The Most Fresh & Cordial Political Thread Ever

[nonniey]

Originally Posted by MTK

These states with no exception abortion bans even in the case of rape and incest... man that's just seriously fucked up

Pro lifers you ok with that?

Yes I think that is fucked up as well, but not nearly as fucked up as those states that have no questions asked (heck in Vermont it is actually no questions permitted) laws that allow abortion at anytime during pregnancy.

[MTK]

Originally Posted by nonniey

Yes I think that is fucked up as well, but not nearly as fucked up as those states that have no questions asked (heck in Vermont it is actually no questions permitted) laws that allow abortion at anytime during pregnancy.

You do realize there are legit medical reasons that may make a late term abortion necessary right? We're not talking about someone walking in and aborting an otherwise perfectly healthy baby just because the woman changed her mind last second. These types of abortions are rare.

[Chico23231]

Originally Posted by MTK

You do realize there are legit medical reasons that may make a late term abortion necessary right? We're not talking about someone walking in and aborting an otherwise perfectly healthy baby just because the woman changed her mind last second. These types of abortions are rare.

It’s still murder tho

Would a compromise up to 15 week abortion national law work? It would still be more progressive than most of Europe?

[MTK]

Originally Posted by Chico23231

It’s still murder tho

Would a compromise up to 15 week abortion national law work? It would still be more progressive than most of Europe?

I don't think it's a procedure anyone takes lightly, we're typically talking about a situation where the woman's life is in danger or the baby has a fatal condition. But if it makes you feel righteous to call it murder go ahead.

Compromise? You think the pro lifers are willing to compromise? They're coming for a national ban.

Back to my original question, states that are banning abortion even in the case of incest and rape, bad idea or no?

[Giantone]

Originally Posted by MTK

I don't think it's a procedure anyone takes lightly, we're typically talking about a situation where the woman's life is in danger or the baby has a fatal condition. But if it makes you feel righteous to call it murder go ahead.

Compromise? You think the pro lifers are willing to compromise? They're coming for a national ban.

Back to my original question, states that are banning abortion even in the case of incest and rape, bad idea or no?

YES.It's a bad idea. The emotional damage that this will cause just can not be imagined.

[Giantone]

True story.

A Military wife expecting second child 6 and 1/2 months along realized something was wrong . The fetus was dead but being stationed in NC she was to far along to allow for an abortion and was made to carry the child and deliver naturally . Just think of the living hell done to this Women knowing she is carrying her dead child and there was nothing she could do.
You think that would be enough but it gets worse. She has a miscarriage at the start of the 8th month and was investigated by Dept. of Health and contacted by the Police because the Hospital had to report it. All this going on while trying to bury her still born child.

[Giantone]

Originally Posted by Chico23231

It’s still murder tho

chico, please, just shut up! You know not of what you speak.

[SunnySide]

Originally Posted by Chico23231

It’s still murder tho

Would a compromise up to 15 week abortion national law work? It would still be more progressive than most of Europe?

Yes for me.

That gives (most) woman time to find out their pregnant and do something about it while its a non viable fetus. Most people think or thought abortion should be a scientific litmus test of "when is a fetus viable" ... and we could discuss and debate that.

but now the political hack of the SCOTUS is making the test/question a religious one.

Religion has no place in steering our government or laws. If you agree with that, you should disagree with what the SCOTUS did. If you dont agree with that, you are a cancer to our democracy.

[Chico23231]

Originally Posted by SunnySide

Yes for me.

That gives (most) woman time to find out their pregnant and do something about it while its a non viable fetus. Most people think or thought abortion should be a scientific litmus test of "when is a fetus viable" ... and we could discuss and debate that.

but now the political hack of the SCOTUS is making the test/question a religious one.

Religion has no place in steering our government or laws. If you agree with that, you should disagree with what the SCOTUS did. If you dont agree with that, you are a cancer to our democracy.

95% abortions fall into the 15 week limit. Only exception would be life of the mother with two doctor sign off.

That’s my proposal

[nonniey]

Originally Posted by MTK

You do realize there are legit medical reasons that may make a late term abortion necessary right? We're not talking about someone walking in and aborting an otherwise perfectly healthy baby just because the woman changed her mind last second. These types of abortions are rare.

Yes we are talking about that.

You know this gets pretty frustrating. I post the same god damn thing every 6 months, showing where you and other posters are wrong on this, just to have you all come back 6 months later with the same mistaken belief about late term abortions.


This is what???, the 3rd or 4th time I've posted this during discussions on late term abortions on who gets them and why (and each time I get "the wow I didn't know about that.")?

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6457018/

"......However, while the occasional politician or news reporter will still indicate that late-term abortions are most often performed in the case of “severe fetal anomalies” or to “save the woman’s life,” the trajectory of the peer-reviewed research literature has been obvious for decades: most late-term abortions are elective, done on healthy women with healthy fetuses, and for the same reasons given by women experiencing first trimester abortions. The Guttmacher Institute has provided a number of reports over 2 decades which have identified the reasons why women choose abortion, and they have consistently reported that childbearing would interfere with their education, work, and ability to care for existing dependents; would be a financial burden; and would disrupt partner relationships. A more recent Guttmacher study focused on abortion after 20 weeks of gestation and similarly concluded that women seeking late-term abortions were not doing so for reasons of fetal anomaly or life endangerment. The study further concluded that late-term abortion seekers were younger and more likely to be unemployed than those seeking earlier abortions.4 It is estimated that about 1% of all abortions in the United States are performed after 20 weeks, or approximately 10 000 to 15 000 annually......"

As for Vermont I see someone posted bad info on that as well in a weak attempt to refute what I said.

https://www.cga.ct.gov/2019/rpt/pdf/2019-R-0259.pdf
https://legislature.vermont.gov/stat...chapter/18/223

"Summary
Vermont is one of 13 states that have enacted laws affirmatively declaring a woman’s right to choose an abortion. According to the Guttmacher Institute, it is the only state, aside from Oregon,that codified the right to abortion without government interference throughout a woman’s pregnancy, instead of only (1) prior to the viability of the fetus or (2) when necessary to protect the woman’s health or life. "

Since this study additional states have passed similar laws including Maryland and New York.


Here is an analogy of what is going on this subject in this forum. You guys are they the dog in the car.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=muhL7dhUBqs

[Giantone]

some again are distorting facts.






https://vtdigger.org/2019/02/15/verm...-moment-birth/

However, in 2016, the latest year for which abortion data is available, “91.7 percent of all Vermont abortions happened within the first trimester (12 weeks or less) and only 1.3 percent of Vermont abortions occurred in 2016 after 21 weeks.”

Data from the Centers for Disease Control on abortions nationwide in 2015 shows that seven abortions were conducted in Vermont after 21 weeks -- 0.7 percent of all abortions in the state -- but doesn’t give a more specific breakdown for when those procedures were performed.

The medical society added that women do not elect to terminate pregnancies in the final few months, as opponents of H.57, like Coyne, suggest.

“‘Late term’ abortion is a social construct introduced to create an image of an elective abortion that happens closer to 8-9 months, which does not happen and is not a term that is used medically,” the society says.

And even if a woman wanted to abort a pregnancy that late, there are no providers who would do it in Vermont, according to the medical society.

“No abortion providers in Vermont perform elective abortions in the third trimester,” it says.

Lucy Leriche, the vice president of public policy at Planned Parenthood of Northern New England, said the only time when a woman might get an abortion that late in their pregnancy would be “under really severe circumstances for health of mother or because the viability of pregnancy is at risk.”

Doctors who do carry out elective procedures that late in pregnancy, she added, would face dire professional consequences for violating their licensure and committing medical malpractice.

So abortions in the third trimester are exceedingly rare, and don’t occur as elective procedures, but are they legal, as Coyne says?

The law currently before Vermont lawmakers would not legalize such procedures. Hare writes: “In the event that a provider in Vermont knowingly performed a ‘partial-birth abortion’ as it is defined by the Act in violation of that federal statute, the provider could be prosecuted as provided for in the Act, and regardless of the provisions in H.57.”

But as Coyne has pointed out, “partial-birth abortion” does not describe all late-term abortions, and no one disputes that abortions for medical emergencies are legal throughout the pregnancy.

[nonniey]

Originally Posted by Giantone

some again are distorting facts.






https://vtdigger.org/2019/02/15/verm...-moment-birth/

However, in 2016, the latest year for which abortion data is available, “91.7 percent of all Vermont abortions happened within the first trimester (12 weeks or less) and only 1.3 percent of Vermont abortions occurred in 2016 after 21 weeks.”

Data from the Centers for Disease Control on abortions nationwide in 2015 shows that seven abortions were conducted in Vermont after 21 weeks -- 0.7 percent of all abortions in the state -- but doesn’t give a more specific breakdown for when those procedures were performed.

The medical society added that women do not elect to terminate pregnancies in the final few months, as opponents of H.57, like Coyne, suggest.

“‘Late term’ abortion is a social construct introduced to create an image of an elective abortion that happens closer to 8-9 months, which does not happen and is not a term that is used medically,” the society says.

And even if a woman wanted to abort a pregnancy that late, there are no providers who would do it in Vermont, according to the medical society.

“No abortion providers in Vermont perform elective abortions in the third trimester,” it says.

Lucy Leriche, the vice president of public policy at Planned Parenthood of Northern New England, said the only time when a woman might get an abortion that late in their pregnancy would be “under really severe circumstances for health of mother or because the viability of pregnancy is at risk.”

Doctors who do carry out elective procedures that late in pregnancy, she added, would face dire professional consequences for violating their licensure and committing medical malpractice.

So abortions in the third trimester are exceedingly rare, and don’t occur as elective procedures, but are they legal, as Coyne says?

The law currently before Vermont lawmakers would not legalize such procedures. Hare writes: “In the event that a provider in Vermont knowingly performed a ‘partial-birth abortion’ as it is defined by the Act in violation of that federal statute, the provider could be prosecuted as provided for in the Act, and regardless of the provisions in H.57.”

But as Coyne has pointed out, “partial-birth abortion” does not describe all late-term abortions, and no one disputes that abortions for medical emergencies are legal throughout the pregnancy.

I see you still have a reading comprehension problem - eveything I posted said there were very few of these relative (only 1%) to the total number of abortions performed. And now you post an article with stats that show only 1.7% of abortions in Vermont in 2016 were of this type. Brilliant!

Yes only 7 abortions in Vermont fell into this catagory (in 2016) - statistically 4-6 of them were done on healthy women with healthy fetuses (According to Government reports and also the most knowledgeable and quoted source, Guttmacher Institute, which is a pro-abortion source I might add).

I stand by my comment that yes the laws making total abortion bans are fucked up, but not as fucked up as the laws that permit this. There are 10-15k (1%) late term abortions each year in the United States, most on healthy fetus's, and you are ok with that.

[MTK]

Originally Posted by nonniey

I stand by my comment that yes the laws making total abortion bans are fucked up, but not as fucked up as the laws that permit this. There are 10-15k (1%) late term abortions each year in the United States, most on healthy fetus's, and you are ok with that.

I don't think anyone said they are ok with that, how about we put both situations in the category of being fucked up and call it a day. Don't know why we have to rank them.

[Chief X_Phackter]

Originally Posted by MTK

I don't think anyone said they are ok with that, how about we put both situations in the category of being fucked up and call it a day. Don't know why we have to rank them.

That seems fair.

[nonniey]

Originally Posted by MTK

I don't think anyone said they are ok with that, how about we put both situations in the category of being fucked up and call it a day. Don't know why we have to rank them.

All good at least until 6 months from now when once again someone will post that late term abortions are only done to protect the life of the mother or on fetuses with fatal conditions.