You didn't think they'd go this far, did you? You were wrong.
Never underestimate what the state will do to strip away your human rights -- especially Red states:
Washington Post: A new wave of proposals passed in several Texas jurisdictions and under consideration elsewhere in the state would make it illegal for anyone to use certain roads to drive someone out of state for an abortion.
The ordinances, pushed by antiabortion activists, allow any private citizen to sue a person or organization they suspect of violating the ordinance.
Conservative lawmakers started exploring ways to block interstate abortion travel long before Roe v. Wade was overturned. But even in the most conservative corners of Texas, efforts to crack down on abortion travel are meeting some resistance from voters who think the proposed “abortion trafficking” laws go too far.
37 comments:
So I guess if a girl in Texas gets on a bus or a plane that's going to Illinois, she's going to have to take a pregnancy test to prove she's not pregnant. If she is, she won't be able to leave Texas for nine months. If she somehow makes it, the bus driver or pilot could be sued.
Does anyone think the gop really cares about liberty and choice anymore? There's not much evidence to support that they do.
It is definitely not the party of freedom. We'll watch as it continues to work to dilute the liberties of all.
It's in the spirit of the old fugitive slave laws. Yes, I did think they would eventually at least try to go this far. The ultimate goal is to reduce women to the status of domestic animals, breeding stock, like in the culture of the Old Testament. Nobody thinks it's wrong to put up fences to control where cattle can go.
The interesting question is how many women who currently vote Republican will grasp the implications of such laws.
Infidel... we are seeing cracks in the "traditional" female vote for GOP candidates. Some, at least to a degree, while not about to support a progressive agenda, can see that criminalizing the sexual behavior of their sons and daughters is a bridge too far.
So I think they will stay home, or leave a few boxes unchecked moving forward.
All the women I know saw this happening. They saw it when Comey opened his mouth just before the 2016 election. They cried when Trump won because they knew this was coming. How?
Well, Christian nationalists aren't exactly shy about their plan to take over our country. Sun Tzu is very specific on knowing ones enemy and I've read a boatload of sermons preaching about this very subject.
So now we are here.
How do we fix this aside from getting our weapons ready for the war the MAGA's keep threatening to unleash on the rest of us? I mean, I know my enemy. Based on the strawmen I keep running into as MAGA's do their best to 'own the libs' I'm not sure they completely understand who we are.
I voted blue in 22, ready to do it again until MAGA is consigned to the dustbin of history.
Perhaps women who want access to abortions to move to blue states.
Joe Conservative
So that implies that every girl and woman who need access to abortion also has the means to just up and move? Really?
You obviously didn't think that through.
This is group thinking at its worst.
Mike, Les, Dave, Infidel753, Grey One talks sass,
I couldn't find anywhere in this reporting how exactly they'll stop girls and women from crossing the Texas border.
Will they stop every vehicle that has a girl or woman in it? And then what? Set up urine collection sites so they can test if she is pregnant?
Insane and illegal.
Infidel753 was correct in likening this to the Fugitive Slave Act.
Joe Conservative: Perhaps women who want access to abortions to move to blue states
By that argument, rural people in blue states who want to preserve their right to own guns should just move to red states, possibly cutting themselves off from their families, jobs, etc.
Either the government recognizes and protects fundamental rights or it doesn't. The ability to exercise such rights should not depend on what part of the country you happen to live in.
I couldn't find anywhere in this reporting how exactly they'll stop girls and women from crossing the Texas border
Short of a level of totalitarian surveillance and intrusion comparable to North Korea, it's impossible. The only purpose such laws could serve is intimidation -- making women afraid to try to cross the border and making others afraid to help them, for fear of getting caught and punished, however unlikely that is in practice.
They may also simply be too dumb to have thought things through that far. In one state (Missouri, I think), forced-birthers tried to pass a law requiring ectopic pregnancies to be re-implanted in the uterus rather than simply being aborted as is now standard procedure. They apparently didn't know that doing that is not technologically possible at present. They were literally mandating something that can't be done.
Abortion isn't a fundamental right. A gun, is. See? It's all written down in a document called "The Constitution".
lol!
-FJ,
Abortion isn't a fundamental right in American Constitutional law.
Also, abortion is NOT banned under American Constitutional law.
Abortion is considered an international Human Right. Maybe some day the American religionists who are against abortion will figure it out. And maybe the American voters will help them. 70% of Americans approve of a girl or woman's right to an abortion for reasons that are between her, her partner, and her medical team -- NOT RIGHT WING RELIGIONISTS.
"Access to safe, legal abortion is a matter of human rights.
Authoritative interpretations of international human rights law establish that denying women, girls, and other pregnant people access to abortion is a form of discrimination and jeopardizes a range of human rights. United Nations human rights treaty bodies regularly call for governments to decriminalize abortion in all cases and to ensure access to safe, legal abortion in certain circumstances at a minimum."
Not all firearms/weapons are protected by the 2nd Amendment. Our laws have prohibited forms of firearms from being owned. So. There are limits on the 2nd Amendment.
If you live in America, American Constitutional law is the only law that counts. :)
Thersites: "If you live in America, American Constitutional law is the only law that counts. :)"
Tell that to the Trump cultists. They don't believe it. They believe in Trumpian laws.
Anyway, there is no law against abortion in the US Constitution. It is prohibited in all instances ONLY in certain fundamentalist religions.
Americans are allowed to practice their religion. Religious Americans ARE NOT ALLOWED TO MAKE OTHERS WHO ARE NOT PART OF THEIR RELIGION PRACTICE IT.
The Jewish religion, for example, does not prohibit abortion, and neither do other world religions.
We all have to follow YOUR secular religions of sexual perversion and economic stagnation? Who knew?
Joe Conservative
When you have no argument or facts, project onto others your own demons.
I have no religion of anything. PERIOD. The sexual perversions you project onto me are your own.
Seek help.
Killing babies isn't a sexual perversion? Who knew?
Shaw... and I'm sure Thersites would never affirm a Muslim majority community in the states to impose their religious beliefs, via their religion, on the rest of the population of that community.
But of course, that reality seems lost on most.
Without the Doctrine of Discovery, we'd never be having this discussion, because without a theological foundation of prominence of one religion over another, and the surety it engenders, perhaps we'd be living in a more tolerant world.
To Thersites:
Nobody’s “killing babies.” You’re not going to highjack this thread with your radical and sensationally inaccurate views on abortion.
The notion of a secular religion like the Green Energy cult never occurs to those trapped in it. Want to save Mother earth? Commit suicide.
Ha! I was waiting for the secular religion argument. The MAGA's never disappoint.
Took a look around the interwebz where religion is defined as a noun: the belief in and worship of a superhuman power or powers, especially a God or gods. Used in a sentence: "ideas about the relationship between science and religion"
similar: a pursuit or interest to which someone ascribes supreme importance or a particular system of faith and worship.
One could say the adherence to Green Energy to ensure the planet is livable for humans is like a religion in that the topic is of extreme importance. And that is where the term outlives it's usefulness.
Science is the language which will propel humans through this self inflicted disaster. As much as the cultists that come here to tell us how wrong we are about their beloved Lord Dampnut the evidence (or their lack of it) tells many who post here all we need to know.
Nice self owns in the comments by -FJ. Almost brought a smile to my face.
Also -FJ regarding your suggestion to unalive ourselves - you first MAGAT, you first.
Baring a significant shift in world perspective FJ your above comment may very well be the truest statement you have ever have made. Only you're clueless really as to why.
FJ IS RIGHT
The high abortion rate in the United States cannot ignoring. Is is clearly because of the Democrats not caring about sanctity of life, and having the qui s'en soucie attitude
Definition of a religion:
"the belief in and worship of a superhuman power or powers, especially a God or gods.G
Greenpeace and other various organizations that promote clean energy do not worship any god or gods, unlike the Trump cultists who actually compare Trump to Jesus Christ.
"Commit suicide?"
Want to save your sanity?
See a therapist.
The Hawk said...
"FJ IS RIGHT
The high abortion rate in the United States cannot ignoring. Is is clearly because of the Democrats not caring about sanctity of life, and having the qui s'en soucie attitude"
Nah. That "who cares" attitude is more aptly applied to the people who watch babies and children get slaughtered year after year by weapons of war in their schools or negligent people who keep unsecured firearms in the house. Mainly red staters.
DEATH BY FIREARMS is the leading cause of death childrens' deaths in America. FACT.
And the 2nd Amendment fanatic's attitude is "qui s'en soucie."
Grey One talks sass
FOR YOUR COMMENT
@Grey One.
You don't follow "science"... you follow dogma. The need to censor real science during the pandemic, revolutionary science, proved that your "Hephaestean god" was hollow. It's time you "sounded" your idols more thoroughly. And vetted your Fauccian priests, lest the snake oil vaccines they sell you, kill us all.
-ps Me first? I don't give an 'F about global warming.
Sciences are "skeptical". When they become "dogmatic" (religious belief), it's a signal that it's time to shift the paradigm. Only corporate globalism doesn't want THAT to happen. So they censor the science, and produce ineffective vaccines that they then "profit" by.
The Left doesn't follow the science. They follow science's dogs and Faucci's Big Pharma mutts.
Well, JC, you're certainly entitled to your own opinion, but not your own facts.
The COVID vaccine saved millions of lives.
Report: COVID-19 vaccines saved US $1.15 trillion, 3 million lives
News brief December 13, 2022
"Without vaccination the U.S. would have experienced 1.5 times more infections, 3.8 times more hospitalizations, and 4.1 times more deaths," the authors wrote. "These losses would have been accompanied by more than $1 trillion in additional medical costs that were averted because of fewer infections, hospitalizations, and deaths."
The Lancet: "Findings
Based on official reported COVID-19 deaths, we estimated that vaccinations prevented 14·4 million (95% credible interval [Crl] 13·7–15·9) deaths from COVID-19 in 185 countries and territories between Dec 8, 2020, and Dec 8, 2021. This estimate rose to 19·8 million (95% Crl 19·1–20·4) deaths from COVID-19 averted when we used excess deaths as an estimate of the true extent of the pandemic, representing a global reduction of 63% in total deaths (19·8 million of 31·4 million) during the first year of COVID-19 vaccination. In COVAX Advance Market Commitment countries, we estimated that 41% of excess mortality (7·4 million [95% Crl 6·8–7·7] of 17·9 million deaths) was averted. In low-income countries, we estimated that an additional 45% (95% CrI 42–49) of deaths could have been averted had the 20% vaccination coverage target set by COVAX been met by each country, and that an additional 111% (105–118) of deaths could have been averted had the 40% target set by WHO been met by each country by the end of 2021.
National Bureau of Economic Research: "The research finds that vaccinations were very effective in saving lives. The effect was strongest in the September to November period of 2021, when a 14.2 percent rise in the vaccination rate is estimated to have lowered the death rate by 40.6 percent. It took an average of 124 full vaccinations (248 shots) to save one life at this time. At a full cost for two doses of $222, that implies that the cost of saving one life was around $55,000. The estimated effect of vaccinations on death rates was smaller in magnitude in the other periods. For example, between December 2021 and February 2022, the estimates imply that it took 455 full vaccinations to save one life, and the estimated cost per life saved was $200,000. This is still far below most estimates of the value of a statistical life, which are often several million dollars for the United States."
I don't know why people like you reject science and facts. I guess there are folks who just like to be contrary to get attention. Oh well.
RU sextuple boosted, pShaw? Your vaccines are worthless.
...but hey, maybe the next outbreak due this Fall will kill me. But I wouldn't count on it.
SCIENCE!
:)
Blogger Joe Conservative said...
RU sextuple boosted, pShaw? Your vaccines are worthless.
No. They are not. I was exposed to COVID and got nothing more than a head cold. No fever, no sore throat, no headaches. Just a runny nose. Period.
My brother did not get vaccinated and he was sick as a dog with Covid19 for a month and then a year later got the Delta version and was sick again.
But those are just two anecdotal cases. Most of my family came down with COVID during the pandemic, not one of them required hospitalization -- and some of them were quite elderly and suffered from various ailments of the lungs that could have killed them had they not received the vaccine.
The data show that being vaccinated is life-saving.
I don't care what you think. You're neither a virologist, nor a medical expert on any of this. You're simply a conspiracy monger. Unless you've spent your life studying viruses, I'm really not interested in your opinion.
No sense putting much effort into discussion with the ones like JC (FJ) who KNOW for certain they are right. When they forget that which they think they know they will be liberated. And able to learn.
The Liberal Sciences...
Post a Comment