Simply back to the old days where anyone with means will travel outside the state for a "vacation". And pro-choice advocates will set up the Jane pipeline again - where they fund buses to take women to clinics outside the state. Anti-abortion laws at this point in history are a complete waste of money that could be spent on well-baby clinics and prenatal care for people who want to keep their child. It's money that could be spent on more incubators for hospitals for saving premature birth babies. Stupid waste of resources.
I think they're getting their hopes up. I'm not a lawyer, but I can tell the difference between extremity and urgency, and I don't think the SCOTUS is going to be as inclined to confuse the two as some people in Alabama may be. If a lower court issues an injunction, and it's a safe bet that one will, I think that will take the issue of urgency off the table. As for the states rights issue, the extremity of the bill could very well come into play there. I think the SCOTUS will kill the law without even ruling on that matter. I think Alabama is overplaying its hand...
Do you think a pregnant mother should be able to claim the fetus as a dependent for her taxes? How about prosecuting a female for negligent homicide in the instance of a spontaneous abortion? Would you support prosecuting a family for conspiracy because they were willing to help provide transportation for a women, living in Alabama, to travel to another state in order to obtain an abortion?
If people want to reduce the number of abortions, then they should advocate for the widespread and subsidized distribution of contraceptives. Colorado did that and saw a massive drop in both teen pregnancies and abortions.
From what I read Plan B would become illegal as it would terminate a pregnancy. Is that not true? Anyway why do old men always think they have the right to control women?
I'm sure Alabama would make some exception for women who had just been raped the night before. A shot of estrogen, mifepristone, sucking out the uterus as a precautionary measure. Probably a doctor would examine her first and then prescribe the measure to make sure any possible pregnancy wouldn't go anywhere.
Pregnancy, in the best of circumstances, is a 9 month long flu-like process that causes swelling, inflammation, mood swings, nausea, loss of bladder control, and insomnia (among a whole host of other issues). Do you really believe that you should be forced to undergo such a lengthy ordeal even if you do not want to and there is a medical procedure which can dramatically reduce and eliminate all of those symptoms?
Less extreme laws have been overturned by the courts - I don't know what makes the pro-Lifers in Alabama think this will end any differently. This situation reminds me of an observation Will Rogers once made: There are three kinds of men. The one that learns by reading. The few who learn by observation. The rest of them have to pee on the electric fence for themselves.
Does that even really exist these days? Why do those on the Left only want the right to privacy when it comes to Abortion?
Yes, it exists. And the left is the reason you have a right to privacy and they are almost always the first to champion expansions of that right.
We have a Fourth Amendment thanks to James Otis, Jr., not the Leftists who arbitrarily defend our privacy rights when it suits their own interests.
One thing I really like about this bill is that it proposes incarceration for the people actually performing abortions. I'd like to see capital punishment imposed wherever it can be determined that a viable baby has been "aborted" (murdered).
You realize the ONLY way to tell the difference between a natural abortion (miscarriage) and an induced abortion is an invasive pelvic exam. You want to be the one who tells a woman that just had a miscarriage that she has to undergo a pelvic exam to determine if it was murder or not? Good luck with that.
Dude. Only Approved Forms of Murderâ„¢ are permissible. Gov. Gavin Newsom to block California death row executions, close San Quentin execution chamber https://www.latimes.com/politics/la...-death-penalty-moratorium-20190312-story.html Now, if you'll excuse me I have to go kill Bambi for dinner...
The 4th Amendment is the right against unreasonable search and seizure. That is not the same as your constitutional right to privacy, a right that was founded during the Roe v. Wade decisions based on a penumbra of constitutional rights (of which the 4th is one).
Is it obvious? Because a zealous prosecutor could just as easily decide to launch an investigation and indict that female under the grounds that she just committed an involuntary manslaughter.
How do you propose that Americans address the increase in criminal behavior and the increased strain on the social safety net that will be the inevitable result from criminalizing abortion?