- Apr 1, 2009
- 14,981
- 3,843
- 118
- Gender
- Whatever, just wash your hands.
Because they really just want to ban abortions but they legally can't. So this is something sciency sounding that allows them to get as close as possible.
Texas v abortion
- Thread starter Trunkage
- Start date
I personally do it based on viability. I.e. if it cant survive in a NICU. The Roe v Wade I think was 24 weeks
It matches well with the stats. 90ish% of abortions happen before the 20th week and 95ish% after 20 weeks is due to medical reasons. Some of the other 5 is dealing with rape cases. So late term 'emergency birth contol' isn't really a thing
I also don't want to punish people who do the right thing, use birth control, and then it fails.
I'd also prefer that proper sex education in schools be a thing so young people don't HAVE to be put into such stupid predicaments due to their parents getting offended about sex. But it's Texas. They get offended at the drop of a hat over a purple flag
It's an appeal to emotion. "They want to murder that poor defenseless baby! Listen to its heartbeat!"
Man, they could have done 12 weeks when fetal heartbeat could happen at its earliest and maybe convince me.
They just picked a random number and slap a name on it
Texas did that. It was law. The problem is most abortions happen before a heartbeat happens. It failed
- Apr 1, 2009
- 14,981
- 3,843
- 118
- Gender
- Whatever, just wash your hands.
As I said, this isn't about trying to be moral with abortions, this is about just trying to get rid of them. Why do you think they have an easily exploitable 10k lawsuit thing where random people can sue anyone who even as much as gives a thumbs up to someone getting an abortion.
Well, I don't know how impactful a late term abortion is to the body, along with all the hormones and stress running through your body by that point. I mean, my sister is in her 9th month right now, and she went through some heavy physical stress, so I don't know how perfectly fine I would be with someone waiting that long and suffering through that much until finally getting an abortion. It would be medically advised to get an abortion before the pregnancy starts to really put a strain on the body. It's still obviously their choice and nobody else's, but putting your body through all that only to have an abortion at the tail end feels a bit odd. But then I don't think this is at all something that the vast majority of people would ever do if they wouldn't want a baby, so I don't feel this whole "line" thing would even need to be discussed.
Just to be clear, I'm not advocating a ban on late term abortions in any way (unless non consensual obviously). I'm saying that if we take the unlikely scenario of someone suffering from an unwanted pregnancy waiting 7 or 8 months to abort it I would raise an eyebrow.
I hope I sorta made sense here.
Sounds like the police state socialist commies the texans were looking for were themselves and the friends they made along the way.
If you're pre-born, you're fine. If you're post born, you're fucked.
-George Carlin
Just piggybacking off this...
Is it not for a random person who hasn't been injured by a situation to be able to bring a case to court in the US?
Not normally, but they can now. It's the law
"Established norms" only matter if you play by the "rules" and there's somebody willing to enforce it. In actuality, power is all that matters
- Apr 1, 2009
- 14,981
- 3,843
- 118
- Gender
- Whatever, just wash your hands.
No, there is something called standing where you have to show that you are an injured party to be able to bring suit, its like when tx tried to sue another state over election stuff. It had no standing since tx can't mess with another states election process.
Maybe. This is going to be one of those things where it will almost certainly end up in front of the supreme court one way or another once lawsuits start going out since its super weird to allow random people to file suit against others. Also it seems really exploitable so it might end up being one of those laws that just isn't enforced or enough of a shitshow that it gets repealed quickly.
We've got a 6-3 Supreme Court and relying on them is relying on having two of the six not being partisan political agents. I'm not hopeful
But like the Ye Olde Sodomy Laws or the brand spanking new Stand Your Ground Laws, the only people being hurt by them are going to be people that conservatives in charge *want* to hurt
- Apr 1, 2009
- 14,981
- 3,843
- 118
- Gender
- Whatever, just wash your hands.
Oh, I'm not talking about the abortion part, I'm talking about the "random people being able to sue" part. Cause that is super weird and will certainly turn courts into circuses. Not even a conservative majority could possibly see that as a good idea. In fact, I'll bet the reason they didn't want to see it is because that part of the bill is indefensible.
You have way more faith than I do. I remember the 50 2020 election cases. It's been a circus for a long time and they haven't really shown any desire to maintain their integrity
- Apr 1, 2009
- 14,981
- 3,843
- 118
- Gender
- Whatever, just wash your hands.
All of those except like 2 were thrown out. Most for being bullshit, but some before they could even be classified by the court as bullshit, some for standing.
I really do think we will see one or two test suits then it will either go away or become a huge shitshow.
Wouldn't surprise me if it was meant to provide a "chilling action". "Don't provide abortions, don't even help someone find one, don't even speak out in favor of them, or we'll find people willing to sue you into the ground."
Last edited:
- Apr 1, 2009
- 14,981
- 3,843
- 118
- Gender
- Whatever, just wash your hands.
Yeah that is totally what its about. I mean the supreme court literally has to rule on this since enforcement is being done in such a weird way. The law doesn't outlaw abortions, it just makes it so anyone can sue anyone who assists in anyway someone getting one and they would be entitled to at least $10k. This is really fucken weird and it seems like it opens the door to make all sorts of laws that aren't enforced by government officials, but by citizens acting against each other. I mean if this one stands, it wouldn't be hard for New York to pass a bill that allows someone to sue someone else for concealed carry or something like that.