That's what we're trying to tell you. New York will allow abortions after 24 weeks even when there is no risk to the mothers health/life, and the fetus is viable. It has a little bit to do with the semantics of exactly what the word "allow" means. Women will end up being allowed to do this because of the new law, even though the literal wording of the law does not actually allow it. The wording and actual mechanics of the law uses some tricky language and removal of accountability, making it nearly impossible to not allow it. So one could say that in some technical sense, the law "does not allow it", yet in the meaningful sense that actually matters, that law "does make it allowable". I know that may be a little confusing for some people to understand. A law can end up allowing something even if the law does not explicitly say it allows something.
No they wont. The law is very specific that they can only take place if the life of the mother or child are at risk, and/or if the fetus is no longer viable. You are there one making the exceptions to fit your narrative. You are making an outlandish claim in that you say “the law doesn't allow it, but they will...” You are proving my point. The Law doesn't allow what you claim.
I said I dont know if thats the case in all states. Some states may not allow it even if the life of the mother is at raise. That’s what I dont know
Yes, it's the law in all states....sadly not in all countries.. AND you do NOT have to answer personal, off topic questions from anyone....
You still ignore the point. The law uses vague language, and leaves the decision up to a low-paid, low-level abortion clinic worker who is likely not qualified to know if the woman really needs it or not. The law also contains ambiguous, seemingly somewhat conflicting language, that a woman has the absolute right to get an abortion, even though this particular amendment to the law is all about late-term abortion. Under this law, a real doctor doesn't even have to see the woman, for her to be able to get a late-term abortion. It's not disingenuous to say the law will allow elective abortion for non-medical reasons, and may likely have been designed that way. Like I've repeatedly explained, a law can end up allowing something even if the law doesn't say it allows something. It's clever trickery. To not allow something like this, the law would have to have clear limits of what is not allowed, it would have to have some system of accountability, and it would have to give the clear unambiguous message that it is not allowing something, all of which are lacking in the amendment to this law.
Gee, sounds like you have some work ahead of you getting the law changed....what have you done so far? I don't see any problem with it
So your contention is that the law may say one thing, but providers can do whatever they want ? That’s YOU projecting your belief on the law, and not reading the law.
Point still remains that Jewish/Christian right wing America is against all these "handouts".... that would help out single parent households, penalizing the children who must be born and not aborted. Just pathetic how they care about the life of something that's not even born, but when born don't give a rats butt how it manages in life. Here is a thought. A person not wearing a mask, because their own body their own choice, their freedom, to potentially kill sombody else with their covid ... we all know that them lot are usually the conservatives. It's the same group who got a problem when women say that about their body. But suddenly it's the woman's problem when something can't survive outside their body that they don't want. It has everything to do with it. When you value life, than you better take care of it. Told you before. It has everything with the religious background them lot got raised up with.
Yes, they changed the law to allow for when the fetus was not viable. Before the law only allowed for abortions after 24 weeks when the mothers life was at risk
As it happens right now at the same hospital Obama was born at, my daughter is there facing induced birth on january 15. No human on earth can persuade her to abort her own daughter. The due date is actually February 24 so this can be a danger to her own child.
OMG, after being told so many times you still don't know? Involve yourself in a discussion of abortion and NOT know what viable means??!! And unable to google a definition !!
Your daughter is in Kenya ? LOL....just kidding... Now, what TF does any of what your daughter is doing have to do with abortion??
Okay, so you have moved away from trying to argue that Republican politicians "refuse to give aid to single parent households / are against subsidized medical aid", so now you have moved onto Republican supporters! You have the same problem however, and I think that you know what it is! We are talking about abortion, not masks. Absolutely correct, but how does being pro-life make someone anti-welfare? So everyone who is pro-life was raised up in a religious home?
