in tandem with her medical professionals. No matter how late, no questions asked. Even if that wasn't my background, I would still, but it sure helps.
 
Last edited:

bluepolicebox

Member
Oct 27, 2017
169
If men could have babies I'd be saying the same damn thing. How the fuck could it be considered legal to do this?

I know it's fearmongering, but it just doesn't seem right to forego most the restrictions and let you waltz right in and say hey doc, my head hurts. I want to do this.

You'd hope the doctor could talk some sense into them and refuse but, where does it say that? Health impairment is way too vague.

That that's even an option being discussed....I know most people wouldn't, but it just seems wrong.

Do you know of a lot of women who are waltzing right in to get abortions? A procedure that may very well be one of the most emotionally and physically traumatic events of their lives? You think women do this for fun? That we all wait for the day when we can waltz into our doctor's office and make the casual choice to terminate a pregnancy? This thread and your posts in it are just awful.
 

Autodidact

Member
Oct 25, 2017
18,729
You'd hope the doctor could talk some sense into them and refuse but, where does it say that? Health impairment is way too vague.
"Talk some sense into a woman who might be about to die or have her body and mind irreparably damaged."

And again, the fact that you think a woman would blithely say, "Hey, doc, my head hurts, can you abort this sucker for me?" is disgusting and smacks of the same hateful things that douchebag men say about women.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.