Big Blitz Posted May 3, 2022 Author Share Posted May 3, 2022 10 minutes ago, Doc Brown said: I remember the whole push but there was no actual legislation passed that legalized abortion for all women through the third trimester. Like I said, if you can show me it I'll be all ears. New York puts in measures to protect access to abortion even if Roe v. Wade is overturned https://www.cnn.com/2019/01/23/health/new-york-abortion-measures-trnd/index.html Virginia governor signs abortion protections into law https://www.cnn.com/2020/04/10/politics/virginia-abortion-protections/index.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doc Brown Posted May 3, 2022 Share Posted May 3, 2022 7 minutes ago, Big Blitz said: New York puts in measures to protect access to abortion even if Roe v. Wade is overturned https://www.cnn.com/2019/01/23/health/new-york-abortion-measures-trnd/index.html Virginia governor signs abortion protections into law https://www.cnn.com/2020/04/10/politics/virginia-abortion-protections/index.html Neither one says any woman can get an abortion through the third trimester like you claimed. Stop wasting my time please. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillsFanNC Posted May 3, 2022 Share Posted May 3, 2022 2 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillsFanNC Posted May 3, 2022 Share Posted May 3, 2022 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillsFanNC Posted May 3, 2022 Share Posted May 3, 2022 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big Blitz Posted May 3, 2022 Author Share Posted May 3, 2022 17 minutes ago, Doc Brown said: Neither one says any woman can get an abortion through the third trimester like you claimed. Stop wasting my time please. They have said it. The proposals have been in bills - some have been voted out - but that hasn't changed their intentions. Here was a back and forth with a pro infanticide legislator in VA: At a recent committee hearing, Republican state delegate Todd Gilbert asked Tran to clarify exactly how late in a pregnancy doctors would be able to perform abortions. Gilbert asked if a woman who was about to give birth could request an abortion under Tran's proposed bill. "She has physical signs that she is about to give birth. Would that be a point at which she could still request an abortion if she is so certified? She's dilating," Gilbert said. "Mr. Chairman, that would be a, you know, a decision that the doctor, the physician and the woman would make at this point," Tran responded. "I understand that. I'm asking if your bill allows that," Gilbert posed. "My bill would allow that, yes," she said. https://www.cbsnews.com/news/virginia-abortion-bill-proposed-by-kathy-tran-third-trimester-today-2019-01-30/ What all the bills changed was the language of already extreme Abortion rights states for 3rd trimester abortions from "only if the mothers life is at risk" to "if the mothers health is at risk." One doctor to sign off on that not three. And currently in California: "From the bill analysis, According to the author (Wicks): “AB 2223 protects reproductive freedom by clarifying that the Reproductive Privacy Act prohibits pregnancy criminalization, and creates a private right of action for people whose rights have been violated to seek accountability using civil courts. It would also remove outdated provisions requiring coroners to investigate certain pregnancy losses, and ensure that information collected about pregnancy loss is not used to target people through criminal or civil legal systems.” What kind of “tragic loss” is Wicks talking about in the “criminal prosecution of pregnancy outcomes?” These are the terms used in AB 2223 and by supporters to explain: pregnancy loss Reproductive health Reproductive justice reproductive rights pregnant person pregnancy outcomes self-managing an abortion https://californiaglobe.com/articles/infanticide-or-pregnancy-loss-abortion-bill-passes-assembly-judiciary-committee/ That abortion can be up to and after birth. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doc Brown Posted May 3, 2022 Share Posted May 3, 2022 4 minutes ago, Big Blitz said: They have said it. The proposals have been in bills - some have been voted out - but that hasn't changed their intentions. Here was a back and forth with a pro infanticide legislator in VA: At a recent committee hearing, Republican state delegate Todd Gilbert asked Tran to clarify exactly how late in a pregnancy doctors would be able to perform abortions. Gilbert asked if a woman who was about to give birth could request an abortion under Tran's proposed bill. "She has physical signs that she is about to give birth. Would that be a point at which she could still request an abortion if she is so certified? She's dilating," Gilbert said. "Mr. Chairman, that would be a, you know, a decision that the doctor, the physician and the woman would make at this point," Tran responded. "I understand that. I'm asking if your bill allows that," Gilbert posed. "My bill would allow that, yes," she said. https://www.cbsnews.com/news/virginia-abortion-bill-proposed-by-kathy-tran-third-trimester-today-2019-01-30/ What all the bills changed was the language of already extreme Abortion rights states for 3rd trimester abortions from "only if the mothers life is at risk" to "if the mothers health is at risk." One doctor to sign off on that not three. And currently in California: "From the bill analysis, According to the author (Wicks): “AB 2223 protects reproductive freedom by clarifying that the Reproductive Privacy Act prohibits pregnancy criminalization, and creates a private right of action for people whose rights have been violated to seek accountability using civil courts. It would also remove outdated provisions requiring coroners to investigate certain pregnancy losses, and ensure that information collected about pregnancy loss is not used to target people through criminal or civil legal systems.” What kind of “tragic loss” is Wicks talking about in the “criminal prosecution of pregnancy outcomes?” These are the terms used in AB 2223 and by supporters to explain: pregnancy loss Reproductive health Reproductive justice reproductive rights pregnant person pregnancy outcomes self-managing an abortion https://californiaglobe.com/articles/infanticide-or-pregnancy-loss-abortion-bill-passes-assembly-judiciary-committee/ That abortion can be up to and after birth. You don't give up. LOL. No state has or ever will in our lifetime pass an abortion law that says any woman can get an abortion no questions asked all the way up to the point of giving birth. It's ridiculous. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big Blitz Posted May 3, 2022 Author Share Posted May 3, 2022 6 minutes ago, Doc Brown said: You don't give up. LOL. No state has or ever will in our lifetime pass an abortion law that says any woman can get an abortion no questions asked all the way up to the point of giving birth. It's ridiculous. The law also allows for abortion through all nine months of pregnancy when the mother’s life or health is at risk – which is completely unnecessary, as delivering a live baby via C-section is faster and safer than killing the baby in a two-day late-term abortion. Former abortionist Dr. Anthony Levatino explains in the video below "Third-trimester abortion will be allowed under the new law when a preborn child is diagnosed with a condition that will cause him or her to die at or shortly after birth. In addition, the new law removes protections for babies born alive after an abortion — meaning they could be left to die after birth — by rescinding a portion of NY’s public health law, seen below." The law in NY: You won't watch but.....here.. ABORTION IS NEVER A MEDICAL NECESSITY Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ALF Posted May 3, 2022 Share Posted May 3, 2022 If it is overturned would mean abortion likely made illegal in Republican States , stay legal in Democrat States. When SC nominees were questioned by the Senate , the ones that said Roe/Wade is now set as precedent will be highly criticized. Personally I'm pro life by religious belief , but I don't impose my beliefs on others. It will may now be a States right issue if overturned. It will make a partisan country even more partisan. Changing the Senate confirmation vote for SC Justice from 60 to 51 votes does make a difference between partisan and non partisan demeaner. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Governor Posted May 3, 2022 Share Posted May 3, 2022 It’s pretty cool when you can see the political landscape changing in real time. Try to picture what things will look like on Election Day. It won’t look anything like it did 2 months ago. 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiberius Posted May 3, 2022 Share Posted May 3, 2022 6 hours ago, DRsGhost said: You go Mr. Free Speech! 😆 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillStime Posted May 3, 2022 Share Posted May 3, 2022 7 hours ago, DRsGhost said: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillStime Posted May 3, 2022 Share Posted May 3, 2022 It all makes sense now, right @Big Blitz? What is a woman? Just a thing a MAN can control, abuse and rape. So on brand for the GQP. This will all backfire on the cult. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Orlando Tim Posted May 3, 2022 Share Posted May 3, 2022 7 hours ago, Doc Brown said: You don't give up. LOL. No state has or ever will in our lifetime pass an abortion law that says any woman can get an abortion no questions asked all the way up to the point of giving birth. It's ridiculous. Oregon has no restrictions when it comes to abortion except it must be done by a medical professional. I tried to find any indication there was any but I am quite sure there is no time limit at all. 16 minutes ago, BillStime said: LOL- the comparison is the logic of the left. New event that we know just happened vs an event that anyone who is honest knows was made up. I can only imagine all the tips that came for an event that supposedly happened in 1985. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiberius Posted May 3, 2022 Share Posted May 3, 2022 So now a whole bunch of state wide races all over the country will have this as an issue. Right wingers in blue states can try and win elections with this, hope they do 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
716er Posted May 3, 2022 Share Posted May 3, 2022 Without any evidence and based on the feelz, the right has convinced themselves someone on the left leaked this. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Irv Posted May 3, 2022 Share Posted May 3, 2022 Totally a Democrat inside job to desperately hang on to any hope in the midterms. Can’t believe Pelosi, Schumer, and Demented Biden would sink so low. What has this country become with them at the helm? Honestly. What a mess. 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big Blitz Posted May 3, 2022 Author Share Posted May 3, 2022 11 minutes ago, Tiberius said: So now a whole bunch of state wide races all over the country will have this as an issue. Right wingers in blue states can try and win elections with this, hope they do As soon as it goes to States its immediately legal at its minimum in 48 States. Red States have already passed heartbeat bills, illegal at 20 weeks, etc. What are Ds going to do? Run on legalizing abortion till after birth everywhere? Good luck with that. 1 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
716er Posted May 3, 2022 Share Posted May 3, 2022 18 minutes ago, Big Blitz said: As soon as it goes to States its immediately legal at its minimum in 48 States. Fat chance of that happening. Was SD included in the 2 states you left off? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SoCal Deek Posted May 3, 2022 Share Posted May 3, 2022 I’m curious what people think should happen to the two ‘journalists’ who broke this story. I’ve got to assume they are somehow connected to the legal world and may even be lawyers themselves. Should they have not understood the serious breach of trust that this leak represents and told the leaker to shred the document? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts