[Abortion][REVISED POLL] If you had the power...

[The New California Republic]

So apparently new law in Iowa has passed the house and senate and just needs signing from a governor that is very much against aboriton. The law limits abortions to till the fetal heartbeat can be heard, which occurs at about 6 weeks. This would be the most restrictive law about abortions in the US, and will undoubtedly be challenged when it is signed into law. https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/to- ... 00e1254231

My first reaction to this whole thing was: what a ridiculous criteria for judging the cutoff date for abortions. The fetus has a heart that beats, so what? What difference does that make? A beating heart still doesn't necessarily make the fetus viable.

[Dylar]

So apparently new law in Iowa has passed the house and senate and just needs signing from a governor that is very much against aboriton. The law limits abortions to till the fetal heartbeat can be heard, which occurs at about 6 weeks. This would be the most restrictive law about abortions in the US, and will undoubtedly be challenged when it is signed into law. https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/to- ... 00e1254231

My first reaction to this whole thing was: what a ridiculous criteria for judging the cutoff date for abortions. The fetus has a heart that beats, so what? What difference does that make? A beating heart still doesn't necessarily make the fetus viable.

A lot of us pro-life people (or maybe it's just me) believe that life begins at conception, and the the heartbeat proves that the fetus is alive and not a clump of cells. Honestly, I support the bill. It also gives women a deadline to have an abortion or not. So, six weeks of thinking it over should, at least in my head, be plenty of time to decide. Now, before we get into the rare(?) cases where a pregnant woman can be perfectly healthy one day and then die the next day, let me just note that I'm talking about a normal pregnancy where there's nothing complicated or deadly in the nine months of being pregnant.

[The New California Republic]

Honestly, I support the bill. It also gives women a deadline to have an abortion or not. So, six weeks of thinking it over should, at least in my head, be plenty of time to decide.

It is fairly common for women to still be unaware they are pregnant even at the six week stage, it is far too small a window to obtain an abortion if needed, far too small.

[The Free Joy State]

My first reaction to this whole thing was: what a ridiculous criteria for judging the cutoff date for abortions. The fetus has a heart that beats, so what? What difference does that make? A beating heart still doesn't necessarily make the fetus viable.

A lot of us pro-life people (or maybe it's just me) believe that life begins at conception, and the the heartbeat proves that the fetus is alive and not a clump of cells. Honestly, I support the bill. It also gives women a deadline to have an abortion or not. So, six weeks of thinking it over should, at least in my head, be plenty of time to decide. Now, before we get into the rare(?) cases where a pregnant woman can be perfectly healthy one day and then die the next day, let me just note that I'm talking about a normal pregnancy where there's nothing complicated or deadly in the nine months of being pregnant.

Many women have no idea they're even pregnant at six weeks. Morning sickness -- one of the first noticeable signs -- doesn't even present until six weeks. There may not even be a missed period at this stage, as some women continue to have light spotting.

This bill leaves no time at all for a woman to realise she's pregnant and decide whether or not to have an abortion, which is precisely what it's probably designed to do.

EDIT: As for pregnancy not being risky 700 women, in the developed US, die due to complications from pregnancy every year. And that's with abortion being legal.

[Esternial]

A lot of us pro-life people (or maybe it's just me) believe that life begins at conception, and the the heartbeat proves that the fetus is alive and not a clump of cells. Honestly, I support the bill. It also gives women a deadline to have an abortion or not. So, six weeks of thinking it over should, at least in my head, be plenty of time to decide. Now, before we get into the rare(?) cases where a pregnant woman can be perfectly healthy one day and then die the next day, let me just note that I'm talking about a normal pregnancy where there's nothing complicated or deadly in the nine months of being pregnant.

Many women have no idea they're even pregnant at six weeks. Morning sickness -- one of the first noticeable signs -- doesn't even present until six weeks. There may not even be a missed period at this stage, as some women continue to have light spotting.

This bill leaves no time at all for a woman to realise she's pregnant and decide whether or not to have an abortion, which is precisely what it's probably designed to do.

Speaking from personal (non-direct) experience, I can definitely confirm this.

I don't get the pro-life folks sometimes. I'm pretty sure you want woman to take the time to consider their options, but by implementing these ridiculously short time limits, you're basically forcing women to make a decision - fast.

In my opinion, certain branches of the pro-life movement carries blame for hasty or unneeded abortions.

[Hurdergaryp]

A lot of us pro-life people (or maybe it's just me) believe that life begins at conception, and the the heartbeat proves that the fetus is alive and not a clump of cells. Honestly, I support the bill. It also gives women a deadline to have an abortion or not. So, six weeks of thinking it over should, at least in my head, be plenty of time to decide. Now, before we get into the rare(?) cases where a pregnant woman can be perfectly healthy one day and then die the next day, let me just note that I'm talking about a normal pregnancy where there's nothing complicated or deadly in the nine months of being pregnant.

Many women have no idea they're even pregnant at six weeks. Morning sickness -- one of the first noticeable signs -- doesn't even present until six weeks. There may not even be a missed period at this stage, as some women continue to have light spotting.

This bill leaves no time at all for a woman to realise she's pregnant and decide whether or not to have an abortion, which is precisely what it's probably designed to do.

EDIT: As for pregnancy not being risky 700 women, in the developed US, die due to complications from pregnancy every year. And that's with abortion being legal.

Which is apparently not enough of a killscore for the pro-life crowd.

[Ifreann]

So apparently new law in Iowa has passed the house and senate and just needs signing from a governor that is very much against aboriton. The law limits abortions to till the fetal heartbeat can be heard, which occurs at about 6 weeks. This would be the most restrictive law about abortions in the US, and will undoubtedly be challenged when it is signed into law. https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/to- ... 00e1254231

My first reaction to this whole thing was: what a ridiculous criteria for judging the cutoff date for abortions. The fetus has a heart that beats, so what? What difference does that make? A beating heart still doesn't necessarily make the fetus viable.

The No campaign posters here are great craic. Wee foetus saying "I am nine weeks old. I can yawn. I can kick. Don't repeal me."

[Godular]

My first reaction to this whole thing was: what a ridiculous criteria for judging the cutoff date for abortions. The fetus has a heart that beats, so what? What difference does that make? A beating heart still doesn't necessarily make the fetus viable.

The No campaign posters here are great craic. Wee foetus saying "I am nine weeks old. I can yawn. I can kick. Don't repeal me."

Really? That's on a campaign poster?

Is it sad that the first thing that came to mind was that scene from TLJ with Luke saying 'Amazing... every word you just said was wrong!'

I HATED THAT MOVIE... but that part was funny.

[Katganistan]

Honestly, I support the bill. It also gives women a deadline to have an abortion or not. So, six weeks of thinking it over should, at least in my head, be plenty of time to decide.

It is fairly common for women to still be unaware they are pregnant even at the six week stage, it is far too small a window to obtain an abortion if needed, far too small.

That's the point. Trapping women into being forced to continue their pregnancies.

Maybe when people end up dying from botched backalley abortions these pro-birthers will remember why Roe v. Wade came into being, but I doubt it.

[The Free Joy State]

It is fairly common for women to still be unaware they are pregnant even at the six week stage, it is far too small a window to obtain an abortion if needed, far too small.

That's the point. Trapping women into being forced to continue their pregnancies.

Maybe when people end up dying from botched backalley abortions these pro-birthers will remember why Roe v. Wade came into being, but I doubt it.

I doubt it, too. Hasn't happened in Ireland (home to some of the strictest abortion laws in the world), yet...

In Ireland, 2013, a woman died when denied an abortion when she was miscarrying, because there was still a foetal heartbeat. The heartbeat stopped three days later, by which point she was dying with septaecemia.

Five years later, they're just getting round to holding a referendum on liberalising the abortion law this month. I'm not optimistic.

So, I don't think it makes any difference to many pro-lifers -- so-called -- if women die in back-alley abortions, or due to retained miscarriages, or as a result of suicide because they can't bear continuing with the pregnancy.

After all, if a woman wants an abortion, she's obviously just a slut. /s

[Luminesa]

That's the point. Trapping women into being forced to continue their pregnancies.

Maybe when people end up dying from botched backalley abortions these pro-birthers will remember why Roe v. Wade came into being, but I doubt it.

I doubt it, too. Hasn't happened in Ireland (home to some of the strictest abortion laws in the world), yet...

In Ireland, 2013, a woman died when denied an abortion when she was miscarrying, because there was still a foetal heartbeat. The heartbeat stopped three days later, by which point she was dying with septaecemia.

Five years later, they're just getting round to holding a referendum on liberalising the abortion law this month. I'm not optimistic.

So, I don't think it makes any difference to pro-lifers -- so-called -- if women die in back-alley abortions, or due to retained miscarriages, or as a result of suicide because they can't bear continuing with the pregnancy.

After all, if a woman wants an abortion, she's obviously just a slut. /s

You’re making quite a few assumptions about what the opposing side cares about. I used to be that way, then I listened to the other side. As a result, while my core ideals have not changed, they have expanded to include working against societal problems that lead to abortion. Feminism and the pro-life movement don’t have to oppose each other, after all. While I cannot speak for every pro-lifer, it’s rather elementary to suggest that the other side “just doesn’t care”. It’s how we get people like Donald Trump or (almost) Hillary Clinton elected into office.

[The Alma Mater]

I doubt it, too. Hasn't happened in Ireland (home to some of the strictest abortion laws in the world), yet...

In Ireland, 2013, a woman died when denied an abortion when she was miscarrying, because there was still a foetal heartbeat. The heartbeat stopped three days later, by which point she was dying with septaecemia.

Five years later, they're just getting round to holding a referendum on liberalising the abortion law this month. I'm not optimistic.

So, I don't think it makes any difference to pro-lifers -- so-called -- if women die in back-alley abortions, or due to retained miscarriages, or as a result of suicide because they can't bear continuing with the pregnancy.

After all, if a woman wants an abortion, she's obviously just a slut. /s

You’re making quite a few assumptions about what the opposing side cares about. I used to be that way, then I listened to the other side. As a result, while my core ideals have not changed, they have expanded to include societal problems that lead to abortion. Feminism and the pro-life movement don’t have to oppose each other, after all. While I cannot speak for every pro-lifer, it’s rather elementary to suggest that the other side “just doesn’t care”. It’s how we get people like Donald Trump or (almost) Hillary Clinton elected into office.

This topic is now 460 pages and it is not the first topic on this subject.
Throughout them all the overwhelming majority of pro-life posters has consistently declared to agree with the sentiments The Free Joy State posted.

It is a fair basis for assumption

[Luminesa]

You’re making quite a few assumptions about what the opposing side cares about. I used to be that way, then I listened to the other side. As a result, while my core ideals have not changed, they have expanded to include societal problems that lead to abortion. Feminism and the pro-life movement don’t have to oppose each other, after all. While I cannot speak for every pro-lifer, it’s rather elementary to suggest that the other side “just doesn’t care”. It’s how we get people like Donald Trump or (almost) Hillary Clinton elected into office.

This topic is now 460 pages and it is not the first topic on this subject.
Throughout them all the overwhelming majority of pro-life posters has consistently declared to agree with the sentiments The Free Joy State posted.

It is a fair basis for assumption

...I’ve been on these threads for a couple of their itinerations, I am aware.

Agreed? In what way?

“Just don’t care” is not an assumption that should be made unless you wish to demonize the other side. Demonizing never leads to solutions, only more anger and finger-pointing.

[The Free Joy State]

This topic is now 460 pages and it is not the first topic on this subject.
Throughout them all the overwhelming majority of pro-life posters has consistently declared to agree with the sentiments The Free Joy State posted.

It is a fair basis for assumption

...I’ve been on these threads for a couple of their itinerations, I am aware.

Agreed? In what way?

“Just don’t care” is not an assumption that should be made unless you wish to demonize the other side. Demonizing never leads to solutions, only more anger and finger-pointing.

Edited the offending message (as I am sure that some pro-lifers do care about quality women's healthcare provision and better social funding, and all the other things pro-choice advocates also want).

As for agreed, I don't have time to trawl all 460 pages to date, but, a few examples:

Regarding suicide:

https://forum.nationstates.net/viewtopic.php?f=20&t=415543&p=33771139&hilit=suicide#p33771139

Edited later:

Regarding dismissing, minimising, mocking, or not caring about heath risk (this thread only):

https://forum.nationstates.net/viewtopic.php?p=33017269#p33017269
viewtopic.php?f=20&t=415543&p=32800697#p32800697
viewtopic.php?f=20&t=415543&p=32801672#p32801672
viewtopic.php?f=20&t=415543&p=32969322&hilit=danger#p32969322
viewtopic.php?f=20&t=415543&p=32935584&hilit=danger#p32935584
viewtopic.php?f=20&t=415543&p=32851976&hilit=danger#p32851976
viewtopic.php?f=20&t=415543&p=32851359&hilit=danger#p32851359
viewtopic.php?f=20&t=415543&p=32845757&hilit=danger#p32845757
viewtopic.php?f=20&t=415543&p=32248022#p32248022
viewtopic.php?f=20&t=415543&p=32227252#p32227252
viewtopic.php?f=20&t=415543&p=32118114#p32118114
viewtopic.php?f=20&t=415543&p=31973059#p31973059
viewtopic.php?f=20&t=415543&p=31950548#p31950548
viewtopic.php?f=20&t=415543&p=33770610&hilit=health#p33770610

Regarding minimising, dismissing or not caring about back-alley abortions (this thread only):

https://forum.nationstates.net/viewtopic.php?f=20&t=415543&p=33017527#p33017527
viewtopic.php?f=20&t=415543&p=32939656&hilit=back+alley#p32939656
viewtopic.php?f=20&t=415543&p=33017497#p33017497
viewtopic.php?f=20&t=415543&p=33009851#p33009851
viewtopic.php?f=20&t=415543&p=31957521#p31957521

I can't think how I came to my conclusions...

... Notwithstanding prominent conservative personalities sporting T-Shirts reading "Birth control is for sluts", Republicans in Georgia trying to criminalise miscarriage, and this list of statements by prominent pro-lifers outside of NS.

Nope. I'm stumped.

[The New California Republic]

-Snip-

As an aside, looking through all those highlighted quotes has made me realize the sheer number of contributors to this thread that are now ex nations...

But back to topic. I still cannot get the idea out of my head that the whole "detectable heartbeat" criteria is just a underhanded ploy to prevent as many abortions as possible, as I am sure that the people behind this know that it is common for women to find out they are pregnant either on or very close to the six week stage, leaving very little time (if any) for the woman to make a decision.

[The V O I D]

This law in Iowa needs to be stopped, hard.

Seriously, this is such a blatant violation of Roe v. Wade and other abortion-related decisions by SCOTUS that it physically hurts to know about it.

[Hurdergaryp]

This law in Iowa needs to be stopped, hard.

Seriously, this is such a blatant violation of Roe v. Wade and other abortion-related decisions by SCOTUS that it physically hurts to know about it.

Which is exactly why it was written. Hardcore trolling, it is not just an online affair anymore.

[The New California Republic]

This law in Iowa needs to be stopped, hard.

Seriously, this is such a blatant violation of Roe v. Wade and other abortion-related decisions by SCOTUS that it physically hurts to know about it.

The limit on abortions is usually around the 24 week mark, so to cut it from 24 down to just six is a cynical attempt to impose a ban on abortions in everything but name. The back alley clothes hanger clinics in Iowa will be making a very unfortunate return.

[The V O I D]

This law in Iowa needs to be stopped, hard.

Seriously, this is such a blatant violation of Roe v. Wade and other abortion-related decisions by SCOTUS that it physically hurts to know about it.

Which is exactly why it was written. Hardcore trolling, it is not just an online affair anymore.

Maybe if we counter by trying to outlaw life support, the pro-lifers will turn their attention away from abortion long enough to make it so shit like this doesn't fly anymore.

This law in Iowa needs to be stopped, hard.

Seriously, this is such a blatant violation of Roe v. Wade and other abortion-related decisions by SCOTUS that it physically hurts to know about it.

The limit on abortions is usually around the 24 week mark, so to cut it from 24 down to just six is a cynical attempt to impose a ban on abortions in everything but name. The back alley clothes hanger clinics in Iowa will be making a very unfortunate return.

Iowa needs to be stopped. Too bad that the pro-lifers don't realize that this is a threat to Iowan women's lives, which just ends in more fetus deaths anyway. So very counterintuitive.

[Hurdergaryp]

Which is exactly why it was written. Hardcore trolling, it is not just an online affair anymore.

Maybe if we counter by trying to outlaw life support, the pro-lifers will turn their attention away from abortion long enough to make it so shit like this doesn't fly anymore.

You could make a compelling argument that life support is utterly blasphemous, keeping souls away from their divine judgement.

[The Free Joy State]

Maybe if we counter by trying to outlaw life support, the pro-lifers will turn their attention away from abortion long enough to make it so shit like this doesn't fly anymore.

You could make a compelling argument that life support is utterly blasphemous, keeping souls away from their divine judgement.

You could argue the same about any medical intervention. Arguably, if someone believes abortion is "against God's will", they shouldn't have any medical treatment should they fall ill. How dare they question God's divine plan that they be sick?

Of course, some fundie-types do believe that. I'm reminded of the case of a father who was prosecuted (for manslaughter IIRC) when he prayed over his dying daughter rather than call an ambulance because "god would heal her".

But that's by-the-by. Most pro-lifers wouldn't flinch at seeing a doctor if they were unwell, or at risk of death.

[Tobleste]

Honestly, I support the bill. It also gives women a deadline to have an abortion or not. So, six weeks of thinking it over should, at least in my head, be plenty of time to decide.

It is fairly common for women to still be unaware they are pregnant even at the six week stage, it is far too small a window to obtain an abortion if needed, far too small.

That's the point. This law isn't for the pregnant women, its to effectively stop abortions.

[Tobleste]

Iowa needs to be stopped. Too bad that the pro-lifers don't care that this is a threat to Iowan women's lives, which just ends in more fetus deaths anyway. So exactly as planned.

Ftfy.

[The New California Republic]

Iowa needs to be stopped. Too bad that the pro-lifers don't care that this is a threat to Iowan women's lives, which just ends in more fetus deaths anyway. So exactly as planned.

Ftfy.

Just a heads up, it is helpful to put any changes in bold, underlined, or in italics, as otherwise you might open yourself up to accusations of malicious quote editing etc. I know that isn't the case here, but just something to be aware of.

/Not a mod.

[Tobleste]

Ftfy.

Just a heads up, it is helpful to put any changes in bold, underlined, or in italics, as otherwise you might open yourself up to accusations of malicious quote editing etc. I know that isn't the case here, but just something to be aware of.

/Not a mod.

Thanks for the warning. I added in the bold just in case.