NSG Senate Lobby: What Does Marcellus Wallace Look Like?

[Heraklea-]

TLDR. Honestly though, I'm a Jew. Arguments from the Catholic Church have little sway with me.

"But have you read it? Do you like how it is written?"

What part of "Too Long Didn't Read" did you not understand? I skimmed it and in all honesty it is the same drivel that I always see out of the anti-choice crowd, and predicates on an assumption of life beginning at conception which I don't agree with. Life begins at birth, with the first draw of breath unaided by the mother.

[Murkwood]

"But have you read it? Do you like how it is written?"

What part of "Too Long Didn't Read" did you not understand? I skimmed it and in all honesty it is the same drivel that I always see out of the anti-choice crowd, and predicates on an assumption of life beginning at conception which I don't agree with. Life begins at birth, with the first draw of breath unaided by the mother.

"I'm glad to see Senators are so interested in Civic affairs."

[Heraklea-]

What part of "Too Long Didn't Read" did you not understand? I skimmed it and in all honesty it is the same drivel that I always see out of the anti-choice crowd, and predicates on an assumption of life beginning at conception which I don't agree with. Life begins at birth, with the first draw of breath unaided by the mother.

"I'm glad to see Senators are so interested in Civic affairs."

Oh I am interested. But the Episcopal Conference is neither my constituency nor my conscience. What they have to say on the matter is of no interest to me.

[The New World Oceania]

What part of "Too Long Didn't Read" did you not understand? I skimmed it and in all honesty it is the same drivel that I always see out of the anti-choice crowd, and predicates on an assumption of life beginning at conception which I don't agree with. Life begins at birth, with the first draw of breath unaided by the mother.

"I'm glad to see Senators are so interested in Civic affairs."

Let's be OOCly honest, here: it's downright rather asinine to write 6,000 word legislation. Often, it's merely poor writing and not attention to detail that results in such long-winded bills, and writing a twenty-page act is a sure fire way to get full support from your side of the aisle and full opposition from the other side without any consideration to content.

Journalism, on the other hand as I believe this is what the document in question is, ought to be even shorter. The writer and only the writer is at fault when their work is considered too lengthy to bother reviewing.

[Great Nepal]

"I'm glad to see Senators are so interested in Civic affairs."

Let's be OOCly honest, here: it's downright rather asinine to write 6,000 word legislation. Often, it's merely poor writing and not attention to detail that results in such long-winded bills, and writing a twenty-page act is a sure fire way to get full support from your side of the aisle and full opposition from the other side without any consideration to content.

OOC: Actually more often than not it is because of the subject matter and tackling the entire issue on high level rather than trying to chip away at it - which wastes time and frankly requires more effort than writing single 6000 word legislation that covers legislations on one entire department, allows subordinate legislations and establishes process.
You could write a bill that legalizes abortion, then write bill that guarantees freedom of speech, another one that guarantees freedom of religion and so on for all other rights or you could write one massive bill of right that deals with all freedoms, conditions etc. Latter is quite often simpler than former; if someone doesn't have time to read all of it they can just ask for summary of important points.

[Lucasaer]

Here the new TNLP logo

I like the flag logo from SYRIZA and also added an orange flag

[Lucasaer]

Aaand my newest poster.

[Unicario]

Don't we have a rule against advertising in the Lobby? ._.

[Lucasaer]

Don't we have a rule against advertising in the Lobby? ._.

Sorry if is not allowed. But I don't see any rule against that

[The Nihilistic view]

Don't we have a rule against advertising in the Lobby? ._.

No. Not anymore, it was in a bill in previous senates. But we have not passed such a bill and I don't think we will ICly. Of course it's banned in the chamber ICly unless it has something to do with debate or PMQs. But why should we have a rule about people discussing politics in the lobby? If you think about it is is a rather odd thing to do to stop politicians talking politics and showing each other material. It was just about the most nonsensical rule of the whole senate in Aurentina.

[Kralta]

We would probably curtail it if it got out of control, but for now, it's not really at the top of the to do list.

[Gothmogs]

Aye.

Placing a 24 week limit could prevent younger women and teens from having an abortion if they don't find out they're pregnant before the limit. Often times it doesn't cross their minds that they could be pregnant, so they'll find out much later when they start to really show the signs of pregnancy. Forcing unwanted babies to be born is horrible to the mother, and the baby.

...

24 weeks is 6 months pregnant

This is 24 weeks pregnant.

You're going to notice you're pregnant a long time before then. Not to mention you always take a pregnancy test if your boyfriend finished in the wrong place and morning after pills are no longer an option, and you'd anyway know at least after 4 weeks, seeing as you'd have missed a period.

This is why I specifically mentioned young teens. We like to think we're invincible, nothing like that could ever happen to us. Women can miss periods without being pregnant, and many will just shrug it off as a fluke or attribute it to other things, giving no further thought towards the matter until it's too late. There was a women a while back who gave birth to a child in her toilet, and never even knew she was pregnant. Not everyone gets large when they are carrying, and some people assume they're just gaining weight. Making the claim that women will always know is just silly, because it isn't true.

[Arkolon]

...

24 weeks is 6 months pregnant

This is 24 weeks pregnant.

You're going to notice you're pregnant a long time before then. Not to mention you always take a pregnancy test if your boyfriend finished in the wrong place and morning after pills are no longer an option, and you'd anyway know at least after 4 weeks, seeing as you'd have missed a period.

This is why I specifically mentioned young teens. We like to think we're invincible, nothing like that could ever happen to us. Women can miss periods without being pregnant, and many will just shrug it off as a fluke or attribute it to other things, giving no further thought towards the matter until it's too late. There was a women a while back who gave birth to a child in her toilet, and never even knew she was pregnant. Not everyone gets large when they are carrying, and some people assume they're just gaining weight. Making the claim that women will always know is just silly, because it isn't true.

It's pretty hard to miss signs of pregnancy, the clearest of signs being, of course, a huge bulge in your belly, as well as cramps, nausea, et al. The issue here is dilation and evacuation abortions, which are simply inhumane. These can easily be avoided, and women can always get their abortion one week, two weeks, or twenty-three weeks since fertilisation. It's not a problem, until it reaches the legal limit. If the woman's life is at risk, then the baby should be removed at her request.

[Atlanticatia]

This is why I specifically mentioned young teens. We like to think we're invincible, nothing like that could ever happen to us. Women can miss periods without being pregnant, and many will just shrug it off as a fluke or attribute it to other things, giving no further thought towards the matter until it's too late. There was a women a while back who gave birth to a child in her toilet, and never even knew she was pregnant. Not everyone gets large when they are carrying, and some people assume they're just gaining weight. Making the claim that women will always know is just silly, because it isn't true.

It's pretty hard to miss signs of pregnancy, the clearest of signs being, of course, a huge bulge in your belly, as well as cramps, nausea, et al. The issue here is dilation and evacuation abortions, which are simply inhumane. These can easily be avoided, and women can always get their abortion one week, two weeks, or twenty-three weeks since fertilisation. It's not a problem, until it reaches the legal limit. If the woman's life is at risk, then the baby should be removed at her request.

There a range of other factors at hand too - for example, a woman's partner might leave her at 24 weeks, she might lose financial support, or she might decide that she can't go through with it because it's mentally stressful.

If there is a 24-wk restriction it should have exceptions for: mental health, physical health, rape, incest, life of the mother, complications in pregnancy, and social problems.

But very, very few (less than 2%) of abortions occur after 24 weeks. That's why I think it is best left to a woman and her doctor -- it is so rare that I don't think it is necessary to place an arbitrary restriction on.

[Arkolon]

It's pretty hard to miss signs of pregnancy, the clearest of signs being, of course, a huge bulge in your belly, as well as cramps, nausea, et al. The issue here is dilation and evacuation abortions, which are simply inhumane. These can easily be avoided, and women can always get their abortion one week, two weeks, or twenty-three weeks since fertilisation. It's not a problem, until it reaches the legal limit. If the woman's life is at risk, then the baby should be removed at her request.

There a range of other factors at hand too - for example, a woman's partner might leave her at 24 weeks, she might lose financial support, or she might decide that she can't go through with it because it's mentally stressful.

If there is a 24-wk restriction it should have exceptions for: mental health, physical health, rape, incest, life of the mother, complications in pregnancy, and social problems.

But very, very few (less than 2%) of abortions occur after 24 weeks. That's why I think it is best left to a woman and her doctor -- it is so rare that I don't think it is necessary to place an arbitrary restriction on.

Would a woman that would give birth tomorrow be allowed to abort her baby today? What about an hour before? What about two minutes before?

[Gothmogs]

This is why I specifically mentioned young teens. We like to think we're invincible, nothing like that could ever happen to us. Women can miss periods without being pregnant, and many will just shrug it off as a fluke or attribute it to other things, giving no further thought towards the matter until it's too late. There was a women a while back who gave birth to a child in her toilet, and never even knew she was pregnant. Not everyone gets large when they are carrying, and some people assume they're just gaining weight. Making the claim that women will always know is just silly, because it isn't true.

It's pretty hard to miss signs of pregnancy, the clearest of signs being, of course, a huge bulge in your belly, as well as cramps, nausea, et al. The issue here is dilation and evacuation abortions, which are simply inhumane. These can easily be avoided, and women can always get their abortion one week, two weeks, or twenty-three weeks since fertilisation. It's not a problem, until it reaches the legal limit. If the woman's life is at risk, then the baby should be removed at her request.

I'm pretty sure I just pointed out that some people miss the signs of pregnancy anyway. You didn't address anything I said. And I'm not sure how this is inhumane.

[Arkolon]

It's pretty hard to miss signs of pregnancy, the clearest of signs being, of course, a huge bulge in your belly, as well as cramps, nausea, et al. The issue here is dilation and evacuation abortions, which are simply inhumane. These can easily be avoided, and women can always get their abortion one week, two weeks, or twenty-three weeks since fertilisation. It's not a problem, until it reaches the legal limit. If the woman's life is at risk, then the baby should be removed at her request.

I'm pretty sure I just pointed out that some people miss the signs of pregnancy anyway. You didn't address anything I said. And I'm not sure how this is inhumane.

I was going to use lmgtfy, but this isn't something you should use google images for.

[Gothmogs]

I'm pretty sure I just pointed out that some people miss the signs of pregnancy anyway. You didn't address anything I said. And I'm not sure how this is inhumane.

I was going to use lmgtfy, but this isn't something you should use google images for.

Wow. Isn't there a better way to do late stage abortions? Alternate methods?

[Arkolon]

I was going to use lmgtfy, but this isn't something you should use google images for.

Wow. Isn't there a better way to do late stage abortions? Alternate methods?

After around 6 months, D&E is the only way to abort.

[Gothmogs]

Wow. Isn't there a better way to do late stage abortions? Alternate methods?

After around 6 months, D&E is the only way to abort.

Can't the foetus be removed and terminated through a c-section?

[The Nihilistic view]

After around 6 months, D&E is the only way to abort.

Can't the foetus be removed and terminated through a c-section?

If you are going to have a C-Section after 24 weeks you might as well have the state take control of the baby and try and let is survive in intensive care.

[Dejanic]

After around 6 months, D&E is the only way to abort.

Can't the foetus be removed and terminated through a c-section?

At 6 months you could remove the child and it could survive, with support. Why would you go through the trouble of removing the child through C-section, and then kill it? When it could stay alive and be put up for adoption. That would actually be murder you know.

[The New World Oceania]

There a range of other factors at hand too - for example, a woman's partner might leave her at 24 weeks, she might lose financial support, or she might decide that she can't go through with it because it's mentally stressful.

If there is a 24-wk restriction it should have exceptions for: mental health, physical health, rape, incest, life of the mother, complications in pregnancy, and social problems.

But very, very few (less than 2%) of abortions occur after 24 weeks. That's why I think it is best left to a woman and her doctor -- it is so rare that I don't think it is necessary to place an arbitrary restriction on.

Would a woman that would give birth tomorrow be allowed to abort her baby today? What about an hour before? What about two minutes before?

As a casual AJOG reader I'll note that there are various cases and procedures in which and by which one might do so (partial birth and MOLD come to mind), but the point eventually comes that no doctor who's taken their Hippocratic Oath is going to perform an abortion — that means, say, a day before childbirth. At that point it's killing a fully developed fetus (objectively a child) and performing a ceserean section to remove the corpse. That late in someone might as well give birth of their life isn't at risk. There are almost always situations where the reason is present, but I've never heard of an actual occurrence where a doctor wouldn't say "the child is now developed, give birth."

But anything's possible in medicine.

[Gothmogs]

Can't the foetus be removed and terminated through a c-section?

If you are going to have a C-Section after 24 weeks you might as well have the state take control of the baby and try and let is survive in intensive care.

Why? There are enough unwanted babies already. I wouldn't want to force that life on anyone.

[Britanno]

But very, very few (less than 2%) of abortions occur after 24 weeks.

Why are you not getting this? If people think life starts at 24 weeks, then they are going to see abortion after that (except in certain circumstances) as killing. If we killed off 2% of the population, would you be bothered? Of course. You need to stop misunderstanding your opposition and start arguing why life doesn't begin at that stage. Until you do that, you're going to keep going in circles.