Cont: Roe v Wade overturned - this is some BS part II

[The Atheist]

This story should be tattooed on the eyeballs of every woman who ever voted Republican: https://www.independent.co.uk/news/...see-denied-abortion-ban-lawsuit-b2529144.html

The only advice doctors could give offer was that if she had her second child it would “most likely die inside of me before 20 weeks” and she would be forced to deliver a stillborn.

 

[Stacyhs]

This story should be tattooed on the eyeballs of every woman who ever voted Republican: https://www.independent.co.uk/news/...see-denied-abortion-ban-lawsuit-b2529144.html

Disgusting. I lived in Tennessee when I was a child. Nothing would make me live in a red state again.

 

[steenkh]

This story should be tattooed on the eyeballs of every woman who ever voted Republican: https://www.independent.co.uk/news/...see-denied-abortion-ban-lawsuit-b2529144.html

The only advice doctors could give offer was that if she had her second child it would “most likely die inside of me before 20 weeks” and she would be forced to deliver a stillborn.

And she wouldn’t be investigated for killing her child?

 

[Darat]

This story should be tattooed on the eyeballs of every woman who ever voted Republican: https://www.independent.co.uk/news/...see-denied-abortion-ban-lawsuit-b2529144.html

A miracle may have happened and the baby she had ripped out of her could have gone on and lived. Her subsequent problems all came as a result of her finding a doctor who was willing to murder her beautiful living baby.



/s

 

[Stacyhs]

Louisiana Gov. Landry has signed a new law to take effect Oct. 1 making the two drugs that induce abortions, mifepristone and misoprostol, "controlled and dangerous substances".

Opponents of the bill included many physicians who said the drugs have other critical reproductive health care uses, and that changing the classification could make it harder to prescribe the medications. Supporters of the bill said it would protect expectant mothers from coerced abortions, though they cited only one example of that happening, in the state of Texas.

The bill began as a measure to create the crime of “coerced criminal abortion by means of fraud.” An amendment adding the abortion drugs to the Schedule IV classification of Louisiana's Uniform Controlled Dangerous Substances Law was pushed by Sen. Thomas Pressly, a Republican from Shreveport and the main sponsor of the bill.

“Requiring an abortion inducing drug to be obtained with a prescription and criminalizing the use of an abortion drug on an unsuspecting mother is nothing short of common-sense," Landry said in a statement. Current Louisiana law already requires a prescription for both drugs and makes it a crime to use them to induce an abortion, in most cases. The bill would make it harder to obtain the pills. Other Schedule IV drugs include the opioid tramadol and a group of depressants known as benzodiazepines.

The classification would require doctors to have a specific license to prescribe the drugs, and the drugs would have to be stored in certain facilities that in some cases could end up being located far from rural clinics.
In addition to inducing abortions, mifepristone and misoprostol have other common uses, such as treating miscarriages, inducing labor and stopping hemorrhaging.

More than 200 doctors in the state signed a letter to lawmakers warning that the measure could produce a "barrier to physicians' ease of prescribing appropriate treatment" and cause unnecessary fear and confusion among both patients and doctors. The physicians warn that any delay to obtaining the drugs could lead to worsening outcomes in a state that has one of the highest maternal mortality rates in the country.

This is just another example of extremists making it virtually impossible for women to get an abortion under the guise of "protecting" them. What would be the requirements for a doctor to obtain the "specific license"?

 

[Darat]

This is just another example of extremists making it virtually impossible for women to get an abortion under the guise of "protecting" them. What would be the requirements for a doctor to obtain the "specific license"?

Not practicing in the state of Louisiana.

 

[Stacyhs]

Not practicing in the state of Louisiana.

Pretty much. These 'requirements' could be so stringent that only a handful may receive it thus reducing even more access to the medication.

 

[thaiboxerken]

This isn't a big deal. I've heard from several "conservatives" and Republicans in the forum that liberals and progressives are just being hyperbolic when they say Republicans are trying to ban abortion. They're only helping woman be safe and helping those same women realize that they belong in the kitchen, pregnant and barefoot.

 

[bruto]

Ran across this cartoon and figure this is as good a place as any to throw it:

https://www.boredpanda.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2024/04/662958ee2c935_kpjbtz1x35991__700.jpg

 

[cosmicaug]

From https://www.texastribune.org/2024/05/31/texas-supreme-court-zurawski-abortion/

The Texas Supreme Court has unanimously rejected the most significant challenge to Texas’ new abortion laws yet, ruling Friday that the medical exceptions in the law were broad enough to withstand constitutional challenge.

The case, Zurawski v. Texas, started with five women arguing the state’s near-total abortion laws stopped them from getting medical care for their complicated pregnancies. In the year plus it took to move through the court system, the case has grown to include 20 women and two doctors.

In August, a Travis County judge issued a temporary injunction that allowed Texans with complicated pregnancies to get an abortion if their doctor made a “good faith judgment” that it was necessary. The Texas Office of the Attorney General appealed.

The Texas Supreme Court overturned that ruling Friday, saying it “departed from the law as written without constitutional justification.” While the opinion was unanimous, Justice Brett Busby issued a concurring opinion that left the door open to a broader challenge to the law.

 

[The Atheist]

Ran across this cartoon and figure this is as good a place as any to throw it:

https://www.boredpanda.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2024/04/662958ee2c935_kpjbtz1x35991__700.jpg

Gold!

 

[Stacyhs]

From https://www.texastribune.org/2024/05/31/texas-supreme-court-zurawski-abortion/

You couldn't pay me to live in Texas.

 

[Resume]

You couldn't pay me to live in Texas.

Or Florida. Or Missouri. Or Arkansas. Or Oklahoma . . .

 

[cosmicaug]

You couldn't pay me to live in Texas.

What do you know? The Texas GOP has enshrined zygotal personhood in their party platform.

See https://nymag.com/intelligencer/article/texas-gop-abortion-platform.html

Equal Protection for the Preborn: We urge lawmakers to enact 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, because abortion violates the United States Constitution by denying such persons the equal protection of the law.

 

[Stacyhs]

Or Florida. Or Missouri. Or Arkansas. Or Oklahoma . . .

Or any state that votes for Trump. I'm pretty safe here in Oregon, thank goodness.

 

[Stacyhs]

What do you know? The Texas GOP has enshrined zygotal personhood in their party platform.

See https://nymag.com/intelligencer/article/texas-gop-abortion-platform.html

At this point, I'd be happy to let Mexico have Texas back.

 

[Stacyhs]

Remember when the GOP and Trump's SC nominees claimed R v W was established law?

The Senate voted Wednesday to block a bill to create a federal right to contraception access after many Republicans said they opposed the legislation as unnecessary and government overreach.

The Democratic bill — intended to put Republicans on the spot in an election year on their unpopular positions on reproductive rights — would have prevented states from passing laws that limit access to contraception, including hormonal birth control and intrauterine devices. The measure failed to reach the 60 votes it needed to proceed, after all but two of the chamber’s Republicans voted against it.

(WAPO)

Yep, we have zero reason to believe that the right wing won't go after a woman's freedom of choice to use contraception!
Think of the unfertilized eggs being murdered every month!

 

[johnny karate]

Remember when the GOP and Trump's SC nominees claimed R v W was established law?

(WAPO)

Yep, we have zero reason to believe that the right wing won't go after a woman's freedom of choice to use contraception!
Think of the unfertilized eggs being murdered every month!

You have to love the irony of Republicans calling an effort to protect the rights they’re trying to take away “government overreach”.

 

[Stacyhs]

Tim "Anal Polyp" Scott again tries to sidestep a direct question regarding his vote against the right to contraceptive bill put forth by the Dems. Ask by Brett Baier on FOX why a nay vote is not a bad position for the Republicans:

"This is just a shame that the Democrats are willing to try to politicize whether or not women have access to contraceptive. The bottom line is they absolutely do and that will continue. The question is why Democrats continue to take the most extreme position on abortion in the country but voted for abortion up until the day of birth."

And women absolutely had the right to have an abortion as stated by the Supreme Court 50 years ago and that continued, right Tim? Thank goodness the Republicans never politicized that!

What Dems have voted for the right to an abortion "up until the day of birth"? No woman has an abortion up until the day of birth because they GIVE BIRTH, you moron.

Tim Scott is revealing himself to be a true Trump mini-me: a liar and opportunist.

 

[cosmicaug]

This went the correct way but not for reassuring reasons.

From https://www.cnn.com/politics/live-news/supreme-court-abortion-pill-decision-06-13-24#h_a032692f52ce82041dc3e5e64b9fa32b :

What we're covering here

• Today’s ruling: The Supreme Court has rejected a lawsuit challenging the Food and Drug Administration’s approach to regulating the abortion pill mifepristone with a ruling that will continue to allow the pills to be mailed to patients without an in-person doctor’s visit. Justice Brett Kavanaugh wrote the opinion for a unanimous court.
• Why this matters: The ruling is a significant setback for the anti-abortion movement in what was the first major Supreme Court case on reproductive rights since the court’s conservative majority overturned Roe v. Wade in 2022. The appeal was filed by anti-abortion doctors who said their practices have been affected because they must treat women who had complications from the drug.
• What groups have said: The FDA and outside medical groups have stressed that mifepristone is safe. The doctors have faced scrutiny over whether they have been harmed in a way that gives them standing to sue.

This in no way means that abortifacient access is safe from this activist court or from other threats (ie. if Project 2025 get implemented, the FDA will likely get stacked with political operatives rather than technocratic subject matter experts).