Supreme court strikes down strict Texas abortion law aimed at closing clinics

You can not deny that a human fetus is both human and alive. It is not an opinion it is a fact. A fetus after abortion is still human and dead.

 

Plus it's called an Amendment. The very word is synonymous with change. Yet we can't change or modify it? I don't understand why the 2nd Amendment is so sacred when there have been other amendments in the past (you know like the one that permitted slavery or suffrage) have been altered. Other nations have a constitution with amendments. They don't treat it like some sacred unalterable document. When modern society's issues do not reflect older generations they make amendments to their constitution to fit it. I don't understand why it takes so long for change to come from us though. The 2nd Amendment was written when the primary form of firearm was a musket. We all know how inefficient a musket is compared to a modern day assault rifle or hand gun. It's a completely different era we live in compared to our forefathers.

 

You're welcome to that opinion, but the definition of the word "baby" doesn't match your opinion.

While I agree that, in a perfect world, the choices should be made long before abortion becomes an option, we don't live in a perfect world. I would love to make it where various contraceptives were freely and ubiquitously available in order to make those choices easier to make earlier. I would love to make sure that every girl age 12 and older was taught the material in the book "Taking Charge of your Fertility" because if that were the case, unwanted pregnancies would become a thing of the past, especially in conjunction with ubiquitous birth control.

Until we take the issue of unplanned pregnancies seriously, we will have to allow women to choose abortion. If you want to ACTUALLY reduce abortions, increase sex education and access to birth control.

So, in your opinion, birth control like the IUD and the pill are out of bounds because they allow the fertilized egg to pass through the uterus without implanting. Is that an accurate description of your opinion?

Because she doesn't want to bring the fetus to term and bear it and you don't have the right to stick your nose in her uterus.

Your statement above seems to conflict with this one, can you clarify?

 

A fetus is indeed human tissue.

In the same way as any other clump of cells in my body, it is also "alive."

However, it is only a "human life" in some people's opinion. "Life" is a different word with different connotations than "alive" and there are a great many people who don't consider zygotes or fetuses "life."

You don't get to force your beliefs about that word onto people who don't share your belief.

 

People are going to have abortions whether it's legal or not. Making abortion illegal just leads to unsafe, underground abortions, or mother's literally throwing children in the trash.

 

You do realize that 15-20% of women with verified pregnancies end in miscarriage, right? It's a kind of natural quality control. Is that considered murder too?

 

Why don't we do the same with guns? Allow the people doing background checks to be more thorough and not force them to rush.

 

No cuz' then it becomes God's will and that makes it okay.

 

They do in several states.....that was my point.

 

We'd have somewhat of a compromise if getting to and from the clinic wasn't such a burden in states with limited abortion clinics.

 

That and those clinics most of the time just do sexual health check ups and provide contraception to the poor and indentured, improving the quality of life of women to make sure their sexual organs are healthy and lessening the number of abortions by providing birth control. So evil!

 

As a nation we live with our legal definitions over religious definitions. I'm fine with efforts to change laws but this was a blatant end around for Texas religious forces. If it were truly a health issue you would have seen doctors weighing in. Or their insurers at least. They wouldn't insure them for unsafe practices subject to lawsuits.

 

Do you have a clump of living tissue somewhere on your body that you would like me to cut off and see if it dies? From the joy you seem to have in abortion I'm thinking your heart might not be something your using so that would be a good place to start.

The DNA of the fetus is a living, completely unique, one of a kind new human set of cells. These cells are uniquely human and alive and abortion kills them.

Too bad all the abortion lovers out there didn't have parents who were abortion lovers...

This may be one of the dumber questions I've seen in the D&D which is saying something.

 

I understand your emotion and righteous feelings of indignation. I do, but several points.

1. I don't see "joy" in your opponents. Nobody likes abortion. Women don't like it or welcome it. They do want it as a awful option in some cases, however. Painting your opponents to be inhuman monsters won't really get anyone anywhere. There is relief for many that the strange Texas law, that never seemed to be about women's health to most of us, was struck down. (Note, in defending how far women in west texas would have to drive to have an abortion, TX legal representation said "oh they can just drive into New Mexico." The SC called them out on this, since New Mexico's clinics don't have the TX rules "for women's safety," so how is making them drive to New Mexico protecting them exactly? It was an embarrassing and crystal clear moment actually.)

2. You say fetus, and it's a fine thing to argue about. But it's simply a stage (a very human looking stage, yes) that takes us from a fertilized egg cell all the way to a viable baby living outside the mother's womb. As a society, we have to draw the line somewhere and it's hard to agree on that line. We could draw it at a fertilized egg. We could draw it where Aristotle and Bobbythegreat seems to want it, for young children. We could draw it after first trimester. Or at the very point of birth. We can pretend one of us knows better than everyone else, but there's no objective absolute here.

3. If you value every potential human life, I think you should be horrified at some of the technologies used now to get people pregnant. Let's take about 8 fertilized eggs, all of them viable humans, and implant them knowing that only 1 or 2, on average can be supported by the uterus. Never mind the many cases where none take. That is a completely artificial way to create and then cull a bunch of potential humans. Happens all the time, and it's employed by otherwise "pro life" people, and everyone else. Just blows me away.

4. There is much to celebrate, believe it or not. Over the last 40 years, as I understand the numbers, the #s of abortions have been cut in half, even as our population is much, much greater. So the rate of women having abortions has really plummeted and seems to be falling still. That's good news for everyone, without having to monkey with Roe v. Wade.

Cheers.

 

Your post, like the others who like and defend abortion is condescending and arrogant. You like the others also like to assume that there needs to be some religious cause for my "belief" that a human who has been alive for three months or more is not a human somehow. I understand this lie is necessary for you to cope with the idea that you are arguing the righteousness of killing a living human but that does not change what is fact. That truth is that you are FOR killing humans.

This is not righteous indignation. I could care less about the law. I don't have an answer for abortion because outlawing it may cause more damage than keeping it.

I just wish that proponents of abortion would admit that they are proponents of killing humans and stop beating around the truth via semantics. We can at least have an honest conversation from there about why we need to end life and how much of our tax dollars should be used for that purpose.

 

Curious why the legislature is so adamant about the health of women getting abortions as Texas remains a laughingstock in terms of the rates of uninsured children. It's perfectly clear to any informed person that this is simply about curbing abortion rather than the health of anybody.


http://www.dallasnews.com/opinion/e...-children-has-dropped--but-its-not-enough.ece

So there was promising news in the latest State of Texas Children report that the number of children lacking health insurance in Dallas County and much of Texas has spiked since 2009, the year before Obamacare went into effect. About 87 percent of of the county’s kids had health insurance in 2014, the most recent data available, compared with 78 percent in 2009.

That’s the good news from the Center for Public Policy Priorities.

The bad news: Despite those efforts, too many kids — 13 percent in Dallas County — are still uninsured. And the state’s overall rate — 11 percent — continues to be the highest in the country. Hispanic children are much more likely than white, black or Asian kids to lack health insurance in the county, state and nation, the study showed.

The costs of that disappointing data are many. Thousands of uninsured folks wind up at Parkland Memorial Hospital because public hospitals are obligated to care for everyone. And all Dallas County taxpayers are footing the bill.

 

False. I went out of my way to be respectful and understanding. Didn't work, clearly. I'm not sure how one can be "arrogant" about such an incredibly sensitive topic. I didn't call you a liar, or condescending or arrogant, or any other ad hominem. And I won't.

What? I have no idea what you're talking about here. I don't know what you believe. It seems you believe that a human life starts exactly at conception.

I'm not playing games or coping or killing. (I've never ordered an abortion or been party to a woman having an abortion, though I did once sit with a woman who had a miscarriage that would have been a child of mine. And I also sat with a friend who had had an abortion. Both were incredibly sad and awful times. Incredibly similar. Just awful.)

If you think "human" equal fertilized egg cell, and it seems you do, then I support a mother being able to terminate that proto-human, or "killing a human" if you prefer. It's not my call. It's her call, when it's still much more dependent on her body than its own body. To me a "human" starts when a being can survive on its own outside the womb. You call that a semantic game, a lie. I disagree with your judgment of me. I call my stance a philosophical, spiritual and pragmatic decision within an incredibly complex circumstance.

Agree. Luckily, rates have continued to drop fairly quickly. The more education that can be provided and the more unwanted pregnancies that the society can avoid, the better. That seems like the best way forward. Reducing legal access never seemed like a good path to me, but TX politicians see it differently. That's what the thread and the SC decision are about I guess.

It's not just semantics to most of us. But I can see your view of it for sure. I personally am haunted by the idea that my tax dollars kill innocent people in faraway lands via drone strikes. So I can understand if someone believes a human life begins at conception, that they would also hate any of their tax dollars supporting terminating that pregnancy and potential living breathing human. I fear far more of our tax dollars are doing the former, however.

Sorry I disagree with you and you think I am arrogant and condescending. I'll sign off now. I know better than to try these kinds of discussions, especially on this topic.

But I do hope you read my bit about the implantation techniques. It's kind of horrific what pregnancy technologies are doing if you believe every fertilized egg is a human life (and you have good reason to feel that way -- it's a logical way to view the cosmos, I think).

 

When I read thiss, all I see is you being an SOB and arrogant d!ckweed.

Look at point 1. When you point out that nobody has joy about abortions..., only an arrogant turd would ever post something like that.

Look at point 2. When you talked about different places to draw the line, and how you understand different people have all of them for their own respectable reasons..., All I could think of was that you were lucky you weren't in front of me, because I would have resorted to violence without a doubt. Who could post something like that?

Look at point 3. When you mentioned other losses of fertilized eggs that take place, all I could imagine was you cackling an evil arrogant laugh, and I wanted to wipe it from your face.

Look at point 4. Only a real b*stard would dare to talk about a reduction in the number of abortions in an effort to find common ground. Have you no decency!?!?!?!?!?!!!!!

 

I apologize, you are a very respectful and knowledgeable poster and one of my favorites to have "discussions" with.

I got a little irritated by the righteous indignation comment... I am a Christian and it is my policy to save my righteous indignation for Christians... nobody else has much use for it.

 

Darn it. Now it isn't as fun to joke around about your response. I hope you take it with the good humor it was intended.