Jump to content

New York State abortion bill now allows babies, At any point of pregnancy, to be aborted


Beast

Recommended Posts

That ends one of the PPP libs fake points

 

 

 

FIFTH CIRCUIT HOLDS “PLANNED PARENTHOOD” STING VIDEOS were NOT DECEPTIVELY EDITED:

 

Tyler O’Neil reports that the Court of Appeals has lifted the restraining order on videos showing PP agents negotiating the prices of fetal body parts. In 2015, the Center for Medical Progress (“CMP”), a pro-life organization, released more than eight hours of undercover videos disclosing conversations held at the PPGC headquarters. In the CMP videos, two individuals posed as representatives from a fetal tissue procurement company. They claimed to be interested in purchasing liver, thymus, and neural tissue from fetuses aborted during the second trimester of pregnancy.

 

With the help of PR/fixer firm Fusion GPS, the mainstream media bought the “deceptive edit canard” hook line and sinker. This is the same media who loudly and unsuccessfully defended other hidden videos, such as Gawker’s infamous “Hulk Hogan” sextape and Mitt Romney’s “47%” remark.

 

While this Texas case is about the State of Texas seeking to disqualify PP from Medicaid eligibility, the fact that the court rejected the “doctored video” claims, saying:

The district court stated, inaccurately, that the CMP video had not been authenticated and suggested that it may have been edited […] In fact, the record reflects that OIG had submitted a report from a forensic firm concluding that the video was authentic and not deceptively edited. And the plaintiffs did not identify any particular omission or addition in the video footage.

 

 

 

 

More to come on this, I’m sure.

 
Edited by B-Man
  • Like (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thank God I don't assist at deliveries anymore

 
Quote

 

rn7ozBYZ_bigger.jpgCaleb HullVerified account @CalebJHull
FollowFollow @CalebJHull
 

VA gov on abortion this morning: “If a mother is in labor...the infant would be delivered. The infant would be kept comfortable. The infant would be resuscitated if that’s what the mother and the family desired, and then a discussion would ensue between the physicians & mother"

 

 

I don't have a link, but from my experience, almost a third of babies need some type resuscitation (Usually respiratory - think slap on  the bottom)

 

and of course, that percent is much higher the earlier the baby is "born" (28 - 38 weeks)

 

I would be damned if I let an infant, we knew that we could revive by normal means, just die.

 

 

This is not woman's rights.................this is Evil.

 

 

 

 

 

.ADDED:

 

 

 

 

Edited by B-Man
  • Like (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

37 minutes ago, B-Man said:

Thank God I don't assist at deliveries anymore

 

 

I don't have a link, but from my experience, almost a third of babies need some type resuscitation (Usually respiratory - think slap on  the bottom)

 

and of course, that percent is much higher the earlier the baby is "born" (28 - 38 weeks)

 

I would be damned if I let an infant, we knew that we could revive by normal means, just die.

 

 

This is not woman's rights.................this is Evil.

 

 

 

 

 

.ADDED:

 

 

 

 

Fwiw, in cattle the calf can easily die if the mother is laying down when the calf is fully birthed. The calf hanging out /upside down for the 20 to 30 minutes generally allows the mucus and gross nasty stuff to begin to come out. The fall to the ground causes there to be a couch and clear up everything while also sort of knocking the ***** out of the calf to wake up.

 

If pulling a calf I'll have to sometimes hang it by it's feet for 3 to 5 minutes, or just shake it up and down for a minute to help it clear it's airway. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

44 minutes ago, B-Man said:

Thank God I don't assist at deliveries anymore

 

 

I don't have a link, but from my experience, almost a third of babies need some type resuscitation (Usually respiratory - think slap on  the bottom)

 

and of course, that percent is much higher the earlier the baby is "born" (28 - 38 weeks)

 

I would be damned if I let an infant, we knew that we could revive by normal means, just die.

 

 

This is not woman's rights.................this is Evil.

 

 

 

 

 

.ADDED:

 

 

 

 

What's up with the "mother and the family decide..."? It almost seems to cause this douche pain to say "father". And its awesome how he uses the  'most all politicians are men..." talking point before finishing up with HE thinks two doctors need to consult instead of leaving it up to the mother and the family. 

 

 

  • Like (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Rhode Island Gov. Gina Raimondo says she will sign a bill to legalize abortions up to birth.

 

The legislation, which contradicts the teachings of the Catholic Church, would legalize abortions for basically any reason up to birth. A state House committee is expected to vote on the bill today.

 

Earlier this month, Raimondo promised to support the pro-abortion bill in her State of the State address, NBC 10 reports.

 

“Let’s make this the year we codify women’s access to reproductive health care here in Rhode Island,” Raimondo said.

 

The Rhode Island Reproductive Health Care Act, co-sponsored by state Sen. Gayle L. Goldin and Rep. Edith H. Ajello, would strip away even minor, common-sense abortion regulations – ones that a strong majority of Americans support. It would eliminate all protections for unborn babies and codify Roe v. Wade into state law in case the U.S. Supreme Court overturns the ruling.

 

The bill appears to allow restrictions for late-term abortions, but it adds a broad “health” exception for abortions after viability. The exception would allow women to abort unborn babies up to nine months of pregnancy for basically any “health” reason, including “age, economic, social and emotional factors,” a definition given by the U.S. Supreme Court in the case Doe v. Bolton.

 

 

 

Thank You, New York

 

New York’s Reproductive Health Act decriminalizes abortion through all nine months, defines “person” as “a human being who has been born and is alive” and adds the caveat of “health” of the mother, a purposely undefined term meant to include all factors outlined in Doe v. Bolton that may impact the “well-being of the patient,” including mental and emotional stability, family situation and age.

 

Depressed after losing your job and getting dumped by your boyfriend at 36 weeks pregnant? No problem. New York will make sure you can have the abortion you say you need. All they’ll have to do is induce labor, partially deliver the baby, make an incision at the base of the skull and vacuum out its contents. Piece of cake.

 

Don’t let anyone try to tell you the late-term abortion protected in this bill is reserved for women whose lives are at risk. First, taking the life of a child in the third trimester does nothing to protect the life of the mother. Second, if that were the case, this bill would be unnecessary, as it was already the law in New York that practitioners could perform abortion through nine months to save the mother’s life. “Health” was added in this act to ensure that women had greater access to it should they desire.

 

{snip}

 

I think—and hope—that this act has shown otherwise ambivalent people exactly what the aim of the pro-choice movement has always been: abortion on-demand without apology through all nine months. Most people, whether the left likes it or not, just aren’t on board with that.

 

More at the link:

 https://townhall.com/columnists/alliestuckey/2019/01/25/thank-you-new-york-n2540279

 

 

 

 

 

 

77238-A9-A-712-D-4028-BCD7-A862-A93-F1-D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, B-Man said:

 

 

The bill appears to allow restrictions for late-term abortions, but it adds a broad “health” exception for abortions after viability. The exception would allow women to abort unborn babies up to nine months of pregnancy for basically any “health” reason, including “age, economic, social and emotional factors,” a definition given by the U.S. Supreme Court in the case Doe v. Bolton.

 

 

Welcome back, eugenics.  :wacko:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Okay, so can someone break down for me why these liberal states are all, suddenly and virtually simultaneously, declaring they want to abort babies at any stage?

 

Was this some big campaign promise? Has American been asking for this?

 

It's a little stunning, and a lot scary.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, LABillzFan said:

Okay, so can someone break down for me why these liberal states are all, suddenly and virtually simultaneously, declaring they want to abort babies at any stage?

 

Was this some big campaign promise? Has American been asking for this?

 

It's a little stunning, and a lot scary.

 

(cough)

 

Other, more covert, means of supply have been drying up... now they need to be more overt, with the cover of legal protection, to keep up with the demand. 

 

(cough)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, LABillzFan said:

Okay, so can someone break down for me why these liberal states are all, suddenly and virtually simultaneously, declaring they want to abort babies at any stage?

 

Was this some big campaign promise? Has American been asking for this?

 

It's a little stunning, and a lot scary.

 

Pandering to the far left #MeToo branch of the coastal party.  As for the simultaneity of it...I suspect that since NY set the precedent and got minimal backlash, other states feel freer.

 

Or...Ginsburg's clone's death has frightened them in to realizing how successful the fight against child trafficking has been, so that the Illuminati-led lizard-clone states are implementing these laws as an alternate source of juvenile pineal glands.  WAKE UP SHEEPLE!!!

 

(Best.  Conspiracy.  Theory.  EVER.)

3 minutes ago, Deranged Rhino said:

 

(cough)

 

Other, more covert, means of supply have been drying up... now they need to be more overt, with the cover of legal protection, to keep up with the demand. 

 

(cough)

 

Goddammit, I was only kidding!

  • Haha (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, B-Man said:

Rhode Island Gov. Gina Raimondo says she will sign a bill to legalize abortions up to birth.

 

The legislation, which contradicts the teachings of the Catholic Church, would legalize abortions for basically any reason up to birth. A state House committee is expected to vote on the bill today.

 

Earlier this month, Raimondo promised to support the pro-abortion bill in her State of the State address, NBC 10 reports.

 

“Let’s make this the year we codify women’s access to reproductive health care here in Rhode Island,” Raimondo said.

 

The Rhode Island Reproductive Health Care Act, co-sponsored by state Sen. Gayle L. Goldin and Rep. Edith H. Ajello, would strip away even minor, common-sense abortion regulations – ones that a strong majority of Americans support. It would eliminate all protections for unborn babies and codify Roe v. Wade into state law in case the U.S. Supreme Court overturns the ruling.

 

The bill appears to allow restrictions for late-term abortions, but it adds a broad “health” exception for abortions after viability. The exception would allow women to abort unborn babies up to nine months of pregnancy for basically any “health” reason, including “age, economic, social and emotional factors,” a definition given by the U.S. Supreme Court in the case Doe v. Bolton.

 

Raimondo is a fellow alumni of my high school, which is a Catholic institution.  I'm going to contact Bishop Tobin through my contacts through the school, and implore her excommunication from the Church is she goes through with this.

 

  • Like (+1) 1
  • Thank you (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, TakeYouToTasker said:

 

Raimondo is a fellow alumni of my high school, which is a Catholic institution.  I'm going to contact Bishop Tobin through my contacts through the school, and implore her excommunication from the Church is she goes through with this.

 

 

But again, you can find ordained Catholics who are okay with this.

 

That doesn't mean they genuinely adhere to doctrine. But you can find "Catholic" priests blessing abortion clinics as easily as you can find "Christian" pastors marrying homosexuals. It doesn't mean anything anymore unless it means something to the individual.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, LABillzFan said:

 

But again, you can find ordained Catholics who are okay with this.

 

That doesn't mean they genuinely adhere to doctrine. But you can find "Catholic" priests blessing abortion clinics as easily as you can find "Christian" pastors marrying homosexuals. It doesn't mean anything anymore unless it means something to the individual.

 

You can, but you can also put pressure on them using those who are not.  Bishop Tobin, to my understanding, is one of the later group.  It's also a political weapon.  Rhode Island has a massive concentration of Catholics, the nation's highest, with between 40-45% of the state identifying as such.  Politicians rarely get elected here without expressing their dedication to traditional Catholic values; it's simply one of the babies they have to kiss.  The Church has the ability to demonstrate moral leadership here, more than anywhere else in the country, and I hope they will.

  • Thank you (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, TakeYouToTasker said:

 

Raimondo is a fellow alumni of my high school, which is a Catholic institution.  I'm going to contact Bishop Tobin through my contacts through the school, and implore her excommunication from the Church is she goes through with this.

 

 

And no one will actually care, because the Church is considered to be backwards and irrelevant...

 

And now we know in part why the "Catholics are racist and misogynistic" stories were pushed last week...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, DC Tom said:

 

Pandering to the far left #MeToo branch of the coastal party.  As for the simultaneity of it...I suspect that since NY set the precedent and got minimal backlash, other states feel freer.

 

Writer at National Review (Alexandria DeSanctis) suggests:

 

Quote

Some Democrats are clearly terrified that Roe and Casey are going to be loosened in the near future, and in their haste to shore up abortion rights in advance, they’re overplaying their hand big time. This feels like a pivotal moment to me.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, LABillzFan said:

Okay, so can someone break down for me why these liberal states are all, suddenly and virtually simultaneously, declaring they want to abort babies at any stage?

 

Was this some big campaign promise? Has American been asking for this?

 

It's a little stunning, and a lot scary.

Dems are now competing to see who is the most committed  Stalinist.

 

Here is a link with full comments and commentary of VA's Dear Leader .

 

https://dailycaller.com/2019/01/30/virginia-governor-northam-abortion/

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Deranged Rhino said:

 

(cough)

 

Other, more covert, means of supply have been drying up... now they need to be more overt, with the cover of legal protection, to keep up with the demand. 

 

(cough)

It's a hold my beer moment for liberals to show they're not afraid and to pander to their ever shifting fringe electorate.  Simple as that. I doubt some Podunk Virginia legislature has the inside iggy on the baby harvest farm.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...