Woman gets more sucked out than she bargained for

All that blather about "dignity" but you advocate for the worst indignity of all, taking away a person's right to their own body...

 

Not necessarily natural. The knee operation is usually for comfort and functionality, and surgery always has risks of infection, bleeding, heart/lung problems which can be fatal. Strictly speaking it is iatrogenic, not natural.

The only weaker mental comstitution is the mind that cannot understand that a fetus before the 3rd trimester is not a person yet or who has guilt for destroying something that has never had a mind.

It's a medical procedure. Most medical procedures have major risks. So does childbirth. Case reports on medicine tell us about unusual or worst-case scenarios. It is the wrong type of evidence for what you're getting at

Even if true, it's the woman's choice what risks she takes. It's just the responsibility of the doctor to ensure the info is available and to be competent at what she does.

 

Okay - et us leave aside that this act will be as effective as the Queensland legislation - in other words not worth the paper it is written on

I will examine this bit

Who decides??

Under that legislation - who decides if a condition the woman has is severe enough to warrant termination?

 

S*** happens.

 

Literally. Childbirth injuries can result in fecal incontinence:

http://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2010/dec/10/torn-apart-by-childbirth

https://www.fistulafoundation.org/what-is-fistula/

 

For those wishing to protect against all cases where abortion of gestation happens; correct. This law is a major disaster for Pro-Life and establishes the fundamental human right to abort for 12-weeks...
I knew this from the outset.
There are other future results drug makers will see.

This was left without an enforcement "agency" and has only a penalty of loss of medical license for the doctor. The penalty is civil forfeiture where a lone juror can't hang a jury versus criminal. The AR prosecutor's office could assist females who received proscribed abortion of gestation and later considered this a harm. This is adequate as the civil penalty would be HUGE. Any person learning of a post 12-week abortion of gestation could pursue an action demanding a loss of license for the doctor, as would be costly. There would be enough angry "church ladies" to still try.

The Queensland legislation looks even more restrictive by making ANY abortion illegal including pre-12-weeks? (1)

Arkansas Act 301 is in the Public Health and Welfare section of Reproductive Health.

A major bodily function is defined as includes without limitation, functions of the immune system, normal cell growth, and digestive, bowel, bladder, neurological, brain, respiratory, circulatory, endocrine, and reproductive functions;

This law has absolutely ZERO chance of remaining disallowed by confused judges and will sweep the nation state by state very soon afterward.

I appreciate your looking with both eyes. There will be a free book/website documenting this process as a step for the U.S. stopping capital punishment and recognizing human dignity.
I am not the anti-Christ

 

There ya go again with that phony "human dignity" blather.

All that blather about "dignity" but you advocate for the worst indignity of all, taking away a person's right to their own body...


Oh, and if abortion is ever deemed "murder' by "church ladies" (bitter dried up people(male and female) who hate women) then the woman who requested the abortion should be tried as a murderer and executed or imprisoned as a murderer....she hired a "hit man" and people who hire hit men suffer the same penalty as the one who pulls the trigger. That is what you advocate...are you sure you're not the Anti-Christ?

 

Weird response

Okay but every country that has had any degree of medical exemption in the abortion laws has ended where QLD is currently - the abortion rate is the same as America.

Once you have medical exception then the performance of the procedure is between the woman and her medical provider and THAT is protected by the privacy act - and BINGO you are back to Roe Versus Wade.

No you are someone who has not researched the topic nor have you personally dealt with the issues

And you did not really answer my question because there is impact on organ systems and there is impact - now you might think that development of gestational diabetes is enough to satisfy the legal criteria under that legislation whereas I might think that the woman would have to reach multi-system failure

And relying on "church ladies" to oversee the act is opening the gates to a Salem Witch hunt - something America has already seen with the "Depraved Heart Murder" where a 16 year old was put on trial for murder of her stillborn baby - a baby that died of natural causes

 

Guess it "sucks" to be her. Probably a good case for a lawsuit.

 

@

I am certain I am not the anti-Christ He is decades younger but is alive.
The woman can't be punished the same as the "hit-man" unless the woman is a doctor.
The woman has the ability to control her body until the 12th week of gestation. After 12-weeks, no doctor may perform the abortion of gestation unless her health is in jeapordy. The female may still control her body but can't hire a "hit-man" to help her kill the baby. She may still kill the baby inside herself. Honestly; Killing a baby is easy. All babies will die if left alone.
I advocate only allowing Arkansas 12-week limitation for doctors aiding abortion of gestation. Blather about human dignity? http://human-dignity-US.org
http://www.un.org/apps/news/story.asp?NewsID=49509#.Vg4E19Q8KrU

 

Why can't the woman who hires a hit man(the doctor) to kill her fetus be prosecuted like anyone else who hires a hit man to kill someone else? It is exactly the same thing (according to you it's against the law to kill the fetus.)


You contradict yourself:

"The woman has the ability to control her body until the 12th week of gestation. After 12-weeks, no doctor may perform the abortion of gestation unless her health is in jeapordy. The female may still control her body but can't hire a "hit-man" to help her kill the baby. She may still kill the baby inside herself."""

Or are you saying that if the woman does a self abortion it's OK ? ???


You take away all human dignity from women when you insist you must control what they do with their own bodies, making them nothing more than breeding cattle.


And the fact that you believe there's an Anti-Christ....well, that speaks volumes, none good ...

 

It is only against Act 301 for a doctor to abuse a medical license to assist in an optional killing of a fetus in direct violation of the doctor's oath.

EXACTLY! . . .A woman may kill the baby inside her. This law could not care less nor could I.

No law will try to control what women should do with their bodies.
I do not understand the "Anti-Christ" but believe the Bible has several attempts to describe these times.

 

OH Finally you make it clear , you want women FORCED back to the dark ages when they had to find ways to have an abortion by their own hand so MORE DIE!

You take away all human dignity from women when you insist you must control what they do with their own bodies, making them nothing more than breeding cattle. ....

and take away their right to health care....


And the fact that you believe there's an Anti-Christ....well, that speaks volumes, none good ...

 

This is from a "pro-life site" so is not about abortion

[video=youtube;6hQHLJTGdTU]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6hQHLJTGdTU [/video]

These are most commonly the foetuses that are "aborted" after 12 weeks

Are you going to tell a woman who has just had the news that her baby will not live past a few hours at most, that she has to continue the pregnancy regardless??

Please understand you will be stopping NOTHING because the wanton termination of viable foetuses is a myth that happens only in extremely rare cases - and even in those cases - how are you going to determine that it did not fit your criteria?

 

How common do you think late term abortion is? And do you realise that Roe vesus Wade does not apply?

 

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Late-term_abortion#Incidence
All the discoveries you cite are exceptions allowed in Act 301.

 

I cannot see the point of this act

Since all of the women currently having late term abortions are excused from prosecution that gives you no-one to prosecute

 

You are the one making the claim, the onus is in you to provide the evidence .. not me, and yes everything you presented in that other thread was destroyed.

And as already stated, the US is not subject to mob rule, it simply does not matter if 90% of the US public believe something is right or wrong, what matters is whether it is constitutional, and nothing you have presented is.

LOL .. if they are not accurately reported as you assert then your evidence and research becomes even more suspect, all of your research supposedly showing a link between abortion and suicide is based on "faulty" data and yet you want to present it as evidence in a court.

Yet you haven't shown a single "compelling interest" that has not been blown to pieces, neither can you show ANYWHERE where the right to privacy is deemed a "private" right.

I will watch this Act be blown away with glee.

 

There is nothing of any merit in the Act at all, he cannot even defend the rationale for the act as shown in the thread he started about it - http://www.politicalforum.com/abort...01-12-week-time-limit-aborting-gestation.html

 

EXACTLY!!!
This law makes the situation such that 99.997% to 99.998% of the time there would be nobody to prosecute.

This law would make it illegal to perform an abortion after 12-weeks "to enjoy the prom" or the other ridiculous cases you say "allegedly" never occur. The law (Roe) does not match what occurs in the real world.

Many pro-choice want to defend the choice up until "viability" and most of the public does not.
Roe will never be overturned but Act 301 replaces Roe with a law that comes much closer to the reality of abortion being a human right that almost nobody wants to need to use but that exists until the fetus becomes a detectable living "thing".

 

This will not be secretly done. Please watch along with the whole world.

"Glee" is an inappropriate emotion for abortion of gestation or even a forum.

Even killing for self-defence or for "what a fetus does to a female" should not motivate "glee".

Most respectfully; I consider you worthy of completely ignoring. I invite you to do the same for me. Please sir, I did the same in the other thread.

 

Ya, but if you get this silly thing passed (a bloomin' miracle) wouldn't you be filled with glee that you can control women even more than they already are? That IS your goal.

 

Why have a law when there is nothing to regulate??

NO woman has an abortion just to "enjoy the prom" - that is a myth

You have NO proof that it ever does occur

EVERY piece of research on this subject states that THE most common reason is for foetal abnormality incompatible with life. What dingbat of a woman would WAIT until near term and THEN decide? Yes some later (second trimester) abortions occur on normal foetuses but they are usually the case where the woman has been denied earlier access to abortion

 

This law passed and was vetoed. The law then passed again and overrode this veto.
This law would make late term "abortion of gestation to enjoy the prom" very difficult but not impossible. I doubt this ever happened. It was described first by you for impact?
This law only requires women in Arkansas get abortions of gestation or choose to be mothers during the first 12-weeks after conception. Those not willing to accept this may move. This law is the end of the public abortion of gestation debate in Arkansas and soon the rest of the U.S.
Q

 

Why is it so important for you to make other people's lives harder?