Jump to content
IGNORED

Gilead is Real - The War on Women and Abortion Part 3


GreyhoundFan
 Share

Recommended Posts

It seems like things are getting worse daily. Between rethugs already bringing up a national ban on abortion to a 10 year old rape victim being victimized again by the state and reich wing media.

Continued from here:

 

"GOP lawmaker: Womb has ‘no specific purpose’ to a woman’s ‘life or well-being’"

Quote

As millions of Americans protest restrictions that preclude abortions, even when the life of a woman is at risk, Montana state Rep. Brad Tschida (R) is arguing that a woman’s womb “serves no specific purpose to her life or well-being.”

Tschida, a former Montana House majority leader who is running for the state Senate, wrote an email this week to more than 100 legislators citing a podcast featuring a woman who is an antiabortion advocate, according to the Daily Montanan.

“The womb is the only organ in a woman’s body that serves no specific purpose to her life or well-being,” Tschida wrote on Monday, according to MTN News, the first to report the news. “It is truly a sanctuary.”

The false claim goes against long-accepted science surrounding the pear-shaped organ and how it helps in women’s reproductive health and function. The uterus plays a critical role not just in the growth and development of a fetus during pregnancy but also menstruation and fertility. Conditions and diseases of the uterus can cause painful symptoms that require medical treatment, according to the Cleveland Clinic.

Tschida’s remarks were met by backlash from Democrats who accused the lawmaker of holding “antiquated, and frankly offensive beliefs.” Among those critics was state Rep. Willis Curdy (D), Tschida’s state Senate opponent, who decried the comments as “absolutely ludicrous and flat-out creepy.”

“He is literally telling women what is and isn’t theirs and what they can and cannot do with their bodies,” Curdy tweeted.

But Tschida, who did not immediately respond to a request for comment early Friday, doubled down on his remarks to local media, and pointed to a comment from the antiabortion activist in the podcast episode he had referenced: There is only one organ in a woman’s body “that is not there to serve a purpose for her and that is her womb.”

“I’m not going to apologize for saying that,” Tschida told MTN. “I think that’s exactly what it’s there for. It welcomes in a new life and that’s what it’s there to do, to nurture and sustain that life.”

The Republican’s comments come as the country continues to navigate through the first weeks of a post-Roe landscape — a stretch dominated by protests, lawsuits, court rulings and a man’s arrest in the case of a 10-year-old rape victim in Ohio who traveled to Indiana for an abortion. Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton (R) announced Thursday that he was suing the Biden administration over federal rules that require abortions be provided in medical emergencies to save the life of the mother, even in states with near-total bans. The lawsuit follows new guidance from the Department of Health and Human Services that asserted federal law requiring emergency medical treatment supersedes any state restrictions on abortion in cases where the pregnant patient’s life or health is at risk.

While abortion remains legal for now in Montana due to protections in the state constitution, Gov. Greg Gianforte (R) has said previously that he would call a special legislative session on abortion if Roe was overturned. As Gianforte joined other Republicans on June 24 in celebrating what he called “a historic win for life, families, and science,” the governor tweeted that he was “in discussions with legislative leaders on next steps as we work to protect life in Montana.” Any legislative change to end the abortion protections would require a voter-approved amendment.

image.png.e89f20a7999711f7285bd6e325fe7a72.png

Tschida, who has represented Missoula in the state House since 2015, is running for a state Senate seat in a district that Democrats narrowly won in the previous two elections. The seat has been held by Democratic state Sen. Diane Sands, an outspoken advocate for women’s reproductive rights who recently spoke at a White House roundtable discussion on abortion access with Vice President Harris. Sands’s term ends next year.

In an email sent Monday to legislators, Tschida referenced an episode of a podcast featuring a professor who supported abortion rights debating with a woman who held antiabortion beliefs. Although Tschida told local media that he did not recall the name of the podcast, the Republican noted how the professor asked his antiabortion guest whether a woman should have to “sacrifice her organs because someone else told her to do so.” After thinking on the question, Tschida wrote, the woman expressed her opinion that “the womb is a place set aside for another person who arrives as a result of a choice of a man and a woman to procreate.”

“That single factor has struck me since I heard that commentary,” Tschida wrote.

The Republican told the Daily Montanan that the message he took away from the uterus exchange was comparable to a time he saw a doe fend off birds of prey from eating her dead fawn.

“We’ve got a mother that’s a wild animal that’s trying to protect her offspring who’s already dead, but we don’t have the same concern generally speaking for unborn in humanity,” he said. “I thought that was a pretty interesting parallel or dynamic.”

The Republican argued that voters cared about other issues more than abortion — such as inflation, the high cost of gas and election security — and that his views on women’s rights and their bodies would not be a factor in the November election.

“I’ve told people what I believe. I’ve told them how I would vote,” he said to the newspaper. “That’s up to the individuals.”

 

  • Disgust 1
  • WTF 4
  • Thank You 8
Link to comment
Share on other sites

image.png.23eed4b93c25d841bdd055f36c2bd03d.png

  • Sad 5
  • I Agree 6
Link to comment
Share on other sites

"Texas conservatives have a plan to get around DAs who won't enforce abortion laws"

Quote

Soon after the Supreme Court voted to overturn Roe v. Wade, dozens of prosecutors nationwide — including at least five in Texas, representing some of the state's most populous counties — declared they would not pursue charges against people who seek or provide abortions.

In response, a group of conservative Texas legislators have hatched a plan to circumvent those local district attorneys: allow prosecutors from other parts of the state to enforce the laws for them.

"The legislation that we will introduce next session will empower district attorneys from throughout the state to prosecute abortion-related crimes ... when the local district attorney fails or refuses to do so," wrote Rep. Mayes Middleton, chairman of the Texas Freedom Caucus, in a letter sent last week to a law firm he accused of aiding illegal abortions.

The idea has been circulating since at least March, after the Texas Supreme Court shut down the final challenge to S.B. 8 — the state bill that effectively banned most abortions even before Roe was overturned by deputizing private citizens to sue anybody who provided an abortion, or helped a woman seek one.

"Abortion funds think they can flout the law because a local district attorney refuses to bring charges. We'll fix this problem next session," said Republican state Rep. Briscoe Cain that month, when he announced he would introduce the bill.

Cain did not respond to a request for comment.

A prosecutor from Lubbock could press charges in Austin

If Cain's proposal passes, it would be another highly unusual modification to the traditional criminal justice system in Texas, following in the footsteps of S.B. 8, which used its private lawsuit mechanism to sidestep the Roe-era constitutionality issues of an outright criminal ban.

"It's an example of the same kind of tactical ethos on the part of the Republican Party, which is, 'We're just going to rewrite the playbook,' " said Jennifer Laurin, a professor at the University of Texas Law School.

In almost every state, including Texas, prosecutors are elected by people who live in their area of jurisdiction. If voters don't like how a prosecutor has chosen to pursue some types of crime over others — like police prosecutions, marijuana offenses, or immigration-related crimes — they can vote differently next time.

Prosecutors elected by Democratic majorities in Dallas, San Antonio and Austin have already said they will not pursue abortion-related charges.

"I don't want women who live in our community suffering or dying at home because they're too scared to go to the doctor and get the medical attention that they need," said Travis County District Attorney José Garza last week in an interview with NPR.

Garza says he sees more pressing issues in his county, which includes Austin, like working to reduce gun violence. "To pool resources away from that work to pursue this kind of political prosecution would destabilize our community and make it less safe," he said.

Cain's proposal would allow such prosecutions to go ahead anyway, no matter what local voters may prefer.

If it passes, an abortion fund based in Austin — where Joe Biden won 72% of the vote in 2020 — could be prosecuted by a district attorney from Lubbock, where Trump won with 65%. Austin voters may be unhappy, but they would have no recourse in any subsequent Lubbock County election.

In an interview last month with Dallas TV station WFAA, a reporter raised this question directly to Cain. Wouldn't the proposal, the reporter asked, "essentially overturn, or move out of the way, a duly elected official?"

"I guess that's how it would work. That's the idea," Cain replied. "And we're gonna go for it."

Texas conservatives say they are not done targeting abortion

Abortions in Texas have already come to a halt. After S.B. 8 went into effect last year, abortions fell by more than 60%. Now that Roe v. Wade has been overturned, a near-total ban on abortion from 1925 is back in effect. Abortion providers in the state say they have ceased providing abortion services.

Still, conservative lawmakers say they are not done targeting abortion rights.

Along with Cain's district attorney proposal, the Texas Freedom Caucus has prepared a raft of other legislation, including a bill that would impose criminal penalties on employers for covering elective abortions in their health insurance. Another would allow private citizens to sue anyone who pays for a Texas resident to receive an abortion out of state.

The passage of the DA proposal is not guaranteed. In Texas, the state legislature is not scheduled to convene until January 2023. Barring a special legislative session before then, lawmakers must wait until then to introduce the bill, which then must be approved by both legislative chambers.

Another factor is November's gubernatorial election. If voters re-elect Gov. Greg Abbott, a fiercely anti-abortion Republican, he may be likely to sign the bill. But his Democratic challenger, Beto O'Rourke, has vowed to veto any such legislation.

It's not certain the proposal would be legal in Texas

It's also not clear whether the district attorney legislation could survive legal scrutiny.

Texas has a strong tradition of localized prosecution, Laurin said, pointing to a 2021 decision by Texas's highest criminal court that found the Texas attorney general could not prosecute election law offenses without the explicit approval of local prosecutors. It is "plausible," she said, that a court could rule similarly about non-local prosecutors.

Garza, the Travis County DA, was more confident. "The Texas Court of Criminal Appeals, the highest court in the state of Texas for criminal cases, and the Texas Constitution are incredibly clear that the only entity that has authority to pursue prosecutions in a community is the office of the district attorney, locally elected by the people," he said.

But the most clear and direct way to challenge such a law would be to wait for a non-local prosecutor to file charges, and then for the defendant to make the argument in court that the charges should be dismissed, Laurin said.

With a felony conviction and jail time on the line, few potential defendants may be willing to take the risk.

 

  • WTF 6
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, GreyhoundFan said:
"Texas conservatives have a plan to get around DAs who won't enforce abortion laws"
Quote
Soon after the Supreme Court voted to overturn Roe v. Wade, dozens of prosecutors nationwide — including at least five in Texas, representing some of the state's most populous counties — declared they would not pursue charges against people who seek or provide abortions.
In response, a group of conservative Texas legislators have hatched a plan to circumvent those local district attorneys: allow prosecutors from other parts of the state to enforce the laws for them.
"The legislation that we will introduce next session will empower district attorneys from throughout the state to prosecute abortion-related crimes ... when the local district attorney fails or refuses to do so," wrote Rep. Mayes Middleton, chairman of the Texas Freedom Caucus, in a letter sent last week to a law firm he accused of aiding illegal abortions.
The idea has been circulating since at least March, after the Texas Supreme Court shut down the final challenge to S.B. 8 — the state bill that effectively banned most abortions even before Roe was overturned by deputizing private citizens to sue anybody who provided an abortion, or helped a woman seek one.
"Abortion funds think they can flout the law because a local district attorney refuses to bring charges. We'll fix this problem next session," said Republican state Rep. Briscoe Cain that month, when he announced he would introduce the bill.
Cain did not respond to a request for comment.
A prosecutor from Lubbock could press charges in Austin
If Cain's proposal passes, it would be another highly unusual modification to the traditional criminal justice system in Texas, following in the footsteps of S.B. 8, which used its private lawsuit mechanism to sidestep the Roe-era constitutionality issues of an outright criminal ban.
"It's an example of the same kind of tactical ethos on the part of the Republican Party, which is, 'We're just going to rewrite the playbook,' " said Jennifer Laurin, a professor at the University of Texas Law School.
In almost every state, including Texas, prosecutors are elected by people who live in their area of jurisdiction. If voters don't like how a prosecutor has chosen to pursue some types of crime over others — like police prosecutions, marijuana offenses, or immigration-related crimes — they can vote differently next time.
Prosecutors elected by Democratic majorities in Dallas, San Antonio and Austin have already said they will not pursue abortion-related charges.
"I don't want women who live in our community suffering or dying at home because they're too scared to go to the doctor and get the medical attention that they need," said Travis County District Attorney José Garza last week in an interview with NPR.
Garza says he sees more pressing issues in his county, which includes Austin, like working to reduce gun violence. "To pool resources away from that work to pursue this kind of political prosecution would destabilize our community and make it less safe," he said.
Cain's proposal would allow such prosecutions to go ahead anyway, no matter what local voters may prefer.
If it passes, an abortion fund based in Austin — where Joe Biden won 72% of the vote in 2020 — could be prosecuted by a district attorney from Lubbock, where Trump won with 65%. Austin voters may be unhappy, but they would have no recourse in any subsequent Lubbock County election.
In an interview last month with Dallas TV station WFAA, a reporter raised this question directly to Cain. Wouldn't the proposal, the reporter asked, "essentially overturn, or move out of the way, a duly elected official?"
"I guess that's how it would work. That's the idea," Cain replied. "And we're gonna go for it."
Texas conservatives say they are not done targeting abortion
Abortions in Texas have already come to a halt. After S.B. 8 went into effect last year, abortions fell by more than 60%. Now that Roe v. Wade has been overturned, a near-total ban on abortion from 1925 is back in effect. Abortion providers in the state say they have ceased providing abortion services.
Still, conservative lawmakers say they are not done targeting abortion rights.
Along with Cain's district attorney proposal, the Texas Freedom Caucus has prepared a raft of other legislation, including a bill that would impose criminal penalties on employers for covering elective abortions in their health insurance. Another would allow private citizens to sue anyone who pays for a Texas resident to receive an abortion out of state.
The passage of the DA proposal is not guaranteed. In Texas, the state legislature is not scheduled to convene until January 2023. Barring a special legislative session before then, lawmakers must wait until then to introduce the bill, which then must be approved by both legislative chambers.
Another factor is November's gubernatorial election. If voters re-elect Gov. Greg Abbott, a fiercely anti-abortion Republican, he may be likely to sign the bill. But his Democratic challenger, Beto O'Rourke, has vowed to veto any such legislation.
It's not certain the proposal would be legal in Texas
It's also not clear whether the district attorney legislation could survive legal scrutiny.
Texas has a strong tradition of localized prosecution, Laurin said, pointing to a 2021 decision by Texas's highest criminal court that found the Texas attorney general could not prosecute election law offenses without the explicit approval of local prosecutors. It is "plausible," she said, that a court could rule similarly about non-local prosecutors.
Garza, the Travis County DA, was more confident. "The Texas Court of Criminal Appeals, the highest court in the state of Texas for criminal cases, and the Texas Constitution are incredibly clear that the only entity that has authority to pursue prosecutions in a community is the office of the district attorney, locally elected by the people," he said.
But the most clear and direct way to challenge such a law would be to wait for a non-local prosecutor to file charges, and then for the defendant to make the argument in court that the charges should be dismissed, Laurin said.
With a felony conviction and jail time on the line, few potential defendants may be willing to take the risk.

 

How very fucking dare you? Republicans promised in every hearing this week that they were a fan of letting locals make these decisions for their own people as a part of the democratic process and also that they would never impede a pregnant person’s right to travel for an abortion. You couldn’t be saying they were lying? HOW COULD YOU???

That was sarcasm in case it wasn’t clear. OF COURSE THIS IS WHAT THEY WERE GOING TO DO. Also I am editing to see why the expand link isn’t there in hopes it appears. 

Edited by Destiny
  • Upvote 8
  • I Agree 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, GreyhoundFan said:

The womb is the only organ in a woman’s body that serves no specific purpose to her life or well-being

Using that logic testes serve no purpose either - maybe it's time for men to be regulated around when they are allowed to ejaculate?

  • Love 15
Link to comment
Share on other sites

It would be really nice if actual people who knew shit about the human body were making policy, ‘cause I’m not an expert on the topic but I’m pretty sure that the uterus does more than manage a pregnancy.

I hate it here.

Edited by Destiny
Fixing messed up line breaks.
  • I Agree 13
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, GreyhoundFan said:

It's not certain the proposal would be legal in Texas

 

2 hours ago, GreyhoundFan said:

It's also not clear whether the district attorney legislation could survive legal scrutiny.

Legal or not I'm not entirely sure that it would make a difference. I could see this somehow making it to the US supreme Court and due to the makeup of the US supreme Court I can see them ruling that it is perfectly fine to use this as a workaround DAs who they don't agree with.

I sure wish NASA weren't in Texas. 

  • Upvote 6
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Dr. Bernard's attorney sent a cease and desist to that idiot in Indiana

Quote

An attorney for Dr. Caitlin Bernard sent a cease-and-desist letter Friday to Indiana Attorney General Todd Rokita citing comments he made regarding Bernard on Fox News Channel Wednesday night.

"Your false and defamatory statements to Fox News on July 13, 2022, cast Dr. Bernard in a false light and allege misconduct in her profession," Kathleen DeLaney, the attorney representing Bernard, wrote in the letter to Rokita.

A spokesperson for Rokita's office wrote in an email that the letter will be reviewed when it arrives but "no false or misleading statements have been made."

Bernard is an Indianapolis obstetrician-gynecologist who provided care to a 10-year-old rape victim from Ohio. The story garnered international attention after IndyStar wrote about the child.

 

  • Upvote 2
  • Thank You 7
Link to comment
Share on other sites

These anti-abortion fucksticks really are awful people.

Quote

The Indiana doctor who recently provided an abortion to a 10-year-old rape victim whose story has garnered national attention faced serious threats in the past and is named on an extreme anti-abortion website linked to Amy Coney Barrett before she was a supreme court justice.

Dr Caitlin Bernard testified last year, in a case involving abortion restrictions in Indiana, that she was forced to stop providing first-trimester abortions at a clinic in South Bend. She stopped the procedures after she was alerted by Planned Parenthood – who in turn had been alerted by the FBI – that a kidnapping threat had been made against her daughter.

The Guardian reported in January that the names of six abortion providers, as well as their educational backgrounds and places of work, were listed on the website of an extreme anti-abortion group called Right to Life Michiana, in a section of the website titled “Local Abortion Threat”. Bernard was among the list of doctors named on the extremist website.

Barrett, who voted to overturn Roe v Wade last month, signed a two-page advertisement published by the group in 2006, while she was working as a professor at Notre Dame. It stated that those who signed “oppose abortion on demand and defend the right to life from fertilization to natural death”. The second page of the ad called Roe v Wade, the landmark 1973 decision that legalized abortion, “barbaric”. The advertisement was published in the South Bend Tribune by St Joseph County Right to Life, which merged with Right to Life Michiana in 2020.

 

  • Thank You 9
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, 47of74 said:
These anti-abortion fucksticks really are awful people.
Quote
The Indiana doctor who recently provided an abortion to a 10-year-old rape victim whose story has garnered national attention faced serious threats in the past and is named on an extreme anti-abortion website linked to Amy Coney Barrett before she was a supreme court justice.
Dr Caitlin Bernard testified last year, in a case involving abortion restrictions in Indiana, that she was forced to stop providing first-trimester abortions at a clinic in South Bend. She stopped the procedures after she was alerted by Planned Parenthood – who in turn had been alerted by the FBI – that a kidnapping threat had been made against her daughter.
The Guardian reported in January that the names of six abortion providers, as well as their educational backgrounds and places of work, were listed on the website of an extreme anti-abortion group called Right to Life Michiana, in a section of the website titled “Local Abortion Threat”. Bernard was among the list of doctors named on the extremist website.
Barrett, who voted to overturn Roe v Wade last month, signed a two-page advertisement published by the group in 2006, while she was working as a professor at Notre Dame. It stated that those who signed “oppose abortion on demand and defend the right to life from fertilization to natural death”. The second page of the ad called Roe v Wade, the landmark 1973 decision that legalized abortion, “barbaric”. The advertisement was published in the South Bend Tribune by St Joseph County Right to Life, which merged with Right to Life Michiana in 2020.

 

But but but Kavanagh didn’t get dessert and someone put graffiti on a sidewalk. Surely those are the real travesties here??? I know I’m trivialising a bit but I’m so tired of the pearl clutching when shit like this has been a part of life for healthcare providers for 50 years!

Edited by Destiny
  • Upvote 7
  • I Agree 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 7/16/2022 at 6:48 AM, 47of74 said:

She stopped the procedures after she was alerted by Planned Parenthood – who in turn had been alerted by the FBI – that a kidnapping threat had been made against her daughter.

I don’t know the age of her daughter, but I found articles giving Dr. Bernard’s current age as 37, making her 36 at the time of her testimony last year so unless she had her daughter at age 18 or earlier, her daughter would definitely be a minor child. So once again we have people who claim to be wanting to protect human lives but have no shame about threatening a child. Assholes. 

  • Upvote 10
  • I Agree 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

"Louisiana judge will decide whether to keep blocking abortion ban"

Quote

A Louisiana judge on Monday will consider temporarily blocking the state’s trigger laws until a district court determines whether the state’s near-total abortion ban, with no exceptions for rape or incest, violates Louisiana’s constitution.

The legality of abortion in Louisiana has changed rapidly in the weeks since the Supreme Court struck down Roe v. Wade and gave states the power to enact restrictions. The ensuing confusion has left patients and abortion providers scrambling as the courts have blocked, unblocked and the re-blocked the ban.

“We’re still getting a lot of desperate phone calls from women who are angry or sobbing,” said Kathaleen Pittman, who runs an abortion clinic at Hope Medical Group in Shreveport, La. “They seem so totally beaten down because they’ve been trying to access care and, in one moment, it’s available in a few weeks; the next minute, it may not ever be available here.”

Monday’s hearing is the next step in a lawsuit brought by abortion providers who have challenged the state’s trigger laws as “constitutionally vague.” A judge in Baton Rouge will hear arguments on the motion for a preliminary injunction, which would keep the state’s near-total abortion ban from taking effect until a panel of judges rule on the merits of the case, which could take weeks.

The laws “do not clearly determine what conduct has been made illegal and what conduct is allowed,” said Joanna Wright, an attorney representing the abortion providers who are challenging Louisiana’s abortion restrictions. “And the Louisiana state constitution requires that criminal laws provide proper notice of what is and is not illegal.”

Shortly after the Supreme Court’s decision in late June, the plaintiffs sought a temporary restraining order that allowed abortion providers to keep offering services as the case moved forward. That order was granted on June 27 but then dissolved on July 8, when the lawsuit was moved to a different jurisdiction. For a few days, abortion was illegal throughout Louisiana.

Another judge granted a second temporary restraining order last week, again pausing the state’s abortion ban.

“When we were granted the most recent [temporary restraining order] — I don’t know how to describe the staff except for giddy,” Pittman said. “The relief was palpable around here.”

Pittman’s clinic had to halt abortion services when the first restraining order expired on July 8. Physicians continued to meet with prospective patients and offer them counseling, ultrasounds and initial consultations. But patients could not access the procedure while the courts considered the request to temporarily block the ban.

“Some of these women had been waiting weeks, or even months,” Pittman said.

Hope Medical Group had a waiting list of 300 to 500 patients even before the Supreme Court’s decision to roll back the federal protections guaranteed by Roe. Many patients scheduled to have an abortion shortly after the Supreme Court decision had their appointments cancelled as the clinic halted the procedure for several days because of the state’s trigger laws. Some were able to reschedule after the court blocked the trigger ban – but abortions stopped again when the first temporary restraining order expired.

A judge granted a second temporary restraining order and Pittman’s clinic resumed abortions once more on July 14.

“Some of the women we’re seeing today have already had appointments cancelled on them twice now,” Pittman said last Thursday, the first morning that her clinic was able to perform abortions after the second restraining order took effect.

Louisiana Attorney General Jeff Landry has sought to discourage patients from seeking abortions even while the state’s ban is blocked by the courts. On July 14, when some clinics resumed services after the second restraining order went into effect, Landry tweeted out a “reminder.”

“Louisiana's laws banning abortion have not been enjoined,” he wrote. “Subject to certain exceptions, abortion remains a criminal offense in our State! Anyone performing abortions, pending outcome, will be culpable when the case is closed in favor of the laws of our State.”

But legal experts say that criminal laws are not typically applied to actions that took place when those laws were blocked by the courts.

“Most people would tell you there is a real retroactivity problem there,” said Elizabeth Sepper, a professor of law at the University of Texas at Austin. “You can’t apply criminal law that didn’t exist at the time to a provider who was operating under a TRO or a preliminary injunction.”

Landry also criticized the court for temporarily blocking enforcement of the state’s abortion laws that have been supported “at the ballot box and through their elected legislature again and again and again.”

“To have the judiciary create a legal circus is disappointing and what discredits the institutions we rely upon for a stable society,” Landry tweeted shortly after a judge granted the second temporary restraining order. “The rule of law must be followed, and I will not rest until it is. Unfortunately, we will have to wait a little bit longer for that to happen.”

Monday’s hearing will likely decide whether Louisiana’s trigger law that bans abortion will continue to be blocked as the case winds its way through the courts. If the law is not blocked, the state’s three abortion clinics will have to close their doors to patients, Pittman said.

"We absolutely have to have that preliminary injunction,” Pittman said.

 

  • Sad 3
  • Thank You 8
Link to comment
Share on other sites

image.png.f9c2adc39f04bc09a878b33b853f388d.png

  • Upvote 14
  • I Agree 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

This guy is disgusting.

 

  • Disgust 7
  • WTF 8
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, GreyhoundFan said:

This guy is disgusting.

 

As a Minnesota Vikings fan I am so embarrassed Matt Birk played for them.

  • Upvote 4
  • I Agree 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is a good read:

image.png.e00db6baa697acc7f53223bb0a891702.png

 

Remainder of thread is under the spoiler:

Spoiler

image.png.b08e50666c858d1d7cdd55e252633bea.png

image.png.7ea0fba6ffb2a8d9e08eaf3b0a78c7bc.png

image.png.77ed2722448de8a9349446662f1d664e.png

image.png.2ed5a54551554d763914e3e66b7f81c4.png

image.png.451f79665d13d355e43428701175b3a1.png

image.png.31e2ce1e340943c8c625ef3f9e15e100.png

image.png.a2538d56c3fc3531b7a3443d1ee23fbd.png

image.png.3c9603cb1af1e038e1a25094395deecc.png

 

  • Thank You 13
  • Love 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I was just thinking about the woman with the ectopic pregnancy who almost died thanks to the fuckers with the robes (not all but we know who I mean.) My MIL used birth control to limit her pregnancies to two. (She was fortunate enough to not have any miscarriages but sadly for my BIL, she thinks it is okay to talk about how Taco Grande was the perfect pregnancy and birth and how he was the perfect baby and child but BIL meant throwing up all the time, horrible labor, no sleep for months, a toddler who was- well, a regular toddler….. she also has made clear that their dad desperately wanted a girl and while SHE didn’t mind another boy “too much but it would’ve been fun to have a girl to dress up” she always “felt bad” she didn’t give FIL “his baby girl”.) She and FIL, though, are 100% forced birth. I know the two positions can be reconciled but it infuriates me that they are overjoyed by the Dobbs decision but can’t understand that the Thomas dicta pretty much says “oh, and no birth control is coming soon.” But when confronted with a woman who almost died due to an ectopic pregnancy that she may have desperately wanted- may have danced in joy, hugged her partner, called her family and friends, and laid awake at night in excitement thinking about her baby only to not only find out she wouldn’t be able to ever hold that baby but her own life was in danger but because of some lying assholes the best way to keep her safe- hell, even the worst way to keep her safe- wasn’t coming because of fucking politics must have been devastating. That poor, poor woman and all who love her, waiting while she got worse and worse with no help, then put on a breathing tube- all because of raging jackasses who have no clue what it means to be pregnant. Fuck that “pro-life” shit. If she had died (and last I checked she is still alive thank God or whatever or whoever you wish to thank) if I were her family/friends I would have taken her corpse right to the SCOTUS and demanded to be let it. I would have been refused but I would make damn sure I had contacted every press agency possible so when refused I could go full throttle. I said it about the mass gun murders, especially with children who are victims- if it was my child, I would insist on the pictures of the crime scene and the coroner photos being shown next to pictures of you loved one alive, happy, and smiling. Let the ammosexuals face the carnage. In this case, if she consents, let the gory details be released. Let those fuckers know just how close they came to killing a woman for an unviable pregnancy. I know it sounds awful, but I think we need to start putting the bodies of those who die because of their shitty and death cult beliefs literally at their doorsteps. Ron DeSantis wants to be anti-vaxx, anti- mask? Pile up the COVID dead on his doorstep. Ted Cruz, Greg Abbott, and Ken Paxton want to be climate change deniers? Put those who died from the heat right where they will decompose quickly and pungently. Gun fanatic? Hey there, LBo and Loud Marge- how’re you feeling about those guns now that you have a doorstep full of kids caught in crossfire or just innocently attending school when an 18 year old with an assault rifle committed mass murder? Gosh, Mike DeWine and Todd Rokita, are ya feeling kinda queasy about that little girl who was raped twice by a 27 year old man and whose body can’t possibly carry the pregnancy he inflicted on her to term standing in front of you with tears in her eyes because she is in such physical AND mental pain thanks to the two of you insisting she give birth to the baby?) I know the sight of a child whose pregnant belly is probably bigger than she herself is talk but c’mon, buckaroos! Think of it this way- when that kid graduates high school she’ll be closer in age to his or her hot high school friends by at least 20 years than the interns you keep creeping on! And at ten, she can practice on her baby dolls before having her ACTUAL baby!! Besides, she can be a role model for the other children her age- because now that the protections are now longer in place, rightfully outraged medical professionals are making it clear hers is not even CLOSE to being an isolated case- maybe she can write a book like Bristol Palin! Did I miss anything? Oh yes- how about the rest of you. Howsabout we gift you all the bodies of women who die from abortions gone wrong because they weren’t safely given; the women who kill themselves (and sometimes their living children) out of desperation upon finding themselves pregnant again; the women who are in abusive and even deadly situations who lose their lives (and whose unborn children AND sometimes their born children’s lives are lost at her killer’s hands) because pregnant woman in abusive relationships are very at risk for being killed when pregnant- what “pro-life” members of Congress want to volunteer for those bodies? 
 

I apologize for going so dark. I am just so so angry and I really do believe that until all of these completely politically driven, cold, calculating, disgusting, vile, depraved “people” really have to come face to face and up close to what they have created they will continue on their path of destruction. 

  • Upvote 10
  • I Agree 4
  • Thank You 1
  • Love 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Fascinating read on the history of abortion and the rise of the anti abortion movement. 

In 1876 Nancy Ann Harris died following her 10th abortion. 

“In Nancy’s time, abortion was a common means of birth control for women of every race, religion, and social class. Abortions were acceptable both morally and legally, as long as they occurred before quickening, the time when a pregnant woman can feel the fetus move (usually around the fourth month). They were often a safer alternative to childbirth. They were a way to limit family size, manage resources, and protect one’s health. Abortions were so frequent, one Michigan doctor wrote in 1874, that “It is rare to find a married woman who passes through the childbearing period, who has not had one or more.””

https://news.yahoo.com/nancy-ann-harris-died-abortion-110121495.html

  • Thank You 9
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Bethella said:

Abortions were so frequent, one Michigan doctor wrote in 1874, that “It is rare to find a married woman who passes through the childbearing period, who has not had one or more.””

Wait, are you saying they ARE rooted in the nation's history and traditions? But, but, but, the Supreme Court said they weren't and they are never wrong!

Seriously y'all, if women didn't even have the right to vote, why the hell do these assholes think that there would be laws enshrining their rights? That argument makes no damn sense. I really think that they decided they were going to overrule Roe and then just made a bunch of legalese up to make it look like real jurisprudence.

  • Upvote 9
  • Haha 1
  • I Agree 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

For some reason, all the news outlets are reporting that the House passed a bill giving rights to contraception, rather than that 97% of Republicans voted *against* the rights to contraception. Including, of course, Matt Gaetz. I can only hope that 538's predictions for the midterms (52% for GOP Senate, 86% GOP House in simulations) are as off as they were in 2016. 

Screenshot_2022-07-21_19-37-47.png

  • Upvote 3
  • WTF 1
  • I Agree 2
  • Thank You 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

image.png.6e2c890569bbbeac12948d88c95cfdb2.png

  • Upvote 6
  • I Agree 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

My shit for brains Rep voted no even though he and his wife are proclaimed Catholics who remarkably have a very small family with the children very evenly spaced out between them.  

  • Upvote 9
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Interesting article in the Guardian today about US Evangelicals sticking their filthy hands and money into Romanian anti-abortion activities. Seems to me that, if they have all that extra money, they should be paying extremely hefty taxes to take care of the US parents and children they are forcing to suffer, and keeping their bullshit fake religion out of Europe.
https://www.theguardian.com/global-development/2022/jul/22/how-us-dollars-put-anti-abortion-groups-at-the-heart-of-romanian-healthcare
I knew they were bankrolling the UK forced birth movement, but the UK is aggressively agnostic, so probably not very fertile ground. They are involved with funding the German anti-vax movement too. But, for the love of <insert deity of choice here>, leave the Romanians alone. Haven't they suffered enough from the forced birthers already? And, having seen what happened to Romania during that time, within recent memory for many of us, forced birthers *know* what their laws will result in, and they do. not. care.

  • Upvote 7
  • I Agree 1
  • Thank You 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share




  • Recent Status Updates

    • 47of74

      47of74

      Someone trying to make some salad of the potaters

      · 0 replies
    • FiveAcres

      FiveAcres

      Just found out that a friend, who was in home hospice, died last night. He was a cantankerous old guy, but still, a friend.
       
      · 0 replies
    • 47of74

      47of74

      Holy Storage Places!

      · 0 replies
    • GreyhoundFan

      GreyhoundFan

      I ran into this cartoon that made me smile. It's nice to see something wholesome. Plus, Triceratops are my favorite dinosaurs too.


      · 1 reply
    • Hazelbunny

      Hazelbunny

      It is Hazels 11th Birthday today! (He has been living with me for 11 years - probably more like 13 years old)❤️
       
      · 2 replies
    • 47of74

      47of74

      It was gonna be the photo of the year until....

      · 2 replies
    • K'Z'K

      K'Z'K

      🎵 It's beginning to look a lot like Allston Christmas 🎵
       
      It's mid-August, time for the biggest holiday in Boston (and Cambridge, Somerville, and other nearby cities/towns). The traditional decorations are going out on the curb, the UHauls are converging on the city, and the Storrowings have begun in earnest. As a bonus for this year, the T is a disaster and occasionally bursts info flames, if it's running at all. Welcome, students!
      As the BossTones once said:
      I was here before they came,
      I'll be here long after.
      Don't wanna swear,
      but it seems clear
      that I'm gonna have ta.
      Ah . . . . fuck.
      · 0 replies
    • WannabeHistorian

      WannabeHistorian

      Well, I survived the ultrasound. It was incredibly uncomfortable and invasive, but I lived. Thank you so much once again to everyone who responded to my initial post. You guys helped me so much so that I even had a normal bp when the nurse checked it!
      · 0 replies
    • feministxtian

      feministxtian

      Guess I forgot to tell y'all I fell and dislocated my ankle last week. Had the ankle put back into place but also have something called a tri-mallealar (sp) fracture. 3 places! Surgery next Thursday for the lovely hardware needed to put it all back together. Did I mention that Oxy is like shooting a bb at a hurricane for pain? 
      · 6 replies
    • Bluebirdbluebell

      Bluebirdbluebell

      F**k Alzheimer's.
      · 1 reply
  • Recent Blog Entries

×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.