1. #7461
    Quote Originally Posted by bladeXcrasher View Post
    Because doctor's are refusing to make that decision...but if you really wondered you could just read a Texas Tribune article.
    You can't make unreasonable demands like that... :P
    Last edited by Evil Midnight Bomber; 2024-01-12 at 06:41 AM.
    “The biggest communication problem is we do not listen to understand. We listen to reply,” Stephen Covey.

  2. #7462
    Quote Originally Posted by Evil Midnight Bomber View Post
    You can't make unreasonable demands like that... :P
    "If it's an emergency, just use the system to qualify for a for the very helpful exemptions. Also, if you use the system to qualify for an exemption, it wasn't really an emergency."
    Conservatism consists of exactly one proposition, to wit: There must be in-groups whom the law protects but does not bind, alongside out-groups whom the law binds but does not protect. There is nothing more or else to it, and there never has been, in any place or time. --Frank Wilhoit

  3. #7463
    https://www.cnn.com/2024/01/17/polit...ons/index.html

    It appears some Republicans ARE maybe paying attention. Which is good in a sense. But also at the same point, I guess the strength of his convictions was weaker than the strength of his desire to be North Carolina's governor.

    North Carolina Lt. Gov. Mark Robinson, the state’s second highest-ranking elected official and its leading Republican candidate for governor in 2024, once hailed banning abortion as his top priority, advocating for its complete ban without exceptions.

    “For me, there is no compromise on abortion. It makes no difference to me why or how that child ended up in that womb,” he said in July 2020 while campaigning for lieutenant governor.

    At the time, Robinson was a political newcomer, having built his campaign off his work as a conservative influencer espousing support for gun rights, law enforcement and “protecting the life of the unborn.”
    Clear and unequivocal. A terrible opinion too, but I digress.

    Now, as the 2024 GOP front-runner for governor, Robinson avoids mentioning abortion on the campaign trail, claiming recently that he stopped using what he calls the “a-word,” preferring instead to use the word “life.”
    Well yeah, the "a-word", as Republicans have found out, is incredible unpopular.

    He’s also softened his position. Robinson denies ever supporting abortion bans without exceptions, publicly stating that he has always struggled with the issue and confirming that he once paid for an abortion for his then-girlfriend, now-wife in the 1980s, an experience he says he fully regrets.
    Nevermind, he's also a liar. It's one thing to change your beliefs, even if they were strongly held. It's another to change then and then pretend you never changed them.

    But in comments reviewed by CNN’s KFile dating back to 2018, Robinson regularly labeled abortion as “murder” and “genocide,” comparing the anti-abortion movement to the abolitionist movement to end slavery. He also baselessly speculated that the founders of Planned Parenthood were satanists who practiced witchcraft.

    Robinson characterized women who undergo abortions, even if they are just “24 hours pregnant,” as murderers.

    Robinson’s current position, his office has said, is support for so-called “heartbeat” legislation, which could ban abortion after a “heartbeat” is detected — but with exceptions for rape, incest, and the life of the mother.

    If victorious in this year’s election, Robinson would be the first Black governor in the state’s history.
    This is really just a great reminder of why Republicans cannot, and should not, be trusted on this issue. Ever.

  4. #7464
    Quote Originally Posted by Edge- View Post
    https://www.cnn.com/2024/01/17/polit...ons/index.html

    It appears some Republicans ARE maybe paying attention. Which is good in a sense. But also at the same point, I guess the strength of his convictions was weaker than the strength of his desire to be North Carolina's governor.



    Clear and unequivocal. A terrible opinion too, but I digress.



    Well yeah, the "a-word", as Republicans have found out, is incredible unpopular.



    Nevermind, he's also a liar. It's one thing to change your beliefs, even if they were strongly held. It's another to change then and then pretend you never changed them.



    This is really just a great reminder of why Republicans cannot, and should not, be trusted on this issue. Ever.
    So, by his own logic, he’s a murderer then? Funny shit.

  5. #7465
    Quote Originally Posted by Gelannerai View Post
    So, by his own logic, he’s a murderer then? Funny shit.
    If you're looking for consistency in a politician's anti-abortion rhetoric, you're going to be here all day.

  6. #7466
    Quote Originally Posted by Gelannerai View Post
    So, by his own logic, he’s a murderer then? Funny shit.
    No no no no. HE's not a murderer. It's his wife who's the murderer. I mean, it's important to remember that the woman, and ONLY the woman, is always responsible for everything involving a pregnancy, despite the fact that, as a general rule, a man is always involved in them at some point.

  7. #7467
    https://helenair.com/news/state-regi...b88fffa83.html

    Montana Attorney General Austin Knudsen has blocked a ballot proposal seeking to create a constitutional right to abortion, labeling the initiative “legally insufficient” after a required review by his office.

    In a memorandum dated Jan. 16, Knudsen said the proposed ballot initiative spearheaded by Planned Parenthood Advocates of Montana, Ballot Measure #14, improperly “logrolls multiple distinct political choices into a single initiative” and limits the state’s ability to protect public health and safety.

    “Ballot Measure 14 creates an express right to abortion but denies voters the ability to express their views on the nuance of the right. This is classic logrolling and is prohibited by Article XIV, Section 11” of the Montana Constitution, Knudsen wrote.
    It's a right or it's not.

    This sure tracks with Republicans consistent efforts to stop voters from having a say on this topic, now that they've realized that their position as a political party is extremist and consistently majority unpopular.

    But no nuance?

    If advocates are successful in court and clear the other hurdles leading up to November, voters will get to weigh in on the constitutional initiative that, in the language drafted, “affirms the right to make and carry out decisions about one’s own pregnancy, including the right to abortion, in the Montana Constitution.”

    The proposal continues to state that, if approved, the amendment “prohibits the government from denying or burdening the right to abortion before fetal viability. Additionally, the amendment ensures that the government cannot deny or burden access to an abortion when it is necessary to protect the pregnant patient’s life or health. This constitutional amendment prevents the government from punishing patients, health care providers, or anyone who assists someone in seeking reproductive care, including abortion care.”
    Well that...all seems pretty reasonable to enshrine access to health care and is pretty similar to what we've seen passed in other states.

    In his legal review, Knudsen said the proposed ballot language would preclude elected officials from enacting reasonable regulations and restrictions on abortion when the practice is determined “medically necessary.”

    “This clause makes it so even regulations that serve a compelling state interest and are narrowly tailored to that interest cannot survive,” Knudsen wrote.
    Does it? Knudsen doesn't appear to provide an example of the kinds of "compelling state interests" and the kinds of "narrowly tailored" regulations that this amendment would prevent.

    Knudsen also said that, as written, the constitutional amendment would preclude Montanans from passing future regulations on abortion that reflect their nuanced and complicated views on the issue, particularly in relation to fetal viability and various health risks to the pregnant patient.
    Well yes to a point...it's an amendment to the state constitution. That's what state (and federal) constitutions largely do. However they can always be changed should the view of Montanan's change over the years, that's the literal purpose of amendments.

    Which leaves me with two possible conclusions:

    AG Knudsen does not know what a Constitution is and how it differs from laws, including that Constitutions can be amended. Despite this being a case of a literal amendment.

    AG Knudsen does know this, and is lying and dishonestly trying to frame this as an extreme, irreversible move when it is neither of those things.

    “First, voters’ views on abortion change dramatically based on the specific timeframe of pregnancy in which the abortion occurs.
    If they don't agree with the amendment they can vote against it, then. Easy peasy.

    Second, states commonly treat physical and psychological conditions differently.
    Ok but how does Montana treat those conditions? Because this is a Montana amendment. He doesn't appear to specificy/clarify.

    States also commonly use qualifying language to clarify when an abortion is medically necessary
    As noted: Asking the state to specify which conditions and circumstances exceptions are allowed and which aren't achieves the same exact effects of blanket bans as we've seen in Texas and other states where women are often left to suffer and risk death because hospitals will not accept the legal risk from an overtly hostile state.

    Ballot Measure 14 creates an express right to abortion but denies voters the ability to express their views on the nuance of the right.
    It literally does. You agree with the measure or you don't. If it's as "extreme" as AG Knudsen appears to believe it is, surely it would be rejected by the good, moral folks of Montana, right?

    Knudsen’s office previously blocked a different ballot initiative related to the creation of a top-four primary system in Montana, citing similar concerns about “logrolling” multiple subjects into one proposal. The coalition behind that ballot initiative filed a legal challenge over Knudsen’s decision and was affirmed by the Montana Supreme Court within weeks, clearing the way for signature collection.
    Huh, seems like he's found a word he really likes and is just opposing anything that might put Republican elections or policies at risk because the voters will have a direct say.

  8. #7468
    Another horror story.

    The day before—Labor Day—we had checked into the ER after I began to bleed at work. At nine weeks pregnant, I feared the worst, but hoped it was nothing. Panicking at my desk, I immediately called my best friend, who told me to go straight to the emergency room.

    At the ER, that panic deepened. The Dobbs decision, by the U.S. Supreme Court, which overturned a woman's constitutional right to an abortion, had been passed three months earlier and for the first two hours in the waiting room, I could only think of how that decision would now trickle down to me, here.

    My brain anxiously cycled through every bad scenario that could happen. My concern wasn't misplaced.

    I was eventually called back for bloodwork and asked questions that were probably standard, but sounded increasingly cold and accusatory, about why I was there. I repeated for what seemed the tenth time that I thought I was having a miscarriage.

    Questions, tests, and information collected, I was sent back to the waiting room with my husband. Several hours, a sonogram, and transvaginal ultrasound later, a kind doctor and two nurses told me they were 98 percent sure I was beginning a miscarriage.

    There was no heartbeat. There was nothing to save. Miscarriages don't reverse themselves, despite what politicians may think.

    Tired and numb, my husband and I asked what I could expect in the days to come. We had been down this path before, but not in Texas. For years, we struggled with infertility and suffered several pregnancy losses with complications.

    I lost my first pregnancy in Washington, DC at 15 weeks. My doctors were wonderful and compassionate and immediately arranged for me to have a D&C—a procedure often used in abortions—because I was too far along to miscarry on my own and to limit the trauma of my loss. The only pain I woke to after that surgery was emotional, not physical.

    Back in Texas, the attending doctor in the ER told me I was free to take Advil for pain (when you're pregnant you can't take ibuprofen) and that I should return only if I became feverish, filled a heavy pad with blood every hour or was nauseous.

    Before we left, I asked him and the nurse if things had changed since the Dobbs decision. Without hesitation, they both said yes, clearly upset. Every OB they knew was trying to leave Texas.

    As a woman who has dealt with infertility issues and miscarriages over the last six years, I've had my share of bad days. The next day was unnecessarily the worst day of my life.

    For nearly five hours I alternate between lying in a fetal position on our bathroom floor and curling up against the wall, shivering uncontrollably one moment, and burning up the next.

    I vomit three times on the floor. I rock back and forth in tears, repeating out loud, to myself, to God, to my husband and my dog on the other side of the door, to please, please make this stop. The pain is so blinding that I think I'm hallucinating.

    It goes on so long, I don't have the energy to scream, at what feels like every single bone in my body crumbling, my body breaking apart, collapsing into itself. Between each new wave of pain that comes, I try to focus on the broken grout between the floor tiles.

    I pass out twice. I am terrified that I will die.

    No one should have to fear they may die because of a miscarriage. And yet, for women like me in the United States, in Texas, that fear is very real.


    I Miscarried in Texas. My Doctors Put Abortion Law First

    When my husband and I return for the second time to the ER, we explain what happened. The pain is too intense, too deep for me to think about anything else. I'm given a wheelchair this time and I sit weeping in the waiting room, until I'm brought back for more bloodwork, and then finally, to a bed.

    A doctor wearing cowboy boots under his scrubs comes in, and asks me if I want "some real pain relief." A nurse gives me the first of three rounds of fentanyl and jokes that "it's better than the cartel's stuff." Within a minute, the pain vanishes.

    Sonograms and a CAT scan are needed to rule out other things. But the technicians that do this are an hour away, so we wait. I'm eventually returned to my bed and my husband. Minutes later, the doctor becomes concerned when my white blood cell count skyrockets, fearing an infection.

    I remember hearing the rising, alarming series of beeps from a monitor and my husband's voice fielding calls from our family in Virginia and Oregon. I hear the fear in their voices, asking him to get me out of there and for a flight to California or any safe state—a desperate, hopeful, impossible request.

    I'm given more fentanyl as the pain returns and more hours pass waiting. Around 5:30am, the doctor returns. As he opens his mouth to start talking, I stop him and tell him I need the bathroom because I feel something leaving me. That something was my placenta, which the doctor and nurse came in to collect for biopsy.

    The doctor confirms, to the surprise of absolutely no one, that I'm miscarrying. He prescribes hydrocodone and an anti-inflammatory drug.

    Before I'm discharged, I asked him to be frank with me—why wasn't I offered a D&C—a surgery that clears the uterine lining after a miscarriage and spares women the physical trauma of experiencing what I did over those two days—or misoprostol—a medication used to treat miscarriages, but also used for medicated abortions? Did the Dobbs decision affect how women were now treated in the ER?

    Like the doctor the previous night, he sighed heavily: "Yes."


    He said that doctors now felt pressure because of lawyers and that today, because my HCG levels were going down (confirming pregnancy loss) he was in a better position to recommend to an OB what the attending doctor the previous night could not.

    Lawyers, not women's lives, were now the overriding concern.

    In Texas, doctors who perform abortions face fines of up to $100,000 and life in prison. Texas has one of the most restrictive abortion bans in the country and while it allows exceptions when the patient's life is in danger, the law is vaguely worded, making doctors hesitant to do anything that may jeopardize their career.


    So much unnecessary sufferings.
    Last edited by Rasulis; 2024-01-21 at 07:33 PM.

  9. #7469
    Quote Originally Posted by Rasulis View Post
    Another horror story.



    I Miscarried in Texas. My Doctors Put Abortion Law First



    So much unnecessary sufferings.
    And as usual: @tehdang come and explain yourself, you despicable, little worm. Move your sex offender pfp in here and explain to us why it excites you so very much to see women suffer.
    “There you stand, the good man doing nothing. And while evil triumphs, and your rigid pacifism crumbles to blood stained dust, the only victory afforded to you is that you stuck true to your guns.”

  10. #7470
    Quote Originally Posted by Mekh View Post
    And as usual: @tehdang come and explain yourself, you despicable, little worm. Move your sex offender pfp in here and explain to us why it excites you so very much to see women suffer.
    Presumably he's going to say that the doctors totally could have done it and not gotten in trouble, forgetting that recently he defended the AG pledging to bring the full force of the law down on someone whose doctors actually got legal permission to do it.

  11. #7471
    Titan Captain N's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    New Resident of Emerald City
    Posts
    11,061
    Quote Originally Posted by DarkTZeratul View Post
    Presumably he's going to say that the doctors totally could have done it and not gotten in trouble, forgetting that recently he defended the AG pledging to bring the full force of the law down on someone whose doctors actually got legal permission to do it.
    I don't think he even believes half the shit he posts. He's here for the reactions and the mods let him run with it. I mean letting him run with a sex offender as a profile picture without retaliation while others get signature infractions is fairly telling.
    “You're not to be so blind with patriotism that you can't face reality. Wrong is wrong, no matter who does it or says it.”― Malcolm X

    I watch them fight and die in the name of freedom. They speak of liberty and justice, but for whom? -Ratonhnhaké:ton (Connor Kenway)

  12. #7472
    Brewmaster Slirith's Avatar
    15+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Gamindustri
    Posts
    1,400
    Quote Originally Posted by Captain N View Post
    I don't think he even believes half the shit he posts. He's here for the reactions and the mods let him run with it. I mean letting him run with a sex offender as a profile picture without retaliation while others get signature infractions is fairly telling.
    It's this why I think it's a mods alt account.

  13. #7473
    Herald of the Titans tehdang's Avatar
    7+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Mar 2015
    Location
    SoCal
    Posts
    2,665
    come and explain yourself, you despicable, little worm. Move your sex offender pfp in here
    I don't think he even believes half the shit he posts. He's here for the reactions and the mods let him run with it. I mean letting him run with a sex offender as a profile picture
    It's this why I think it's a mods alt account.
    This subject is already cancerous to discuss, but I took a break when a massive amount of people transmuted the subject to a personal-attack and ad-hominem discussion. Insulting someone is the fast track way to show you aren't interested in hearing and discussing his or her opinion.

    "You're a fucking asshole mod-alt that doesn't even believe what you write" seldom pairs well with "By the way, what do you think about this?" There might be some other person that actually enjoys the abuse or is just frighteningly passionate in writing about abortion policy on the internet, but that person aint me.
    "I wish it need not have happened in my time." "So do all who live to see such times. But that is not for them to decide. All we have to decide is what to do with the time that is given us."

  14. #7474

  15. #7475
    Quote Originally Posted by Rasulis View Post
    The idiocy is not confined to Texas.


    Definition of Molar pregnancy.
    The cruelty continues to appear to be the point as Republicans continue to watch the consequences of their policy largely be, "Women are left to suffer needlessly." and the response from state-level Republican in these states is to completely and totally ignore the issue or double down on even more draconian restrictions.

  16. #7476
    Quote Originally Posted by tehdang View Post
    This subject is already cancerous to discuss, but I took a break when a massive amount of people transmuted the subject to a personal-attack and ad-hominem discussion. Insulting someone is the fast track way to show you aren't interested in hearing and discussing his or her opinion.

    "You're a fucking asshole mod-alt that doesn't even believe what you write" seldom pairs well with "By the way, what do you think about this?" There might be some other person that actually enjoys the abuse or is just frighteningly passionate in writing about abortion policy on the internet, but that person aint me.
    The cancer is you refusing to take responsibility for the disgusting policies you keep defending. You can walk away from this thread, you can't wash your hands of it. All you're doing is putting your cowardice on display now.
    “There you stand, the good man doing nothing. And while evil triumphs, and your rigid pacifism crumbles to blood stained dust, the only victory afforded to you is that you stuck true to your guns.”

  17. #7477
    The Unstoppable Force Orange Joe's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    001100010010011110100001101101110011
    Posts
    23,248
    Quote Originally Posted by Orange Joe View Post
    Can you quote a scientific paper that details when a fetus becomes a person?
    Quote Originally Posted by tehdang View Post
    This subject is already cancerous to discuss, but I took a break when a massive amount of people transmuted the subject to a personal-attack and ad-hominem discussion. Insulting someone is the fast track way to show you aren't interested in hearing and discussing his or her opinion.

    "You're a fucking asshole mod-alt that doesn't even believe what you write" seldom pairs well with "By the way, what do you think about this?" There might be some other person that actually enjoys the abuse or is just frighteningly passionate in writing about abortion policy on the internet, but that person aint me.
    since you are posting in here again. Care to answer this?
    MMO-Champ the place where calling out trolls get you into more trouble than trolling.

  18. #7478
    Quote Originally Posted by Orange Joe View Post
    since you are posting in here again. Care to answer this?
    When a woman in the midst of active miscarriage and a fetus with no heartbeat couldn't get a D&R, there is no point in discussing viability.

  19. #7479
    Quote Originally Posted by tehdang View Post
    This subject is already cancerous to discuss, but I took a break when a massive amount of people transmuted the subject to a personal-attack and ad-hominem discussion. Insulting someone is the fast track way to show you aren't interested in hearing and discussing his or her opinion.

    "You're a fucking asshole mod-alt that doesn't even believe what you write" seldom pairs well with "By the way, what do you think about this?" There might be some other person that actually enjoys the abuse or is just frighteningly passionate in writing about abortion policy on the internet, but that person aint me.
    "People called me names when I constantly support abuse against women and children." And how do you think you could stop that? Perhaps become a better person and realize what you support is garbage?

    Dontrike/Shadow Priest/Black Cell Faction Friend Code - 5172-0967-3866

  20. #7480
    The Undying Cthulhu 2020's Avatar
    15+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Rigging your election
    Posts
    36,891
    Quote Originally Posted by tehdang View Post
    This subject is already cancerous to discuss, but I took a break when a massive amount of people transmuted the subject to a personal-attack and ad-hominem discussion. Insulting someone is the fast track way to show you aren't interested in hearing and discussing his or her opinion.

    "You're a fucking asshole mod-alt that doesn't even believe what you write" seldom pairs well with "By the way, what do you think about this?" There might be some other person that actually enjoys the abuse or is just frighteningly passionate in writing about abortion policy on the internet, but that person aint me.
    You've made it abundantly clear that you have zero tolerance for abortion of any type and seem to enjoy people suffering when continuing to carry a pregnancy would kill them. But sure, I'm sure you're "pro life".
    2014 Gamergate: "If you want games without hyper sexualized female characters and representation, then learn to code!"
    2023: "What's with all these massively successful games with ugly (realistic) women? How could this have happened?!"

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •