RosieKat
Drama Llama
PeaJect #12
Posts: 5,561 
|
Post by RosieKat on Dec 13, 2023 15:50:24 GMT
I've said it before and I'll say it again. When your definition of what an acceptable abortion is is more strict than the Catholic Church's, you should realize you have a problem. Unfortunately, it becomes the problem of real, suffering people.
|
|
|
|
Post by Merge on Dec 13, 2023 17:14:00 GMT
I've said it before and I'll say it again. When your definition of what an acceptable abortion is is more strict than the Catholic Church's, you should realize you have a problem. Unfortunately, it becomes the problem of real, suffering people. I thought the church taught abortion is never acceptable. My very Catholic cousin carried her baby with anencephaly to term (it died within minutes of birth) and wields that decision over pro-choice relatives like a cudgel. “If I carried my child with a condition incompatible with life to term, there’s no reason for any woman to terminate for that reason” is her attitude. |
|
RosieKat
Drama Llama
PeaJect #12
Posts: 5,561
|
Post by RosieKat on Dec 13, 2023 19:57:18 GMT
thought the church taught abortion is never acceptable. Nope. I've both read some about it and had the conversation with many Catholic priests and ranking laity, and they are all in agreement that in some cases for medical reasons, it is acceptable, such as for saving a mother's life. I do not represent the Church officially, but I've heard it from pretty reliable sources. I researched the topic pretty thoroughly when I was considering IVF/IUI. (I did decide against it for me ultimately, but that was for other reasons.) It is true, however, that the standard party line is "No abortions, ever." |
|
|
|
Post by epeanymous on Dec 13, 2023 20:23:43 GMT
I've said it before and I'll say it again. When your definition of what an acceptable abortion is is more strict than the Catholic Church's, you should realize you have a problem. Unfortunately, it becomes the problem of real, suffering people. I thought the church taught abortion is never acceptable. My very Catholic cousin carried her baby with anencephaly to term (it died within minutes of birth) and wields that decision over pro-choice relatives like a cudgel. “If I carried my child with a condition incompatible with life to term, there’s no reason for any woman to terminate for that reason” is her attitude. There are two kinds of people who have experienced a great hardship -- those who want to make it so everyone experiences, and those who want to ensure that no one experiences it again. |
|
|
|
Post by aj2hall on Dec 13, 2023 21:13:22 GMT
This was intentional. Republicans want to pretend to be reasonable and be able to say there are exceptions, but in practice, Republicans intimidate doctors and wrote a deliberately vague law to ensure there very few exceptions. The mother's life has to be in immediate danger. Just putting her health at risk or risking future pregnancies is not enough. www.nytimes.com/2023/12/13/us/texas-abortion-doctor-prosecution.htmlAbortion Ruling Keeps Texas Doctors Afraid of Prosecution
In ruling that a pregnant woman did not qualify for a medical exception to abortion bans, the Texas Supreme Court left doctors without clear guidance on which cases might pass legal muster.
The mere threat of ruinous civil litigation or a lifetime in prison has been enough.
“Essentially, what we have is that no one will take responsibility,” said Molly Duane, a lawyer with the Center for Reproductive Rights who represented Ms. Cox and her doctor. “The court isn’t taking responsibility. The medical board isn’t taking responsibility. And in the meantime, doctors are more afraid than ever, and real patients’ lives hang in the balance.”
In its ruling, the Texas Supreme Court sided with the state’s attorney general, Ken Paxton, who argued that exceptions to the bans were legal only when the health or life of the mother was seriously threatened, and Ms. Cox’s case did not appear to meet that standard, based on the arguments presented.
But doctors have said that the risk of performing an abortion that they believed to be necessary but that could later be questioned by the state presented them with a stark choice: Go ahead with the procedure and risk felony prosecution, or wait until a woman’s health deteriorates to the point that no one would question the medical need.
“In Texas, you have to wait until the patient gets sick,” said Dr. Alireza A. Shamshirsaz, an obstetrician and fetal surgeon who left Texas for Boston last year. “But that is a dangerous game. Wait, wait, wait, while the mom gets sick, and then you do it.”
Dr. Shamshirsaz said the problem was concern about legal action, especially among hospital administrators. “Our hospital was very clear that you cannot even talk about abortion,” he said of a hospital where he had worked in Texas. “Because they don’t want to deal with the state at all. Or the courts.” |
|
|
|
Post by aj2hall on Dec 13, 2023 21:20:39 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by birukitty on Dec 13, 2023 21:53:23 GMT
And yet they do nothing to save a VIABLE child, outside the womb, in a CLASSROOM! NOTHING. Thoughts and prayers, I guess. And I am a gun owner who does not want a lot of government interference with my guns - but COME ON! They can't stick their heads in the sand over kids getting murdered by guns in schools (and elsewhere) but have a conniption fit about a woman's right to choose. They actually don't care about children at all. The one's already born or even the unborn they claim to care about. It was never about that. It's all about control. Control of women period. At least that's how I see it. |
|
Gem Girl
Pearl Clutcher
......
Posts: 2,686
Jun 29, 2014 19:29:52 GMT
|
Post by Gem Girl on Dec 13, 2023 23:02:20 GMT
I've said it before and I'll say it again. When your definition of what an acceptable abortion is is more strict than the Catholic Church's, you should realize you have a problem. Unfortunately, it becomes the problem of real, suffering people. I thought the church taught abortion is never acceptable. My very Catholic cousin carried her baby with anencephaly to term (it died within minutes of birth) and wields that decision over pro-choice relatives like a cudgel. “If I carried my child with a condition incompatible with life to term, there’s no reason for any woman to terminate for that reason” is her attitude. I'm afraid your cousin may have a bit of a mean streak, wearing it with Holier-than-Thou. |
|
|
|
Post by Merge on Dec 14, 2023 1:14:59 GMT
I thought the church taught abortion is never acceptable. My very Catholic cousin carried her baby with anencephaly to term (it died within minutes of birth) and wields that decision over pro-choice relatives like a cudgel. “If I carried my child with a condition incompatible with life to term, there’s no reason for any woman to terminate for that reason” is her attitude. I'm afraid your cousin may have a bit of a mean streak, wearing it with Holier-than-Thou. Oh most of my mom’s extended family does. This woman’s mother (my aunt) was the worst. I don’t really have contact with most of them any more. This cousin and her siblings were also adopted, and she’s inclined to think that any woman with an unwanted pregnancy should be contributing to the domestic supply of adoptable infants. |
|
dawnnikol
Prolific Pea
'A life without books is a life not lived.' Jay Kristoff
Posts: 8,555
Sept 21, 2015 18:39:25 GMT
|
Post by dawnnikol on Dec 14, 2023 12:22:23 GMT
Amarillo City is looking to start a travel ban for abortion, too. FFS. |
|
|
|
Post by smasonnc on Dec 14, 2023 12:39:19 GMT
My very Catholic cousin carried her baby with anencephaly to term (it died within minutes of birth) and wields that decision over pro-choice relatives like a cudgel. “If I carried my child with a condition incompatible with life to term, there’s no reason for any woman to terminate for that reason” is her attitude. I'm a Catholic and that's disgusting. She's a martyr so everyone else has to be, too? She must have missed the part about easing the suffering of others and, instead, uses her religion for self-aggrandizement. The church's stance is still very anti-abortion, but it has mellowed with science and with the fact that many Catholic women have decided not to let celibate men determine their reproductive rights. Before the 60s, they even let women die to save the baby if they had to make a choice. |
|
|
|
Post by monklady123 on Dec 14, 2023 12:58:55 GMT
And yet they do nothing to save a VIABLE child, outside the womb, in a CLASSROOM! NOTHING. Thoughts and prayers, I guess. And I am a gun owner who does not want a lot of government interference with my guns - but COME ON! They can't stick their heads in the sand over kids getting murdered by guns in schools (and elsewhere) but have a conniption fit about a woman's right to choose. They actually don't care about children at all. The one's already born or even the unborn they claim to care about. It was never about that. It's all about control. Control of women period. At least that's how I see it. Yes this. If they really truly cared about children then they would fund health care, and they would put more money into school meals, and they would increase SNAP benefits for women and children. etc. etc. But they don't.  |
|
|
|
Post by agengr2004 on Dec 14, 2023 13:01:13 GMT
Amarillo City is looking to start a travel ban for abortion, too. FFS.Great so now we can look forward to being told where we can go and what we can do there. It was never, not once, about babies. Hide behind all the religion you like, it was never about babies then either. |
|
|
|
Post by OntarioScrapper on Dec 14, 2023 16:46:50 GMT
Here I am in Canada and I can't believe some parts of the USA are going down the Gilead path. Fight hard. Don't let the bastards grind you down.  And to my fellow Canadians, pay attention to Poilievre and the Conservations party. The Federal election isn't that far and this leader has been saying very disturbing things that concerns me for the future of Canada. |
|
|
|
Post by hop2 on Dec 15, 2023 14:55:43 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by dewryce on Dec 15, 2023 20:56:56 GMT
The first comment on there is dead on as well. Amarillo City is looking to start a travel ban for abortion, too. FFS. This, to me, is truly terrifying. Can you imagine the uproar if we tried to stop men from receiving medical care this way? Not only making it illegal in the state, but preventing them from going elsewhere to access it? And this? I have no words. Well, I do but they’re all of the four letter variety. |
|
Gem Girl
Pearl Clutcher
......
Posts: 2,686
Jun 29, 2014 19:29:52 GMT
|
Post by Gem Girl on Dec 15, 2023 21:07:25 GMT
Amarillo City is looking to start a travel ban for abortion, too. FFS.They might find themselves on the wrong side of the law on this one. Prohibiting interstate travel isn't something the Feds are likely to tolerate from a city. |
|
|
|
Post by revirdsuba99 on Dec 15, 2023 21:26:44 GMT
Amarillo City is looking to start a travel ban for abortion, too. FFS.They might find themselves on the wrong side of the law on this one. Prohibiting interstate travel isn't something the Feds are likely to tolerate from a city. Some that has already been passed. Not sure if there has been an attempt to enforce it yet... $10,000 reward is enticing.. |
|
Gem Girl
Pearl Clutcher
......
Posts: 2,686
Jun 29, 2014 19:29:52 GMT
|
Post by Gem Girl on Dec 15, 2023 21:39:33 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by Merge on Dec 15, 2023 21:46:26 GMT
|
|
Gem Girl
Pearl Clutcher
......
Posts: 2,686
Jun 29, 2014 19:29:52 GMT
|
Post by Gem Girl on Dec 15, 2023 21:51:00 GMT
As always, you have my sympathy. |
|
|
|
Post by Mel on Dec 15, 2023 22:07:16 GMT
ALL of these are rhetorical questions... mostly because there really is no answer...
WHO would have taken care of the baby once it was born for the time that it did live? Would the TX government pay the hospital bills? If Mom had died, would they have taken over raising her other children? Would they provide the income that she brought to the family? Would they have paid for her funeral? For her kids' educations? Not likely.
And… honestly… what happened to HIPPA(or whatever the letters are, you all know what I meant)? Why did anyone even find out that the baby was non-viable? If her doctor had told her the condition of the baby, and she chose to find a different doctor or get a second opinion, that doctor should have been bound by HIPPA to not disclose any information about her. I know they are supposed to report any illegal things but that wouldn't have been illegal.
I don't know, just thinking out loud I suppose. Either way, both of the situations discussed here are heartbreaking and wrong.
|
|
|
|
Post by birukitty on Dec 17, 2023 20:43:14 GMT
They actually don't care about children at all. The one's already born or even the unborn they claim to care about. It was never about that. It's all about control. Control of women period. At least that's how I see it. Yes this. If they really truly cared about children then they would fund health care, and they would put more money into school meals, and they would increase SNAP benefits for women and children. etc. etc. But they don't. Exactly. Reminds me of one of my favorite quotes by a Catholic nun, Sister Joan Chittister "I do not believe that just because you are opposed to abortion that makes you pro-life. In fact, I think in many cases your morality is deeply lacking if all you want is a child born but not a child fed, not a child educated, not a child housed. And why do I think that you don't? Because you don't want any tax money to go there. That's not pro-life. That's pro-birth. We need a much broader conversation on what the morality of pro-life is." |
|
mimima
Drama Llama
Stay Gold, Ponyboy
Posts: 5,104
|
Post by mimima on Dec 17, 2023 23:30:40 GMT
I was listening to a Podcast about this case and the other Texas case about women being forced to carry babies. One of the things that struck me is, in the current hellscape that is our health care system, who is paying for these hospitalizations and days in the ICU? In addition, it was a special kick in the teeth to one plaintiff that the lawyer said, "since you won't be having children." Especially rich since the sepsis caused her infertility. |
|
|
|
Post by dewryce on Dec 18, 2023 6:53:05 GMT
I was listening to a Podcast about this case and the other Texas case about women being forced to carry babies. One of the things that struck me is, in the current hellscape that is our health care system, who is paying for these hospitalizations and days in the ICU? In addition, it was a special kick in the teeth to one plaintiff that the lawyer said, "since you won't be having children." Especially rich since the sepsis caused her infertility. Cold hearted bastard. |
|
huskergal
Pearl Clutcher
Posts: 3,435
Member is Online
|
Post by huskergal on Dec 18, 2023 16:23:33 GMT
The current Republican party has made me a militant pro-choicer.
|
|
dawnnikol
Prolific Pea
'A life without books is a life not lived.' Jay Kristoff
Posts: 8,555
Sept 21, 2015 18:39:25 GMT
|
Post by dawnnikol on Dec 19, 2023 12:43:45 GMT
In case you were confused about the Pro-life Forced Birth Party: "In a court response, Issa’s lawyer shot back that the state’s arguments were “nothing more than an attempt to say—without explicitly saying—that an unborn child at seven months gestation is not a person.”
Oh and this gem "Issa and her husband say in court filings that she was seeking to leave work because her unborn child was suffering from a serious health condition, including a lack of oxygen and difficulty breathing during labor. “Issa’s unborn child was past viability and its heartbeat had previously been detected,” the couple’s filing states. “This overwhelmingly supports finding the unborn child to be a ‘son’ or ‘daughter’ given the significance the State of Texas has attached to such benchmarks.” Texas argued that the claim is invalid because Issa was only seeking leave to care for herself, not a child. And, they note, she was able to take leave after the stillbirth." Because the PERSON CARRYING THE BABY IS NOTHING BUT AN INCUBATING MACHINE to them. |
|
sueg
Prolific Pea
Posts: 8,570
Location: Munich
Apr 12, 2016 12:51:01 GMT
|
Post by sueg on Dec 19, 2023 12:49:49 GMT
In case you were confused about the Pro-life Forced Birth Party: "In a court response, Issa’s lawyer shot back that the state’s arguments were “nothing more than an attempt to say—without explicitly saying—that an unborn child at seven months gestation is not a person.”
Oh and this gem "Issa and her husband say in court filings that she was seeking to leave work because her unborn child was suffering from a serious health condition, including a lack of oxygen and difficulty breathing during labor. “Issa’s unborn child was past viability and its heartbeat had previously been detected,” the couple’s filing states. “This overwhelmingly supports finding the unborn child to be a ‘son’ or ‘daughter’ given the significance the State of Texas has attached to such benchmarks.” Texas argued that the claim is invalid because Issa was only seeking leave to care for herself, not a child. And, they note, she was able to take leave after the stillbirth." Because the PERSON CARRYING THE BABY IS NOTHING BUT AN INCUBATING MACHINE to them. So an unborn baby has rights if a woman wants to abort, but not if means a woman has to take time off to give birth? Righto then, makes perfect sense (sarcasm alert, in case anyone thought otherwise) It’s not about pro life, it’s about control of women. |
|
|
|
Post by Merge on Dec 19, 2023 13:32:35 GMT
In case you were confused about the Pro-life Forced Birth Party: "In a court response, Issa’s lawyer shot back that the state’s arguments were “nothing more than an attempt to say—without explicitly saying—that an unborn child at seven months gestation is not a person.”
Oh and this gem "Issa and her husband say in court filings that she was seeking to leave work because her unborn child was suffering from a serious health condition, including a lack of oxygen and difficulty breathing during labor. “Issa’s unborn child was past viability and its heartbeat had previously been detected,” the couple’s filing states. “This overwhelmingly supports finding the unborn child to be a ‘son’ or ‘daughter’ given the significance the State of Texas has attached to such benchmarks.” Texas argued that the claim is invalid because Issa was only seeking leave to care for herself, not a child. And, they note, she was able to take leave after the stillbirth." Because the PERSON CARRYING THE BABY IS NOTHING BUT AN INCUBATING MACHINE to them. The anti-choice crowd hasn’t yet realized the slippery slope that comes with allowing the state to make decisions about your fetus. If they can mandate certain fetuses are carried to term, they can also mandate that some are aborted. Or, like in this case, that their life has no value and neither does that of the mother, so the state has no liability. If you can’t imagine a world where Texas mandates forced abortion for certain people - racial minorities, undocumented immigrants, the mentally ill, those who are likely to become a “public burden” - you either have no imagination and/or you’ve never read any history. Giving the state this power over women’s choices opens the door to the loss of all kinds of rights. |
|
|
|
Post by crazy4scraps on Dec 19, 2023 14:09:45 GMT
In case you were confused about the Pro-life Forced Birth Party: "In a court response, Issa’s lawyer shot back that the state’s arguments were “nothing more than an attempt to say—without explicitly saying—that an unborn child at seven months gestation is not a person.”
Oh and this gem "Issa and her husband say in court filings that she was seeking to leave work because her unborn child was suffering from a serious health condition, including a lack of oxygen and difficulty breathing during labor. “Issa’s unborn child was past viability and its heartbeat had previously been detected,” the couple’s filing states. “This overwhelmingly supports finding the unborn child to be a ‘son’ or ‘daughter’ given the significance the State of Texas has attached to such benchmarks.” Texas argued that the claim is invalid because Issa was only seeking leave to care for herself, not a child. And, they note, she was able to take leave after the stillbirth." Because the PERSON CARRYING THE BABY IS NOTHING BUT AN INCUBATING MACHINE to them. The anti-choice crowd hasn’t yet realized the slippery slope that comes with allowing the state to make decisions about your fetus. If they can mandate certain fetuses are carried to term, they can also mandate that some are aborted. Or, like in this case, that their life has no value and neither does that of the mother, so the state has no liability. If you can’t imagine a world where Texas mandates forced abortion for certain people - racial minorities, undocumented immigrants, the mentally ill, those who are likely to become a “public burden” - you either have no imagination and/or you’ve never read any history. Giving the state this power over women’s choices opens the door to the loss of all kinds of rights. This is what I’ve been saying since before Roe v Wade was struck down. If they have the power to make you stay pregnant when you don’t want to be, it’s not that much of a stretch to flip that and make you abort when you don’t want to. No government entity should have that much power over a living, breathing person’s autonomy. You don’t have to look any further than China to see what a dumpster fire their strict policies have created. |
|
