Missouri Republicans Introduce Bills to Charge Women Who Receive Abortions With Murder

[Clizby Wampuscat]

I found this article: OB GYN residency trainees can't train in Texas

OB-GYN Residents Are Required to Receive Clinical Abortion Training. They Can’t Do That in Texas.

Abortion restrictions running in conflict with training requirements are pushing lifelong Texans to leave the state.

www.texasmonthly.com

Ok, you do know there are prolife OBGYN doctors.

 

[Clizby Wampuscat]

It only takes one ignorant yahoo to file suit to seek a $10,000 reward.

How is the relevant to my stance on the Cox case. I agree with you on that case.

 

[SkepticThinker]

Nope. Why do you lie about what I said? Anyone can read my thoughts on this case.

It's the thread topic.
And I'm sorry to have to point out to you that's it's what happens when we legislate beliefs like this into law.

 

[Clizby Wampuscat]

It only takes one ignorant yahoo to file suit to seek a $10,000 reward.

How is the relevant to my stance on the Cox case. I agree with you on that case.

 

[Clizby Wampuscat]

I'm not sure what to believe about what people say about their beliefs when their actions seem to be in conflict with what they say are their beliefs. I usually apply Hanlon's Razor but that doesn't help here either.
Maybe we should separate what the real question is. There are two here which people seem to confuse. 1. Are you for or against abortion?

I am against abortion in most cases. But there are cases like the Cox case where it makes sense.

2. Are you for or against the laws that are now implemented or supposed?

I am ok with the law as written in Texas. I am not ok with how Paxton and the Texas supreme court has interpreted the law. The intent of the law is to allow for medical emergencies etc. So if the law needs to be changed to allow an abortion in this situation like Mrs. Cox then I am for that change.

I'm (and I think most of the pro-choicers here are) interested in the 2nd question.
Do we agree that almost all anti abortion laws introduced in several red states recently are massively flawed, either through stupidity or through malice?

I don't know the specifics of all the anti abortion laws in other states. I know what is says in Texas and see above about my take.

Do you think that these laws should be/ should have been ratified even though they have (un-)wanted consequences such as forcing 10 year old rape victims out of state or nearly killing women who, by all medical standards, needed an abortion?

Yes, we should change the laws if they are doing these things. I would support a 10 yo to have an abortion and I have already stated many times that I am for abortions that save a mothers life. It seems you want me to say I am not. How many more times do I need to say it?

Do you put dogma over people's live and liberty?

No, that is what theists do many times.

 

[Orbit]

Yes, what else can it be? It is alive and it is human.

Non viable tissue outside the woman's body. And most women have an abortion not to preserve their health but because they don't want a child.


So what? People die of natural causes everyday, that does not give anyone the right to kill someone.

Miscarriages are not alive. They aren't even a proper fetus many times. An early first trimester miscarriage presents much like a heavy period. There is blood, and blood clots, and uterine lining. No baby.

This is the problem with men (politicians, lawyers, judges) making health care decisions for women. Not only are they not doctors, but they have no idea how a woman's body works.

As I stated before, 10-25% of pregnancies end in first trimester miscarriages. That's a lot of miscarriages. Many of them will require an abortion. Another 2% of pregnancies are ectopic; that requires an abortion and the fetus is not a viable fetus at all, ever. And still others result from fatal fetal abnormalities, or when the baby simply dies inside the mother.

You need to make a distinction between elective and medically necessary abortion, and stop basing policy on the former. Women who need a medically necessary abortion don't care about why other people get abortions; neither should you.

 

[Heyo]

I am against abortion in most cases. But there are cases like the Cox case where it makes sense.

I think abortion is often a bad solution to unfortunate circumstances - but forcing a woman to give birth is a worse solution.

I am ok with the law as written in Texas. I am not ok with how Paxton and the Texas supreme court has interpreted the law. The intent of the law is to allow for medical emergencies etc. So if the law needs to be changed to allow an abortion in this situation like Mrs. Cox then I am for that change.

Do you think that's going to happen?
The speed with which the flaw will be corrected will give me additional hints to whether the consequences were intended (malicious) or unforeseen (stupid).

I don't know the specifics of all the anti abortion laws in other states. I know what is says in Texas and see above about my take.

Yes, we should change the laws if they are doing these things. I would support a 10 yo to have an abortion and I have already stated many times that I am for abortions that save a mothers life. It seems you want me to say I am not. How many more times do I need to say it?

As I said above I wasn't sure. Now it seems that you are genuine anti abortion with some common sense. I don't hold your naïvety against you. (But I can't hold back to tell you that we told you so.)

No, that is what theists do many times.

And politicians.

 

[SkepticThinker]

Miscarriages are not alive. They aren't even a proper fetus many times. An early first trimester miscarriage presents much like a heavy period. There is blood, and blood clots, and uterine lining. No baby.

This is the problem with men (politicians, lawyers, judges) making health care decisions for women. Not only are they not doctors, but they have no idea how a woman's body works.

As I stated before, 10-25% of pregnancies end in first trimester miscarriages. That's a lot of miscarriages. Many of them will require an abortion. Another 2% of pregnancies are ectopic; that requires an abortion and the fetus is not a viable fetus at all, ever. And still others result from fatal fetal abnormalities, or when the baby simply dies inside the mother.

You need to make a distinction between elective and medically necessary abortion, and stop basing policy on the former. Women who need a medically necessary abortion don't care about why other people get abortions; neither should you.

I literally, just moments ago, talked to a man who was saying he is afraid to have sexual intercourse with his 12 weeks pregnant girlfriend because he is afraid his ummmmm ... equipment is going to bonk the fetus in the head.
I just asked him if he knows anything about female anatomy and he said "what do you mean?"

Seriously.

 

[Clizby Wampuscat]

It's the thread topic.
And I'm sorry to have to point out to you that's it's what happens when we legislate beliefs like this into law.

We legislate all our beliefs into law.

 

[SkepticThinker]

We legislate all our beliefs into law.

No we don't.

 

[Clizby Wampuscat]

Miscarriages are not alive. They aren't even a proper fetus many times. An early first trimester miscarriage presents much like a heavy period. There is blood, and blood clots, and uterine lining. No baby.

A fertilized egg is human life.

This is the problem with men (politicians, lawyers, judges) making health care decisions for women. Not only are they not doctors, but they have no idea how a woman's body works.

This has nothing to do with me being a man. There are millions of women that have the same stance I have. This is just a way to dismiss my argument.

As I stated before, 10-25% of pregnancies end in first trimester miscarriages. That's a lot of miscarriages. Many of them will require an abortion. Another 2% of pregnancies are ectopic; that requires an abortion and the fetus is not a viable fetus at all, ever. And still others result from fatal fetal abnormalities, or when the baby simply dies inside the mother.

And I am in agreement with these abortions. But as I said natural miscarriages have no bearing on this issue.

You need to make a distinction between elective and medically necessary abortion, and stop basing policy on the former. Women who need a medically necessary abortion don't care about why other people get abortions; neither should you.

I have made the distinction many times. I feel like you are not reading my posts and want to saddle me with beliefs I don't have.

 

[Clizby Wampuscat]

No we don't.

I should clarify. All laws are based on beliefs.

 

[crossfire]

Ok, you do know there are prolife OBGYN doctors.

Of course there are. However, these are trained medical professionals who know when a pregnancy termination or a procedure often used in pregnancy termination is in order. Catholic hospitals will perform medically necessary abortions when the situation calls for it, as long as the State isn't hogtying them. These pro-life doctors don't need politicians who don't know squat about medicine tying their hands when such a procedure is necessary. They don't deserve to be harassed by any ignorant yahoo with a $10,000 lawsuit for performing a medically sound procedure that they have deemed necessary from their pro-life standpoint either.

I know Texas has limitations as to whom (certain relatives) can file a wrongful death lawsuit, but these limitations do not apply when it comes to abortion?

 

[crossfire]

How is the relevant to my stance on the Cox case. I agree with you on that case.

She couldn't get it because it would only take one ignorant yahoo to file a lawsuit for a $10,000 reward--and with the case being so widely broadcast, I'm sure the greedy money-grabbers were ready to pounce.

 

[Clizby Wampuscat]

Of course there are. However, these are trained medical professionals who know when a pregnancy termination or a procedure often used in pregnancy termination is in order. Catholic hospitals will perform medically necessary abortions when the situation calls for it, as long as the State isn't hogtying them. These pro-life doctors don't need politicians who don't know squat about medicine tying their hands when such a procedure is necessary. They don't deserve to be harassed by any ignorant yahoo with a $10,000 lawsuit for performing a medically sound procedure that they have deemed necessary from their pro-life standpoint either.

I know Texas has limitations as to whom (certain relatives) can file a wrongful death lawsuit, but these limitations do not apply when it comes to abortion?

Ok, then maybe the law needs to be changed. I am not against people learning how to do abortions because sometimes they are necessary.

 

[Clizby Wampuscat]

She couldn't get it because it would only take one ignorant yahoo to file a lawsuit for a $10,000 reward--and with the case being so widely broadcast, I'm sure the greedy money-grabbers were ready to pounce.

She got the abortion.

 

[fantome profane]

So what? People die of natural causes everyday, that does not give anyone the right to kill someone.

But when millions of people die of natural causes, we try to do something about that. In the U.S. hundreds of thousands of people die from cancer each year, but we don't just shrug that off. Millions of dollars and countless man-hours of brilliant researchers go into go into treating, curing or preventing cancer. Covid comes along and kills millions and we try to prevent that and we make a vaccine. The point is we do something.

As @Orbit said, 10-25% of all pregnancies end in miscarriages. Now if you really believe, with all sincerity, that those are dead "people", if you really believe those are millions and millions of people dying, even if it is from "natural causes", I have to ask, why aren't we doing anything about that? We don't even talk about it. Why?

When you think about it, all the abortions make up a incredibly tiny fraction of the natural miscarriages. Why aren't you talking about that?

 

[Clizby Wampuscat]

But when millions of people die of natural causes, we try to do something about that. In the U.S. hundreds of thousands of people die from cancer each year, but we don't just shrug that off. Millions of dollars and countless man-hours of brilliant researchers go into go into treating, curing or preventing cancer. Covid comes along and kills millions and we try to prevent that and we make a vaccine. The point is we do something.

As @Orbit said, 10-25% of all pregnancies end in miscarriages. Now if you really believe, with all sincerity, that those are dead "people", if you really believe those are millions and millions of people dying, even if it is from "natural causes", I have to ask, why aren't we doing anything about that? We don't even talk about it. Why?

When you think about it, all the abortions make up a incredibly tiny fraction of the natural miscarriages. Why aren't you talking about that?

What do you want me to do about it? I am an engineer not a scientist or doctor.

There is research being done

Progestogen for preventing miscarriage in women with recurrent miscarriage of unclear etiology

Progesterone, a female sex hormone, is known to induce secretory changes in the lining of the uterus essential for successful implantation of a fertilized egg. It has been suggested that a causative factor in many cases of miscarriage may be inadequate ...

www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

Evidence-based management of recurrent miscarriages

Recurrent miscarriages are postimplantation failures in natural conception; they are also termed as habitual abortions or recurrent pregnancy losses. Recurrent pregnancy loss is disheartening to the couple and to the treating clinician. There has been ...

www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

These people are educating women to try to reduce miscarriages:

Miscarriage - Prevention

Miscarriages cannot always be prevented, but you can try to reduce your risk by aiming to stay as healthy as possible.

www.nhs.uk

Preventing Miscarriages

Is it possible to prevent a miscarriage? Get answers from the experts at WebMD.

www.webmd.com

There are people talking about it and doing something just like Covid and cancer.

 

[Wandering Monk]

This thread is about MISSOURI, NOT TEXAS. Take your argument to THAT thread!

 

[Clizby Wampuscat]

But when millions of people die of natural causes, we try to do something about that. In the U.S. hundreds of thousands of people die from cancer each year, but we don't just shrug that off. Millions of dollars and countless man-hours of brilliant researchers go into go into treating, curing or preventing cancer. Covid comes along and kills millions and we try to prevent that and we make a vaccine. The point is we do something.

As @Orbit said, 10-25% of all pregnancies end in miscarriages. Now if you really believe, with all sincerity, that those are dead "people", if you really believe those are millions and millions of people dying, even if it is from "natural causes", I have to ask, why aren't we doing anything about that? We don't even talk about it. Why?

When you think about it, all the abortions make up a incredibly tiny fraction of the natural miscarriages. Why aren't you talking about that

What restrictions do you think should be on abortion if any?