Texas considering death penalty for abortions

Texas planning to pass law that requires rape victims to marry their rapists

http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Deuteronomy 22:28-29&version=NIV

 

Biblical law and Shari law have no place in our government

 

Has anyone put up a religious argument against abortion in this thread so far or is that a strawman?

 

2 ways

Woman needs permission from the father for an abortion.

Father has the right to deny the abortion and take over primary custody and the woman pays child support.


Of course, both of these assume the pregnancy is normal and there is no unusual risk to the mother.

 

No they are not and you have no evidence to the contrary

Stop making up rubbish

 

Or woman needs permission from father after certain gestational age, if it's a normal pregnancy and there's nothing wrong with the fetus

A sample of the fetus would be taken for potential dna testing later if a man claimed he was the father and hadn't been informed

 

No that appears to be the bit that is not true

They do it is true allow someone other than a doctor to do it, but the medical side is still there

and it apparently removes abortion from the criminal code and makes it a health procedure.

https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/new-york-abortions-birth/

This is just normal stuff. Late abortions are usually for medical reasons and there is no difference here. It seems, and this thread obviously makes that clear, that there are some in the US who are extremist in their position on abortion wanting to kill a woman who has one when one of the strongest arguments for bringing them in was to save women's lives. Totally normal stuff. They are just keeping themselves safe from people who might want to kill them. The suggestion that a law has been past which allows women to kill their new born babies is totally false. The idea that women would want this is beyond ridiculous.

 

Those restrictions are very loose and would be virtually impossible to enforce under the new law.

The law seems to have been designed that way without much care to actually wanting to prevent late term abortions done for reasons not under the law.

The effect is basically making it legal without explicitly saying it.

Not only that but the first part of the law says women have a right to abortion.
And since this law is specifically about late-term abortion, how do you think that statement of intent should be interpreted?

 

They have set what will work for them and it seems intended to protect themselves from others who might want to interfere with their rights. If you have abortion, what this does is completely in compliance with most countries. People can have an abortion up to 24 weeks though most people have them earlier and after that only if there is a serious medical reason. The reason for 24 weeks is because there is the faintest sign that the child could live - and then with only massive medical care, more often than not resulting in life long problems.

A few years ago there was a woman in Northern Ireland who needed a late abortion for her own life. She wasn't allowed it and died. I think the baby did as well. I cannot remember the exact situation but that is the sort of thing that happens when people try to stop late medical abortions. There is no way this was about giving women the right to murder their new born infants. That is ridiculous and malicious propaganda.

 

Except a doctor isn't the one saying it was done for a medical reason.
I'd say that alone is a pretty big difference.

And the law says "health reasons" which is a much lower bar than "medical reasons".
Many pro-choicers believe that all abortions are for health reasons.

 

Her life was at risk. They didn't know for sure that she was going to die.

 

A child can live at 21 weeks too, if only the mother will gestate it a few more weeks.
How is that so different.

 

You can say that again... sort of

 

Dude - you realize it would be killing the fetus you are trying to save, right ... like I said - moronic joke on your part.

 

That's nonsense.

 

It would not necessarily affect the fetus in any way.
Why would you think that?

 

Women won't put up with that.

 

That has more stretch than an elastic factory . Where in the legislation does it stioulate that anyone OTHER than a certified medical officer can make that determination or perform the procedure?

 

His “rights” ended with insemination without her consent

 

If you don’t honk your hideous suggestion would do harm to both the woman AND the foetus then you are at a greater level of ignorance than I had previously thought

 

Sorry honey, the draw bridge opened.

 

Once conceived an unborn child is innocent human life

That is a godless secular scientific fact

 

Women used to die when they had illegal abortions. Legal abortion was brought in to save women's lives. Women haters try to use that as an excuse to murder women. Nothing changes.

 

They sell extra neurons in the Trump aisle at Walmart

 

In the end the choice to get an abortion is the human female hosts decision.. and I agree that nobody else should be involved in it. Especially the government.

I told my sister I admired the maternal instinct and she told me that was politically incorrect to do so anymore

I am slightly disappointed about that because a woman's instinct to nurture is so strong and powerful. I really think they perform in the workplace better than men and they get paid less I don't understand it

I was also quite shocked when a young man who was in a new relationship and I warned him of possibly getting her pregnant and he said that abortion was under consideration if that happened. I understood the sanctity of Life at a very young age and respected it my entire life. Evidently this young man didn't get the same values that I did

I found it interesting this morning that prior to 1963 a woman was required to get consent from her male partner use birth control