Read this report about another Texas woman who was pregnant with twins and found out that one of them had a genetic deformity that would not make it viable if brought to term. The other twin was healthy.
Read what the state of Texas forced her to do.
These are not rare cases.
Abortion is health care.
"Lauren Miller is speaking out after she became one of five women who filed a lawsuit against Texas and its attorney general, alleging that the state's abortion ban put their lives in danger. Miller, 35, who became pregnant with twins last year, said she had to travel out of state to get care to save her life and the life of one of the unborn twins after she learned the other was not viable.
With trisomy 18, if he made it to birth, all it says is that he's got a pulse," Miller told ABC News' Rachel Scott, referring to a condition in which a baby has three copies of chromosome 18 instead of the normal two. "It's no quality of life. It would be immediate surgeries. Life expectancy somewhere three to 15 days."
26 comments:
Here's the question...
Men, do you want to live in a world where if your mom, sister, daughter or grand daughter gets pregnant and something goes wrong with that pregnancy, rather than have access to immediate quality medical care, they would be told no, go see a judge, or get out of Dodge and go to another state?
Now let me pose another question... if, God forbid, a female of your family is raped, or sexually abused by a stranger or family member, would you like her and her family to have the ability to have an abortion?
Finally, another question... do you think teenagers 14 and above should have access to birth control pills?
If you answered yes to one of those questions, you cannot realistically support any GOP candidate. Because they are actively working right now to make, if they have not already, those scenarios happen.
Add the current SCOTUS case regarding Mifepristone and the GOP members who see most birth control pills as upsetting God's plan for reproduction to the current reality in states like Texas and we have a recipe for disaster for young women across the US.
I'll end with this...
Once Obamacare, the ACA became law, my GOP Governor Jim Sandoval decided that Nevada would take the Medicaid option for our state. Primarily for the benefits it offered to young girls as they entered child bearing age.
In short order, young women across the state had access to free or highly affordable options for effective birth control. The "Pill" if you will.
Teenage pregnancy and abortions tumbled in Nevada by 20%.
Sadly, the GOP and many pastors in Nevada I know were not happy with a result that for years they said they wanted. Why were they upset at the lowering of teenage pregnancy rates and abortions?
Because it did not discourage sex outside of marriage. It gave those young women, and their boy friends, a pass on non marital sex. Instead of rejoicing in the actual policy result they wanted and had prayed for, they sat silently in the well at the State of the State address when Sandoval praised the numbers and the ACA for helping young people in our state.
So, if you care about the women in your family, maybe even your grand daughters, you can't vote for the GOP. Because the GOP wants to police morality, not seek good governance through workable policies.
Sadly, I know even that, even the specter of a 16 year old girl, impregnated by another family member, will sway many GOP voters. Simply because... they don't care.
You have the right to live in a Medical Nanny State, Dave. Just move your women to California. Better yet, Move them to the UK. The NHS will take care of them. And every time they get a paper-cut, they will put a band-aid on their finger, or suffer the NHS voter consequences.
Better yet Joe Con, you move to Afghanistan. You'd fit right in with the misogynistic views of the extremist there.
Joe Conservative: "You have the right to live in a Medical Nanny State, Dave. Just move your women to California. Better yet, Move them to the UK. The NHS will take care of them. And every time they get a paper-cut, they will put a band-aid on their finger, or suffer the NHS voter consequences."
It's curious how easy it is to trigger misogynists when all one has to do is talk about the dystopian world the NOT pro-life Trumpublicans impose on pregnant girls and women.
Dave's comment is in line with a majority (70%) of the American people. Abortion rights are human rights. A human being has the right to bodily autonomy.
JoeCon and his other personas apparently believe women are owned by the State and the State decides how women and girls are to be treated before they're pregnant, when they're pregnant, and when the pregnancies run into life-threatening trouble.
This sort of State imposed treatment of girls and women is akin to what one sees in Iran and Afghanistan.
Joe Conservative has a right to live in those countries where he can enjoy seeing the State impose life-threatening and life-ending laws on girls and women.
For people like JoeCon and the mullahs, that's a sport.
I have a right to move to Afghanistan w/o you and your globalist friends invading Afghanistan again and imposing your will on me again? Who knew? I didn't know that totalitarians allowed for exceptions to their rule.
Joe, is that value you hold absolute? Or fungible?
If absolute, then are our Civil Rights laws wrong too? Should we just have told black people to move to a state where it was legal to eat at a lunch counter with white people next to you?
Was the Loving decision decided improperly? After all, they could have just left Virginia and moved to one of the 33 states where it legal to marry interracially.
It's called progress Joe, not the nanny state. You want to live in, and demand the same of others, some sort of "Lord of the Flies" fantasy system where you think you can live free of the government.
Newsflash amigo... it doesn't exist. Because Hillary and Obama were right. It takes a village and you didn't build nothing apart from our government.
Roads, power grids, the telephone system, dams for water storage, the postal system, energy and more were all developed for mass consumption through government action.
You want to live free or die as an absolutist?
Go ahead, no one is stopping you. Find a patch in the desert, pitch your tent and enjoy yourself. Then maybe you'll be happy and unencumbered by all us nanny staters working to make the US better as we progress.
Meanwhile...
In Ohio a woman who was refused care for what at the time she presented at the hospital, was legal medical help for her pregnancy, went home as instructed by hospital personnel.
There she miscarried an already dead fetus that she knew she was carrying because her doctor had done an ultrasound earlier and was the one who told her to go to the hospital.
Police ultimately got involved when she again sought treatment after the miscarriage. Since she had miscarried at home, on the toilet, the state seized her toilet, with the dead fetus in it, as evidence. An autopsy revealed that the fetus was dead in utero, prior to birth.
So what did the police do in GOP Ohio?
Since she tried to flush the bloody, already dead fetus, they could not charge the woman with murder, or violating the Ohio abortion laws. So they have charged her with abusing a corpse, a felony.
Please tell me why any woman would risk a pregnancy in any GOP/red state.
Republican support for denying women abortions has never really been about the sanctity of life. If it was, then Republicans would care about the lives of the mothers facing high-risk and potentially fatal pregnancies; they would care about the lives of the babies (vs non-alive fetuses) and support public funds for health care, education and welfare for the poor and underprivileged.
Since they actively fight against those things, we know the "right to life" movement is a misnomer. It's about control and enforcing ancient, illogical and discriminatory religious dogma on the rest of the more rational world. It's about being "right" in their choice of their God and their interpretation of that deity's ethical guidance. That's all.
So "who's" the "absolutist" Dave? Me? Or you?
Yeah -FJ, I've been thinking on that.
But as usual, I see you avoided the above question.
QED
I guess I could respond with the same QED to my point that you rarely if ever answer posts directly.
But yes, I am an absolutist on some things.
Like I absolutely reject racism, racist statements, language and racist actions.
And though I might not always get it right, I work at it, try to be respectful when people call me out on it and when I fail, work harder.
I'm an absolutist on Nazism too. I reject statements that promote Nazism, think anybody who flies or waves the Nazi flag is stepping on the graves of Americans who gave their lives to defeat that regime and anyone who cannot proudly condemn the Nazis and their philosophy does not deserve to be called an American.
I could go on, but you get my point. I hope. What's sad is we have people who are unwilling to join me and somehow portray that unwillingness as patriotic.
Ignorance is not, and never has been patriotic. Nor will it ever be. And that FJ, Joe Con, etc. is an absolute
Like I absolutely reject racism, racist statements, language and racist actions.
Like I absolutely reject racism, racist statements, language and racist actions.
Do you? How about "intersectionalism"?
Hypocrite.
Intersectionality is just good manners.
Intersectionality is vital because it allows people to see beyond the rigid identities such extremists promote, and it helps us understand that we are all more connected than we may realize.
You should look into that.
Racial and sexual hierarchies are just good manners? Enforcement through anti-racism or anti-transphobia are "good manners"? Who knew? I think it's the sign of elitist "bores".
"Sometimes people complain that this is all about ‘identity politics’ and that these ideas are about creating hierarchies of victimisation and demonising (in particular) young, white men. This is absolutely not the intention of engaging with ideas of privilege and intersectionality. However, it does mean that before you voice your opinion on another person, you should stop to think about whether you have the right to speak about them from a position of no direct expertise, and you could stop before acting and consider whether your behaviour is contributing to or alleviating their existing disadvantage." --Edinburgh University
He won't. He wallows in the stuff ignorance is made of. It fuels his ego's love of his imagined non existant self.
Thersites "Who knew? I think it's the sign of elitist 'bores"
Speaking of 'bores:'
This post is about another Texas woman who was denied pregnancy medical care because of the boors in Texas who have passed laws that criminalize health care for women. It may be that those boorish Texas lawmakers could use a semester or two on what intersectionality means.
You have more than one blog where you can talk to your little heart's content about your bugaboo: "intersectionality."
Don't like Texas' lawmakers? Vote out the boors! Can I vote out the cancelling edumacated boorish university elites? Or do I need to just "not go to Harvard"?
btw - "you should stop to think about whether you have the right to speak about them from a position of no direct expertise,"
Then perhaps you should tell all your whiney blacks and homo friends not to speak out publically about whites. They have no direct expertise with what it means to be straight and white. After all, it's all about inverting positions of privilege.
Only a completely ignorant fool what say that Joe Con. Thanks for again confirming for us.
You truly have no idea of how America, with its “Liberty and Justice FOR ALL,” promise has often failed, do you. Instead you sound off whenever “homos” as you call our gay brothers and sisters, and “Blacks” demand America delivers on that promise, as only someone whose sexual preference or skin color never made him a target.
I never made any promises.
...and where's the justice for the J6 defendants?
Joe Conservative said...
...and where's the justice for the J6 defendants?
They had their time in court with representation and a trial by peers or judge, depending on how they were charged.
They were found guilty as charged on the evidence.
Just because you sympathize with the insurrectionists that doesn't mean they didn't receive the justice that they earned when they broke the law.
You don't like how it resulted?
Try the kind of justice you want in Putin's, Viktor Orban's, or Kim Jong Un's courts.
Joe, what would justice look like for the Jan J defendants?
What is it you advocate for them?
Post a Comment