TX Abortion Restrictions Declared Unconstitutional

I think "If it ain't your fetus, it's none of your f*king business."

Oh, and the ersatz reference to "Gosnell".... :Snooze

The evidencee suggests you don't think at all, you simply parrrot the reverberations experienced in the echo chambers you frequent. If you were capable of thinking you would be able to comprehend that every right you have is not an unlimited one, that even SCOTUS, you know the folks that according to you decide what "settled law" is, have said that the state has two compelling interests with regards to abortion law, the health and well being of the mother and the protection of prenatal life, which means the fetus in case you don't know what the word "prenatal" means.

In fact, it appears that you don't know what "prenatal" means, so I'll be kind and address your ignorance. Prenatal means occurring or existing before birth. Thus, prenatal life is life that exists prior to birth. I this case we are talking about human life. That, by the way, is the language used by the men and women in black robes when rendering their decision. They, unlike you, do not attempt to dehumanize the human life that exists in a woman's womb.

So go ahead and repeat your rally slogan to your black heart's content, any person of reason realizes you gave up on thinking years ago.

PrintSmith wrote: Wrong again bigot - the state does have a compelling interest in protecting both the health and well being of the mother and the human life she carries in her womb. That, by the way, comes from the very same court that fabricated the so called "right" to an abortion in the first place.

Roe v. Wade, 410 U.S. 113 (1973), is a landmark decision by the United States Supreme Court on the issue of abortion. Decided simultaneously with a companion case, Doe v. Bolton, the Court ruled 7–2 that a right to privacy under the due process clause of the 14th Amendment extended to a woman's decision to have an abortion, but that right must be balanced against the state's two legitimate interests in regulating abortions: protecting prenatal life and protecting women's health. Arguing that these state interests became stronger over the course of a pregnancy, the Court resolved this balancing test by tying state regulation of abortion to the trimester of pregnancy.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roe_v._Wade

The BRAIN DEAD BODY of a mother and a NONVIABLE fetus forced into limbo hell, by a hospital's LACK of common sense...... THAT is the definition of "infringing upon
the rights of an individual"......JMO

You know something home, any mother worthy of that name that I have ever met would be willing to lay down their life for that of their child. The would literally walk through the fires of Hell and look the devil himself in they eye to protect thier child if they could. I can't begin to imagine that a mother wouldn't want every attempt to save her child tried.

READ THE OATH that doctors take.....it gets back to BASICS Print.....the fetus was NONVIABLE.
The hospital was OVER stepping the intent of the law and was NOT using common sense. Do
I KNOW that there was a "religious" reason (no, I do not)...HOWEVER,it would be worth while to
investigate WHO made that edict/decision/choice that put this family thru limbo hell.....THEY
WERE IN AGREEMENT AS A FAMILY and from what I read so was the doctor UNTIL the last
moment when someone "decided" to rescind the decision..... THAT is the epitome
of "infringing upon the right's of an individual"....

II am dealing with the basics home. The basics are that we are endowed with rights as a result of our creation, not as a result of our birth. Human life in the womb is well past the point of its creation. Now you have not been very specific as to why that life wasn't viable, but I am presuming that the reason has something to do with how many weeks it had been alive and developing, which keeping the mother technically able to support further develop using available technology might overcome. Do you want me to find you a story about a woman who refused to undergo medical treatment which had the possibility of saving her life but would definately kill their unborn child? They are out there you know.

The most basic line is that the life in the womb, life that has been endowed with the same rights that you and I have if we take to heart our society's foundational statement that all are created equal, has a right to be considered. The first rule of medicine is do no harm, right? The woman was already brain dead, how much harm can be involved to her given that reality? The life in the womb, however, would be harmed by the removal of life support for the woman who was brain dead, right? Doing no harm, therefore, means not removing that support until such time as no harm is done to the other life in the process.

LadyJazzer wrote: I think "If it ain't your fetus, it's none of your f*king business."

Oh, and the ersatz reference to "Gosnell".... :Snooze

:banghead: So you support Gosnell's methods? Bravo! You just don't care about those women patients dying.
And do you even know what ersatz is?

FredHayek wrote:

LadyJazzer wrote: I think "If it ain't your fetus, it's none of your f*king business."

Oh, and the ersatz reference to "Gosnell".... :Snooze

:banghead: So you support Gosnell's methods? Bravo! You just don't care about those women patients dying.
And do you even know what ersatz is?

Probably should have used the word "ubiquitous"....

Gosnell happens because right-to-lifers close down clinics where affordable care is offered. So people go to some back-alley doctor looking for the treatment the prolifers have closed off. You don't stop it--you just send it underground. It's been that way since the beginning of the Republic; and it always will be. I don't support it...Neither do I support the efforts to close down clinics with a series of over-the-top, unnecessary regulations designed to do one thing--close the clinics. It's not about "safety"--It's about closure.

I'll be proudly wearing my coat-hanger pendant around my neck as a sign to the prolifers that they'll be responsible for the horrors of people like Gosnell.



Oh, and West Virginia's governor just vetoed the 20-week ban.... The fight continues....

"If it ain't your fetus, it's none of your f*king business."

OMIGOD! There is someone who is going to buy that pendant! Someone happy that America has had 55 million legal abortions. Even your bud Hilary wishes abortions were more rare.