U.S. health agency revokes Obama-era Planned Parenthood protection

You have selective memory. Clinton was raked over the coals for this. How do you think Elian became famous ? Those “fake news” stations you hate so much ran with this day and night. IT was the only thing talked about on night line for almost 2 weeks.

 

Dr’s and Nurses have every right to refuse to perform services they don’t like. BUt their employers have every right to fire them when they do. I cant wait for the first one to be fired and watch the heads on the right assplode with rage over some “religious freedom”. Just remember righties, you gave employers great power in the contraceptive debate, now they can use that same power to fire someone who doesn’t do what they tell them.

 

Republicans certainly did. Give me some links to 3 Senior Democrat leaders than denounced him for this, with pull-quotes, and I would be happy to review them.

 

Never heard of them.

Poll: 56% of Americans Say Abortion "Morally Wrong," 76% Want Major Restrictions

 

Your poll is from a Catholic institute

And America is one of the few developed countries where abortion restriction is increasing. It is also one of the few developed countries where maternal mortality is also increasing

http://www.harpersbazaar.com/culture/features/a10033320/pro-life-abortion/

Although I am unsure whether that is due to abortions restrictions or the obvious inclination of the right in America to institutes Sharia law for women - only with fewer freedoms. Just in the last fe w days on this forum I have read where American men feel it is OK to grope a woman they do not know when they are sleeping, it is ok to commit paedophilia, as long as you are president, and of course it is just following a natural urge to say you will grab women by thier privates
A better poll

http://www.pewforum.org/fact-sheet/public-opinion-on-abortion/

I just hope those who are anti abortion realise that banning abortion comes with a hideous cost

 

Seriously, stop watching fax news. Your either 12 years old, or your being obtuse. Clinton WAS raked over the coals on BOTH sides when this happened

 

Silly nonsense:

Abortion laws in Ireland allow terminations only on the grounds of a threat to the life of the mother.

The policy I support is what is in force in most other parts of Europe. Abortion is allowed without restriction up to between 10 and 14 weeks’ gestation. In most countries abortions can be carried out beyond this point, but only on specific grounds.

Greece, for example, has sensible restrictions on abortions, on demand up to a limit of 12 weeks, 19 weeks applies in cases where the pregnancy was the result of rape and 24 weeks where there is a threat to the life or health of the woman and in cases of fetal abnormality that would result in a serious congenital defect.

The Netherlands is closer to the US free for all.

In Poland abortion is legal only under certain circumstances, including where the pregnancy is the result of rape or incest, in cases of fetal impairment or to avert a danger to the health or life of the pregnant woman.

In Portugal a recently adopted bill requires women to pay for terminations and to undergo more stringent tests beforehand.

Mindless hyperbole.

Abortion on demand for the first half, only to protect the life and health of the mother in the second half is a policy most in American would be fine with.

 

Give me some links to 3 Senior Democrat leaders than denounced him for this, with pull-quotes, and I would be happy to review them.

 

The life growing in the mother's body is NOT the mother's body. It's a separate body using the mother has a host.

There are laws in the United States that if someone kills a mother who is pregnant and the unborn baby also dies, then the murderer is charged with double homicide.

Some scientist? The Human life cycle beginning at conception is not debatable. It is a fact.

WTF are you blabbing about?

 

If it's a separate entity then it has NO right to use another's body to sustain it's life.

YOU don't have that right and I don't have that right , NOBODY has the right to use another's body to sustain their life.

Yup, it's the UVVA and it has NOTHING to do with abortion, it even has a clause stating it has nothing to do with abortion. It did NOT give the fetus the rights of a person....it can't , it didn't.

The fact that you think life starts at conception so you obviously don't think that the parents are alive...how could they be alive if life ONLY starts at conception?

AND AGAIN, it does not matter what scientists think, they do NOT create laws or rights.

 

The zygote May have unique DNA but the baby is still an accessory of the mother. Answer me this:
Would the baby continue to survive if the mother died in a car wreck or of natural causes?

 

Yes, it's possible for a baby to be saved if the mother dies.

 

Depends on how far along the woman is....and the extent of the injuries to the fetus.

 

What's the matter? Too much actual logic?

 

Fake News Horse ****

I HAD BEEN ASSURED THAT THE SCIENCE WAS SETTLED:
The horrifying maternal mortality rate in Texas turned out to be wrong, but that’s not the biggest issue.

Though we only now realize how flawed the data were, this isn’t entirely a recent revelation. Experts suspected that something was wrong with the data, they just weren’t sure what. The authors of that original study noted that “in the absence of war, natural disaster, or severe economic upheaval, the doubling of a mortality rate within a 2-year period in a state with almost 400,000 annual births seems unlikely.” Their suspicions turned out to be right. Instead of roughly 36 deaths per 100,000 births, the mortality rate was more like 14.6 deaths per 100,000 births.

Texas is, in fact, a cautionary tale, just not in the way we all thought. It’s been collecting data poorly for years now, and they’re not alone—maternal mortality rates could be wrong all over the U.S. Ever since some states introduced a checkbox to their death certificates asking about pregnancy back in 2003, the stats on maternal mortality have been skewed. A 2017 study concluded that this addition “appears to be the main driver of the increases in [maternal mortality rates] during the last decade.” States with and without the checkbox differ so much in reported data that we haven’t published an official national maternal mortality rate since 2007. The data just haven’t been good enough.​

It makes you wonder what other data aren’t being collected, or are being improperly or incompletely collected.

 

The fact that there is any mortality rate at all shows that mothers are put at risk by pregnancy. If my life were to be put at risk by something that was controllable, I would like some say in the matter. It's cowardly to force someone else to risk their lives against their will if you are not willing to share the risk. I would simply say that if you want to force a woman to carry to term and she dies, you should be willing to be put to death as well. If not, then shut up and sit down.

 

I don't support the late term slaughter of unborn pain-capable women or men.

If you're not willing to have scissors stuck into your brain-stem before you are torn to pieces and sucked into a sink, don't insist anyone else undergo this either.

 

It would be best if it were not done, but the final trimester of a pregnancy is when an enlarged heart because of increased blood demands can be fatal to a pregnant woman.
Unless you are willing to share the risk, you have no say over that woman's choice (or the doctor's recommendation to terminate).

 

I'll take that as proof that you are not willing to undergo the destruction you would force on others. I have never supported the position that the mother must carry a baby if doing so would cause her death or grave physical harm. <Mod Edit- Rule 2>

 

EVERY pregnancy can result in grave physical harm up to and even shortly after birth. EVERY single one. They all carry a risk of multiple complications at ANY point in gestation.
Wrap your noodle around that.

 

And every human being that has ever lived, only had that opportunity because a woman took that risk. <Mod Edit- Rule 3>

 

And that has been HER choice for quite some time. It's not a choice YOU will ever have to make because YOU don't have to face ANY risk to your life at ANY point of ANY pregnancy.
If every person who forced a woman to carry to term was subject to every possible complication that woman might face, we would see the REAL support for the anti-abortion crap.

 

This is a pretty new argument made by a few Democrats. I recall when Mother was pregnant and she saw it as her baby. By golly she was right. My siblings were born.

 

I have been involved with 4 women that got abortions. None of them said it was due to the baby harming their body.

 

More horse ****. Fatality rates for men in the workplace are 13 times that death rate for women. So should we all quit and make women do all the work?