Supreme Court overturns Roe v. Wade, eliminating constitutional right to abortion

Again, the SCOTUS ruling did not make abortion illegal. It appropriately sent it back to the states... as they should have because it's absurd to think that abortion is a part of the constitution. Some states chose to protect unborn babies from having their lives extinguished. If you oppose that, then your anger should be directed at those states, not the SCOTUS.

 

How do you feel about a 10 year old not being able to get an abortion because it was banned in her state?

 

Incredibly rare case... that policy shouldn't be crafted around... AND she could simply drive to another state if her desire to extinguish the life of a baby is that strong. My preference would obviously be adoption as the alternative instead of abortion.

 

You do realize that pregnancies is like the #1 killer for young, talking pre-18, girls, right?

So you really do think a 10 year old should deliver a baby. That's pretty sick. Knowing she was raped and that delivering the baby will likely kill her...sick and twisted stuff.

 

My anger is mostly directed at Republicans at the state level and in Congress. The Supreme Court justices made a decision knowing it would immediately remove rights away from millions of women and make them less safe. They aren’t blameless either in the suffering this will inevitably cause to actual breathing, thinking, and feeling human beings.

 

This is such a well-designed system.

https://www.kvue.com/article/news/l...ll-8/269-4f1502ed-8f83-4142-85d9-acfc778189ac

AUSTIN, Texas — Kailee DeSpain has dreamed of becoming a mom for years.

"I was pregnant for the first time at 21 years old," she said. "I miscarried that baby at 12 weeks. The doctors just kind of assured us that'll never happen again."

However, it did happen again. When she was 23, DeSpain got her second positive pregnancy test. When she reached 16 weeks, she gave birth, but the baby didn't make it.

She got pregnant again at 28 and miscarried that baby. In late 2021, she got her fourth positive test. Baby Finley.

"With Finley, everything was fine," she added. "Nobody was really worried about anything."

DeSpain thought this would be the baby she could finally carry to full term. He had a strong heartbeat.

"We always wondered why his heart was so fast," she said. "Why his heart so strong?"

She went for her routine scan at 16 weeks, and that's when she got the news baby Finley wasn't a healthy baby.

"He didn't have heart chambers," added DeSpain. "All the blood was pooled inside of his heart, and the blood couldn't get out to know where it was supposed to go."

He had several defects. He was missing one kidney, and blood couldn’t reach the other because of his heart. His brain had split. His heart was too big, and if he made it to full term, his lungs would not be fully developed, and he'd likely die in-utero. Doctors told DeSpain that if she followed through with this pregnancy, it could be dangerous for her as well.

They suggested she get an abortion, but under Senate Bill 8, after a fetal heartbeat is detected, abortion is only allowed in cases where it would save the pregnant patient’s life or prevent “substantial impairment of major bodily function.”

Meaning, that DeSpain couldn't get an abortion as she wasn't in immediate danger. While she was at risk and it was possible complications would present themselves later on, that wasn't - and isn't - enough under Texas law.

"The very next day, I called and made an appointment in New Mexico," said added.

While she didn't want to have this abortion, she knew her baby wouldn't survive, and her life was at risk.

"We drove 10 hours out of state," she recalled."I was 19 weeks along and had an abortion in New Mexico at a clinic."

And that was baby Finley's story. The ashes were mailed back to her in Texas, and now she's unsure of what the future holds. While she has doctors who can potentially help her carry her next baby to term, knowing her options are limited in the state scares her.

 

Link please.

 

Sure, yall should know that when Jay states a fact he always has sources...

https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/adolescent-pregnancy

I mean this shouldn't be a surprise of anyone that knows anything about pregnancy, it's something that could kill a fully mature woman, of course it's not going to be safe for a 10 year old.

Hopefully, with this information you can revise your statement of adoption being preferred.

10 year olds should not be having babies. If a law is forcing a 10 year old to deliver a baby then the law is just wrong. Simple. I'm willing to bet even a majority of conservatives agree with that.

 

Funny how the pro life value the life of unborn baby until they are born. There is almost a half a million children in foster care that need homes. If the pro life was so concerned about life why isn’t the ones in foster care taken care of already?. If we can’t take care of the foster kids that we do have now what makes you think the life of 5thr unborn will be taken care of after birth? Explain that to me. It’s like they don’t care about life after birth. If they did almost a half million children wouldn’t be stuck in foster care without a permanent home.

 

Have fun being being f*cking insane.

 

You had to modify your response to use "global" data instead of what's relevant here, which is data in the United States. Globally in places like sub-Saharan Africa, India, Bangladesh, Honduras, etc, people don't have access to good hospitals and doctors. In the US, they do. Pregnancy is certainty NOT the leading cause of death among young women in the United States. It's not even in the top 10.
https://www.cdc.gov/women/lcod/2018/all-races-origins/index.htm
You have been dishonest and you got caught.
The SCOTUS ruling is not a global ruling, it's a United States ruling. Which is why your point falls.

Furthermore, it's the height of ignorance to think that liberals have the moral high ground on the abortion topic. The vast majority of abortions are due to "convenience". In other words, the baby is inconvenient to the woman, so she chooses to terminate its life. Ending the life of a baby because you are too busy or it's just not the right time for you is unconscionable. It's totally irresponsible and it's cruel. If you are responsible enough to have sex, then you are responsible enough to have the baby. Cases of incest, rape, and super young mothers (like 10 y/o) are exceedingly rare and policy should not be crafted around these scenarios. Getting hit by lightning is a cause of death. Should we ban walking in thunderstorms? That's simply not how reasonable policy is made. Liberals will always try to avoid accountability and personal responsibility. Abortion is yet another example. Step up and be a responsible human being -- have the baby and raise it. Or give it up to adoption where many parents wait years to find a baby to adopt.

 

I didn't modify my statement at all, did you not read the link I posted? It explained WHY this is the case. A body is simply not prepared to deliver a baby at 10 years old. There would be major complications. That you need this explained to you is actually astonishing, apparently, you have no idea what pregnancy even is.

The reason it isn't higher in the US has nothing to do with it being safe and everything to do that we don't have many cases of teen and preteen pregnancy in the first place.

No, because I asked YOU how you felt about a 10 year old getting an abortion and YOU said she should deliver baby.

Vast majority of abortions are before 12 weeks. In fact, thanks to pills most happen within 6 weeks.

Late term abortions are also rare cases, most abortions are quite literally exterminating a clump of cells and something that isn't even shaped like a human. But you know this wasn't the point of our conversation, the point is that YOU think a 10 year old should deliver a baby.

I think that's the point here. It's not difficult to write a law that in cases of rape there should be abortion, hell, you could write the law specifically to deal with in cases of rape for adolescents because their bodies are simply not as capable of delivering a baby as a fully mature woman. You act like it's impossible to make exceptions in a law. Don't even get me started on your adoption point lol. hundreds of thousands of kids sit waiting to be adopted, that's a fact. Parents can start adopting those kids if they'd like.

So you really think a 10 year old should deliver a baby. Let's see what happens when a 10 year old delivers a baby.

https://www.livescience.com/19584-10-year-birth.html

This is not even counting the mental trauma a girl must go through.

So this particular story, 6 weeks pregnant.

Spoiler

Well there you go, you're basically choosing the life of that, something that doesn't even feel pain, that is still developing a brain for such functions, over a full developed 10 year old child. Hell, all you know, that might not even be a human embryo, could be an elephant, mouse, who knows? Yet still, you're willing to let a 10 year old go through mental and physical trauma and possibly even death to deliver a baby that might not even develop properly or live itself.

I think it's pretty sick. I mean, not only did you not even hesitate that you think a 10 year old should deliver that baby but you're now doubling down on it!

I think your posts above show why many women tell men to shut up about the topic because you really over there thinking pregnancy is some casual thing, ho hum, push it out for adoption at least...when it's really quite a journey for the female body and presents a lot of risk for the woman. If you knew that then you would never think a 10 year old should carry out a baby to term. "Oh yeah just put it up for adoption!" as if the pregnancy itself is nothing.

Also, for any of the 'He's trolling!' posts, is he really? He edited that post even, did some research for it even, he's making a point that actual GOP politicians made, "Can't follow a tragedy with another tragedy"

nah some of these people really feel like a 10 year old should deliver a baby. Sure it's a rare case, but it shows you how extreme their views are.

If someone showed me a case where a woman aborted a 8 month old fetus for convenience I'd say that is 100% wrong. In fact, someone made the claim of this happening and I asked for proof and said it was wrong if it happened.

 

…JayGoogle got caught with his hand in the dishonesty cookie jar and has to retreat to the 10 y/o mother argument…

Question: How many 10 year olds have given birth in the USA in the last 10 years? Wikipedia says the last one was in 2009! And this is the basis of JayGoogle’s failed argument… smh… You simply can’t build policy around remote hypotheticals.

All my points stand tall while Jay’s sink like a stone.


GOOD DAY

 

Again you personally don't but that is why that is a judgemental position from someone who it is physically impossible to end up in that situation.

This is an answer that I don't think either of us can definitively answer as it would pertain where we view life begins but also I will say expresses again a callousness. If someone isn't adopted then they are just wards of the state. Again it goes to a fundamental difference here in that I believe that the solution should be in not even getting to that point.

Yet parents can and have rejected adopting based upon that background.

That wasn't the scenario you put up and then claimed before I even responded I was trying to deflect. If you didn't agree with that was the whole point of that just a rhetorical trick?

Now we're getting somewhere. I can fully not letting the perfect be the enemy of the good and I understand your argument . I still feel this is a simplistic solution as even under your rosy projections you are still adding more than a 100K children to an already burdened foster care system. I still think if we want to solve this issue you still need to look things like increasing family planning and making it easier to raise children (providing more infant and early childhood healthcare, Pre-K and etc..) .

Your argument just seems to be lets get them to birth and then we roll the dice on abortion.

 

Party of Pro-birth. You couldn’t care less what the outcome of that experience would be for that child. As long as she births that baby…that’s all that matters. And you couldn’t care less what happens to that baby once it’s born.

You are a sick individual.

 

I donk know why you guys engage with Jorge. It is totally fruitless.

 

There are more than 400,000 kids in Foster care

So when people like TRADER lie about adoption or preferring adoption yet don't actually adopt or help those foster kids out, you realize they are hypocritical assholes and not really trying to help, they are just trolling to be trolls.

More than 100,000 babies a year go unadopted here in the USA, and now with Roe v Wade that number is going to go up, where are all these alleged EVANGELICAL CHRISTIANS when they are crying for the unborn, yet unwilling to help the born?

****ing losers, the entire lot of them, Trader is a feckless turd!

DD

 

not exactly a lie, you're probably talking about two different things. Folks who want to adopt infants have a very difficult time of doing that here in the United States, why so many of them have to go outside the country to make it happen. Friends of mine adopted their son from Russia years ago, got him in February after he was born--what I remember of them telling the story is that they were never so cold in all their lives as when they picked up the child in the middle of the winter.

Whereas foster children are from all kinds of situations, and generally older. Broken homes, drug homes, parents who are addicts or abusers, etc. Very difficult to make foster situations translate into adoptions. I have one friend who adopted their foster son. That was after perhaps a dozen fostering attempts.

 

I'm a forced birth libertarian - it's all about freedom.

 

I think ignoring his posts helps nothing because we've literally had a GOP Governor also say that this 10 year old child should birth that baby and an entire GOP state say the same thing.

He could be trolling, sure, but his opinions on this matter are VERY real and are held by many people. I'm not engaging with Trader, I'm engaging with his ideas.