PROSECUTOR TO DROP CHARGES AGAINST TEXAS WOMAN OVER HER ABORTION

The 24-week standard for viability is 50 years old. A 20-week cutoff would be closer to modern medical science.

 

It is part of the new Texas law that was passed. In that law, it requires phyicians and health care systems to report abortions to local authorities to "investigate" said abortion. It is Texas Health and Safety code 141 and 245. And the reason why they do this is because of the lawsuit provisions in the bill that anyone can sue the phyician or hospital if they know an abortion has been perfromed if it is not reported.

https://statutes.capitol.texas.gov/Docs/HS/htm/HS.171.htm

https://statutes.capitol.texas.gov/Docs/HS/htm/HS.245.htm

https://www.texastribune.org/2021/09/10/texas-abortion-law-ban-enforcement/

 

I've noticed that a lot of a threads, use all caps; I didn't think that I was deviating from the norm.

 

Like I said -- performance art from chickenshit Texas GQPers who fly their mistresses and daughters to blue states for elective abortions.

 

Okay, so the next time you eat scrambled eggs, balut, or cavier, we will come and arrest you. We can't have murderers on our Texas streets now, can we.

 

True, considering I live in Texas. Some are more screwy than others that Matt Krause or Dan Patrick or Allen West, well he is not a true Texan just a wannabe, and the list goes on. We definitely have our share, ore than others.

 

Does that mean that pro-choice Texans can sue Chick-fil-A for their breakfast menu?

 

Native, lifelong Texan here...

 

This seems pretty relevant:

 

Has anyone even been charged under that law? More than a tad hypocritical to be up in arms over a law with no charges, than charges with no law.

 

What percentage of abortions are due to rape? So think of a tiny tiny percentage, and half it. Then half it again. When rape is mentioned in an abortion thread, it's called "deflection".

You missed the second part of my quote.

 

Yawn.

You missed the second part of my quote.

 

Actually, they have only pushed it back to 22 weeks-- and that is in a state of the art facility, and still a fetus's chances are quite poor to make it; and they are all but guaranteed to have serious developmental problems, because of their premature delivery...The things one learns, looking for sources to link!

https://www.verywellfamily.com/premature-birth-and-viability-2371529#toc-age-of-viability

What I found interesting, was that a lot of states deviate from the Roe standard-- and in both directions! 17 states use the viability standard, which can vary a little, from 24 weeks, depending on the hospital, as well as gives a doctor, potentially, some leeway. Six more states use a strict 24 week standard, but 17 states (including Oklahoma, which may soon change) also choose the 20 week standard. So that's 40 States, just in that, roughly, one month period.

We know about Texas's way out of the norm, 6- week law, and Mississippi's 15-week litmus, but Virgina was listed as 25+ weeks, and there are seven states with no abortion cutoff point, in their laws.

Just as interesting, these 7 are not all liberal, Blue States, but run the gamut, from Oregon, Vermont, NH, & NJ, to Colorado, New Mexico, and Alaska. Those that go by the viability standard, as well, include, Red and Purple, as well as Blue States. To mention a few: HI, CA, WA, & D.C., to TN, MO, MT, & UT.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_in_the_United_States_by_state

 

If you don’t have a vagina you have no business opining on abortion.

 

I specified "Texas voters" for a reason. The polls you checked were national polls, not specific to Texas. And anyways, my point about the 'majority of Texas voters' wasn't really linked to polling (which I recognize is fairly mixed and subject to small nuances in the wording of questions), but to the fact that Texas has elected a governor and legislature that would, absent Roe v. Wade, pass laws that are more restrictive of abortion than is presently permitted by current legal precedent. That's the outcome the "democratic system" in Texas would have reached, if it were not being actively foiled by anti-democratic legal rulings on the matter.

I think this is probably better described as an arrest rather than "criminal charge". The prosecutor declined to press charges.

I didn't think I'd have to state this, but apparently it needs to be said: my view of what is right or wrong, moral or immoral, good or bad is not really dependent on a popular majority. If tomorrow a majority of voters declare that racial segregation or anti-white racial discrimination are legal, it still won't change my view that those things are morally wrong. If every other person in the country decides to go full Sodom and Gomorrah and make it legal for teachers to f*** their students, I'll still think it's evil. And even if a majority of this country thinks killing unborn babies is cool just because the woman wants to (which I'm not convinced is actually the majority position), I still believe it to be a moral abomination.

What's legal and what's right are not always the same thing (and more and more it feels like the two rarely intersect).

Now, if you'll recall, this whole tangent about popular support / democratic systems got started because you accused me of being "someone who doesn't believe in our democratic system" and I objected to the invocation of "our democratic system" in a discussion about a topic (abortion) that has been governed by decidedly un-democratic means (SCOTUS decrees) for decades now. In fact, my preferred outcome on abortion laws would see it turned back over to the democratic systems in our various state legislatures. I don't believe it should be an issue under the purview of the federal government.

 

Tell that to the swinging dicks of SCOTUS.

 

I don't know about you, but when my wife told me that she was pregnant I had immediate love for my baby. Should you abort my child, no telling what I would do.

Literally.

I have as much right to decide if my child lives or dies.

 

f*** that noise. Do you believe that non-parents have a right to opine on child abuse?

 

her body is her choice, that zygote is a part of her body. That said child abuse is not only hurting a child, it’s a criminal act. There’s quite a difference.

 

I think it makes you a bit of an @$$, but I'm not going to advocate for you being fined $2500 or thrown in county jail for six months, or both. Word selection that "offends" me (or you) shouldn't have any bearing on criminal penalties, agreed? California screwed that one up badly, right? We're on the same page on that issue at least? We both believe in free speech?

 

The only person who could abort that kid was your wife, and that wasn’t a part of your family plan.

 

Give us a couple of years, and hopefully it'll be a criminal act to hurt an unborn child too. Once that difference is gone, will you accept that men are allowed to opine on the subject of abortion too, just like child abuse, because they'll both be criminal acts?

 

But no one else's. And not even yours, if the pregnant woman decides otherwise. You ain't sharing **** before the trip to the LDR - other than a cumshot - you're just along for the ride.

 

scrambled eggs aren't "fertilized", at least not the ones I eat.

 

Since I don't live in CA or work in a CA nursing home, to do so would be just as stupid as advocating to falsely charge someone with murder to make a political point, wouldn't it?

It would be most embarrassing...