Abortion

happy jack wrote:

Artie60438 wrote:

   
But in the end,Planned Parenthood was cleared of any wrongdoing ....

[b]Yes, because shipping severed babies' heads on ice is perfectly legal.

Yaps the boring old drama queen.

happy jack wrote:

Yes, because shipping severed babies' heads on ice is perfectly legal.

Should it not be?

happy jack wrote:

Heretic wrote:

happy jack wrote:

Yes, because shipping severed babies' heads on ice is perfectly legal.

Should it not be?

[b]Never thought I'd live to see the day when that question needed to be asked.
Yet here it is.

While we're on the subject,do you guys prefer conventional ice or dry? I prefer conventional ice myself as I'm always afraid the dry kind might cause freezer burn.

happy jack wrote:

Never thought I'd live to see the day when that question needed to be asked.
Yet here it is.

It didn't need to be asked.

You also didn't answer it.

For clarification on a previous post.  If you mean it needed to be asked because you're as deliberately vague and evasive as ever, then yes, I suppose it needed to be asked.

Marco Rubio: women with Zika should not be allowed abortions

Quote :

In the Senate, Rubio has supported the provision of funding for work against Zika. In May, after a $1.1bn funding measure he sponsored passed the Senate, he cited an estimate from the CDC director, Tom Frieden, that the lifetime cost of caring for a child born with microcephaly could reach $10m.

“We’re going to be dealing with Zika for multiple years,” Rubio said. “Outside of the human cost is the economic cost of this. We’re going to be spending money on Zika for the foreseeable future.”

On Saturday, he added: “Obviously, microcephaly is a terrible prenatal condition that kids are born with. And when they are, it’s a lifetime of difficulties. So I get it.

Yeah,he really "gets it" doesn't he?

Here's where we find out just how "pro-life" happy is:

Flint’s lead-poisoned water had a ‘horrifyingly large’ effect on fetal deaths, study finds

Quote :

The fertility rate in Flint, Mich., dropped precipitously after the city decided to switch to lead-poisoned Flint River water in 2014, according to a new working paper.

That decline was primarily driven by what the authors call a “culling of the least healthy fetuses” resulting in a “horrifyingly large” increase in fetal deaths and miscarriages. The paper estimates that among the  babies conceived from November 2013 through March 2015, “between 198 and 276 more children would have been born had Flint not enacted the switch in water,” write health economists Daniel Grossman of West Virginia University and David Slusky of Kansas University.

My guess is, as always, in name only.

Heretic wrote:

Here's where we find out just how "pro-life" happy is:

Flint’s lead-poisoned water had a ‘horrifyingly large’ effect on fetal deaths, study finds

Quote :

The fertility rate in Flint, Mich., dropped precipitously after the city decided to switch to lead-poisoned Flint River water in 2014, according to a new working paper.

That decline was primarily driven by what the authors call a “culling of the least healthy fetuses” resulting in a “horrifyingly large” increase in fetal deaths and miscarriages. The paper estimates that among the  babies conceived from November 2013 through March 2015, “between 198 and 276 more children would have been born had Flint not enacted the switch in water,” write health economists Daniel Grossman of West Virginia University and David Slusky of Kansas University.

My guess is, as always, in name only.

I respectfully suggest that you search the history of any and all of my posts and come up with even one in which I endorse lead-contaminated drinking water.
Thanks.
 
Christ, and I'm the one being constantly accused of using straw man arguments.
Wake the fuck up and look in the mirror, asswipes.

Required reading for Trump Worshiping Trolls....
Rhetoric vs. Reality: How Abortion Bans Hurt Women

Quote :

Throughout the 2017 congressional cycle, several bans were introduced that restrict women’s access to abortion. These bans were designed to impede access at various arbitrary points within gestation—after six weeks or 20 weeks, for example—or to prevent access to abortion on the basis of various reasons. These bans are dangerous for women, medically unnecessary, and based on misinformation and junk science.

The danger of abortion bans becoming law and threatening the promise of Roe v. Wade is significant. In early October 2017, the U.S. House of Representatives voted 237-189 to pass legislation banning most abortions after 20 weeks of pregnancy, and the Senate will likely vote on the bill in early 2018. President Donald Trump and Vice President Mike Pence vocalized their support for the bill at the annual March for Life this January, indicating that in the case of a tie, the executive branch will wield their power to advance anti-choice legislation. Further, President Trump’s nomination of Justice Neil Gorsuch to the Supreme Court could protect anti-choice legislation if challenged judicially on the basis of Roe vs. Wade. The federal 20-week abortion ban idea originated at the state level: 20-week abortion bans are currently law in 21 states.

Another extreme abortion ban—the six-week abortion ban—was introduced at the federal level last year, also drawn from state legislatures. Rep. Steve King (R-IA) narrated a sonogram during a hearing on the bill, claiming that “[I]t’s time to emancipate every little unborn baby.” The House has yet to vote on the bill and it is unlikely to pass into legislation, but the introduction itself indicates a commitment on the part of extremist anti-choice legislators to limit access to abortion at all points of the pregnancy.

Other abortion bans—including bans criminalizing abortion on the basis of sex discrimination or a fetal diagnosis—have also made headway on the state level and are predicted to surface at the federal level. Currently, eight states ban abortion for reasons of sex selection, and three states ban abortions for reasons of genetic anomaly—Ohio being the most recent to pass an abortion ban based on diagnoses of Down syndrome.

The Trump administration and anti-choice members of Congress have spent a significant portion of 2017 touting misinformation in order to pass anti-choice laws. It is critical to examine the false science and misogyny behind such bans and create widespread awareness of the safety and necessity of abortion for women’s well-being and economic success.
Myth: Abortions performed after 20 weeks of gestation are dangerous

Reality: Abortions during this stage of pregnancy are incredibly rare: Only 1 percent of abortions take place after 21 weeks. However, abortions performed after 20 weeks of gestation, when performed by a trained physician, are safe and often medically critical for the health of the mother. Twenty weeks is an arbitrary cutoff point for lawmakers to interfere with women’s personal decision-making by denying them critical health care. Women should receive support in their efforts to obtain safe, legal abortion at various points throughout their pregnancies.

While these procedures can be complicated, they are necessary for medical reasons discovered later in pregnancies; dramatically changed life circumstances; or an inability to attain abortion earlier in the pregnancy for a variety of reasons. For example, many women who undergo abortions after 20 weeks have learned that the fetus has developed a medical condition that would prevent survival outside of the womb. Twenty-week abortion bans disproportionately affect low-income women and women of color, as these groups disproportionately experience unintended pregnancies as well as financial insecurity and a lack of insurance coverage.
Myth: 20-week abortion bans are based on sound science that supports the claim that fetuses are capable of pain at 20 weeks

Reality: Anti-choice legislators have repeatedly claimed that fetuses at 20-weeks’ gestation are capable of feeling pain—hence the necessity of a 20-week ban. The most recent federal attempt to pass a 20-week abortion ban was based on the notion that fetuses can feel pain at 20 weeks of gestation.  However, there is very weak evidence to support this claim. Anti-choice legislators have relied upon the findings of an outlier physician, Dr. Kanwalgeet “Sunny” Anand, who has argued that abortion after 20 weeks of gestation causes fetuses “severe and excruciating pain.” Dr. Anand’s findings go against an established body of evidence that shows fetuses develop the brain connections required to feel pain only around at least 24 weeks of gestation.
Myth: A 6-week abortion ban would not have a significant impact on most women

Reality: A six-week abortion ban would essentially ban abortion entirely, as most women do not even realize that they’re pregnant before six weeks of gestation. A six-week abortion ban is a tactical effort to get a 20-week ban passed, as a six-week ban makes a 20-week ban seem less extreme. In 2016, the Ohio legislature passed both a six-week and 20-week ban; however, Gov. John Kasich (R) vetoed the former while signing the latter, citing the potential of legal challenges as well as constitutionality as his rationale. While the six-week ban is unlikely to pass into law, the sheer existence of the ban threatens the legality of a woman’s right to choose abortion—reflecting a dangerous threat to the promise of Roe v. Wade. Meanwhile, the American Congress of Obstetricians and Gynecologists has spoken out against e six-week abortion ban “violates the Constitution, will serve as outright ban on abortion for most women, and will prohibit health care providers from providing ethical, necessary care to their patients.”
Myth: Abortion bans prevent women from pursuing abortions on the basis of discriminating against disability or sex

Reality: There is very limited and inconclusive evidence that people pursue abortions for such a reason. In the case of sex-selective bans, this reasoning is used as a racially motivated tactic to criminalize abortion for the Asian-American community, who are incorrectly regarded as more likely to favor sons over daughters. For example, in 2016, two Asian-American women were prosecuted on separate feticide charges that resulted in vastly different outcomes compared with a white woman found guilty of the same charges. Sex-selective abortion bans can pave the way for increased scrutiny toward the reproductive health decisions of Asian-American women, and place undue burdens on health care providers to divulge the privacy of their clients by probing into their intent to receive an abortion.

Similarly, abortion bans that aim to prevent women from pursuing abortions because of a fetal diagnosis are based on misdirection and judgement toward women’s choices. Through these bans, anti-choice legislators are merely using the guise of support for people with disabilities to push an anti-choice agenda that punishes women for choosing a reproductive health care option that is best for her and her family. Such bans do nothing for people with disabilities to improve access to health care or education—nor do they provide education on what parenting a child with a disability entails. Additionally, these bans unnecessarily strain the relationship between patient and health care provider and hinder open and honest conversations about pregnancy.
Conclusion

The impact of the aforementioned abortion bans significantly impede access to abortion in a variety of ways. Abortion bans are dangerous and infringe upon women’s rights and access to health care—despite myths purported by the anti-choice movement that they protect women. By dispelling the misinformation surrounding abortion bans with evidence-based research and policy, women will have access to the care they need to make the best decisions for themselves and their families.

Anusha Ravi is a research assistant for the Women’s Initiative at the Center for American Progress. Jamila Taylor is a senior fellow at the Center.

This bears watching, if only to see how it is portrayed by the mainstream media.



http://sacramento.cbslocal.com/2018/03/20/student-planning-abortion-protest/

Student Planning Abortion Protest After School Shooting Walkout


By Lemor Abrams
March 20, 2018 at 7:06 pm


SACRAMENTO (CBS13) — Last week they protested gun violence.
This week, Rocklin High School students are using social media to organize a pro-life walkout using the hashtag #life.
“To honor all the lives of aborted babies pretty much. All the millions of aborted babies every year,” said organizer Brandon Gillespie.
He says his history teacher inspired the idea.
As thousands of students across the country walked out of class demanding strict gun laws, in honor of the Parkland shooting victims, Benzel was placed on paid administrative leave when she asked students to consider whether there’s a double standard in the national school walkout.
“I would like a conversation about when is too much? And are we going allow this on the other side?” said Julianne Benzel
The principal at Rocklin High declined to meet with us for an on-camera interview, but a district spokeswoman tells us, he does plan to sit down with the student about the possible abortion walkout, and that’s not going over well with some of his peers.
“Abortions aren’t really anything that has to do with school or students here,” said Naeirika Neev.
Neev is the editor of the school newspaper. In her posts, she’s using the hashtag “enough is enough” to promote peace, and take a stance against anything anti-abortion on campus.
“They have their First Amendment, they can go protest about that anytime anywhere,” she said.
But Brandon says protesting on school grounds is just the point.
“I would like to see if there really is a double standard and what will come of that,” he said.
He doesn’t have a date for the protest, but he does with the principal. Their meeting is set for this Friday. [/size]

Trump Worshiping Racist Crossdesser wrote:

Everywhere we look, we see poverty and large families going hand in hand. We see hordes of children whose parents cannot feed, clothe, or educate even one half of the number born to them. We see sick, harassed, broken mothers whose health and nerves cannot bear the strain of further child-bearing. We see fathers growing despondent and desperate, because their labor cannot bring the necessary wage to keep their growing families. We see that those parents who are least fit to reproduce the race are having the largest number of children; while people of wealth, leisure, and education are having small families.
The real hope of the world lies in putting as painstaking thought into the business of mating as we do into other big businesses.
A sickly race is a weak race. As long as Negro mothers die in childbirth at two and one-half times the rate of white mothers, as long as Negro babies are dying at twice the rate of white babies, colored homes will be unhappy.

Nice try troll but no one here is as stupid as you. Here's the rest of the story that you plagiarized from Margaret Higgins Sanger...

Quote :

Work with the African-American community

Sanger worked with African American leaders and professionals who saw a need for birth control in their communities. In 1929, James H. Hubert, a black social worker and the leader of New York's Urban League, asked Sanger to open a clinic in Harlem.[72] Sanger secured funding from the Julius Rosenwald Fund and opened the clinic, staffed with black doctors, in 1930. The clinic was directed by a 15-member advisory board consisting of black doctors, nurses, clergy, journalists, and social workers. The clinic was publicized in the African-American press as well as in black churches, and it received the approval of W. E. B. Du Bois, the co-founder of the NAACP and the editor of its magazine, The Crisis.[73][74][75][76] Sanger did not tolerate bigotry among her staff, nor would she tolerate any refusal to work within interracial projects.[77] Sanger's work with minorities earned praise from Martin Luther King, Jr., in his 1966 acceptance speech for the Margaret Sanger award.[78]

From 1939 to 1942 Sanger was an honorary delegate of the Birth Control Federation of America, which included a supervisory role—alongside Mary Lasker and Clarence Gamble—in the Negro Project, an effort to deliver birth control to poor black people.[79] Sanger, over the objections of other supervisors, wanted the Negro Project to hire black ministers in leadership roles. To emphasize the benefits of hiring black community leaders to act as spokesmen, she wrote to Gamble:

   We should hire three or four colored ministers, preferably with social-service backgrounds, and with engaging personalities. The most successful educational approach to the Negro is through a religious appeal. We don’t want the word to go out that we want to exterminate the Negro population, and the minister is the man who can straighten out that idea if it ever occurs to any of their more rebellious members.

New York University's Margaret Sanger Papers Project says that though the letter would have been meant to avoid the mistaken notion that the Negro Project was a racist campaign, conspiracy theorists have fraudulently attempted to exploit the quotation "as evidence she led a calculated effort to reduce the black population against their will".[80][81][82]

Quote :

Margaret Higgins Sanger (born Margaret Louise Higgins, September 14, 1879 – September 6, 1966, also known as Margaret Sanger Slee) was an American birth control activist, sex educator, writer, and nurse. Sanger popularized the term "birth control", opened the first birth control clinic in the United States, and established organizations that evolved into the Planned Parenthood Federation of America.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Margaret_Sanger

https://www.nationalreview.com/news/tennessee-abortion-monument-senate-erect/

Tennessee Set to Erect Monument to Victims of Abortion
By Mairead McArdle

April 26, 2018 12:51 PM

The Tennessee Senate passed a bill on Monday ordering a monument honoring unborn babies to be erected on the grounds of the state capitol.
The monument will remember the victims of abortion in America, including the parents of aborted babies. It will be inscribed: “Tennessee Monument to Unborn Children, In Memory of the Victims of Abortion: Babies, Women, and Men.”



Will this action be held to be unconstitutional on the grounds that there must be a "separation of non-mutilation and state"?

Girl, 11, gives birth to rapist's child after Argentina refuses abortion

Quote :

An 11-year old girl who became pregnant after being raped was forced to give birth after Argentine authorities refused to allow her the abortion to which she was entitled.

The authorities ignored repeated requests for an abortion from the child, called “Lucía” to protect her identity, as well as her mother and a number of Argentine women’s right activists. After 23 weeks of pregnancy, she had to undergo a caesarean section on Tuesday. The baby is unlikely to survive.

The move has been described as the “worst kind of cruelty for this child” and has been blamed on an anti-choice strategy in the country to force girls to carry their pregnancies to term.

Lucía told the psychologist at the hospital to which she was admitted after two suicide attempts: “I want you to remove what the old man put inside me.”

Can't wait 'til this is visited upon the children of Republicans.

happy jack wrote:

Heretic wrote:

Girl, 11, gives birth to rapist's child after Argentina refuses abortion

Quote :

An 11-year old girl who became pregnant after being raped was forced to give birth after Argentine authorities refused to allow her the abortion to which she was entitled.

The authorities ignored repeated requests for an abortion from the child, called “Lucía” to protect her identity, as well as her mother and a number of Argentine women’s right activists. After 23 weeks of pregnancy, she had to undergo a caesarean section on Tuesday. The baby is unlikely to survive.

The move has been described as the “worst kind of cruelty for this child” and has been blamed on an anti-choice strategy in the country to force girls to carry their pregnancies to term.

Lucía told the psychologist at the hospital to which she was admitted after two suicide attempts: “I want you to remove what the old man put inside me.”

Can't wait 'til this is visited upon the children of Republicans.

Well, with any luck, she can go the Democrat route - raise enough money for a plane ticket to the good ol' U.S. of A. and leave the baby to die on a stainless steel table.

Wow.  That's cold Jack... on a couple of levels.  

Let me ask you...

Do you feel that a woman (or child) should never abort, even in cases of rape?

https://www.thenation.com/article/civility-later-abortion-republicans/

………
And make no mistake—conflating abortion with killing babies is as factually accurate as claiming that conservatives eat puppies.
……...

I guess you can win any debate as long as you are willing to lie your ass off.