Texas abortion law has blood thirsty liberals seething

[rogue06]

I regard it as axiomatic yes. And I base my moral views on it. Plenty of others do likewise.

If MM is too stupid to understand why it is obviously true, that's his problem.

There is a bit of a disconnect between those two sentences.

You say that you "regard" it as being axiomatic, which suggest that the jury is still out on it. That while it hasn't been demonstrated to be axiomatic but you you "regard" it as being so.

But then you declare it is "obviously true" that it's axiomatic and only "stupid" people disagree.

[Mountain Man]

Liberals are holding up Uma Thurman's story as a life affirming example of abortion for the right reasons. It seems their bloodlust has caused them to overlook what the story is really about: a scared young woman in an unstable relationship with unsupportive parents who coerced her into doing something that has left her emotionally shattered to this day:

Thurman found herself pregnant as a teenager just starting out in her career, she said. Her relationship with the father, a much older man, was “not viable.”

Still, she didn’t want an abortion.

“I wanted to keep the baby, but how?” she asked.

But then, her “childish fantasy of motherhood was soundly corrected” by her parents, she said. “We decided as a family that I couldn’t go through with the pregnancy, and agreed that termination was the right choice.”

These were her circumstances, as she explained it: She didn’t have a relationship with the father. She didn’t have her family’s support to keep her baby. She didn’t have the financial means for a stable home.

She sought an abortion, she wrote, but her “heart was broken nonetheless.” In other words, she seemed to say, abortion was her choice because she didn’t feel like she had a choice – the choice to pursue what she initially wanted: “the baby.” Her baby.

With the help of a friend, she obtained an abortion in Germany. More than 30 years later, the memory still haunts her.

“There is so much pain in this story,” she admitted. “It has been my darkest secret until now.”

“The abortion I had as a teenager was the hardest decision of my life, one that caused me anguish then and that saddens me even now,” she said, confessing to “the hole that this decision carved in me.”

https://townhall.com/columnists/kati...hoice-n2596422

[rogue06]

Liberals are holding up Uma Thurman's story as a life affirming example of abortion for the right reasons. It seems their bloodlust has caused them to overlook what the story is really about: a scared young woman in an unstable relationship with unsupportive parents who coerced her into doing something that has left her emotionally shattered to this day:

Thurman found herself pregnant as a teenager just starting out in her career, she said. Her relationship with the father, a much older man, was “not viable.”

Still, she didn’t want an abortion.

“I wanted to keep the baby, but how?” she asked.

But then, her “childish fantasy of motherhood was soundly corrected” by her parents, she said. “We decided as a family that I couldn’t go through with the pregnancy, and agreed that termination was the right choice.”

These were her circumstances, as she explained it: She didn’t have a relationship with the father. She didn’t have her family’s support to keep her baby. She didn’t have the financial means for a stable home.

She sought an abortion, she wrote, but her “heart was broken nonetheless.” In other words, she seemed to say, abortion was her choice because she didn’t feel like she had a choice – the choice to pursue what she initially wanted: “the baby.” Her baby.

With the help of a friend, she obtained an abortion in Germany. More than 30 years later, the memory still haunts her.

“There is so much pain in this story,” she admitted. “It has been my darkest secret until now.”

“The abortion I had as a teenager was the hardest decision of my life, one that caused me anguish then and that saddens me even now,” she said, confessing to “the hole that this decision carved in me.”

https://townhall.com/columnists/kati...hoice-n2596422

Reminds me of something I mentioned a couple years back regarding the singer Nicki Minaj:

[...]

And about the same time the TV show Degrassi: Next Class in an episode called "#IRegretNothing" has a 16 year old going to an abortion clinic where one of her friends says "Making that difficult choice and standing up for it? You're courageous! We should go out and celebrate!" And they all go out to celebrate by having ice cream. They call it celebrating a second time when one proclaims that they're going "To celebrate Lola's bravery!" Yeah real brave, killing a defenseless unborn baby. Maybe she should get a medal.

As an aside, the girl who had the abortion remarks that she doesn't feel sad about aborting her baby to which one of her classmates adds "A lot of women have abortions and feel no shame," and goes on to cite rapper Nicki Minaj as one celebrity who had an abortion while still in High School. What is left out is that in 2014 Minaj told Rolling Stone magazine that this decision has "haunted me all my life." Darn those pesky details.

[Cow Poke]

I have stated before that it's my opinion that the Heartbeat Law was purposely written in such a way to force a SCOTUS appearance.

Seems it's working...

Abortion Clinics Push Supreme Court To Fast-Track Challenge to Texas Law

Abortion clinics in Texas are asking the Supreme Court to fast-track their challenge to the state’s law banning abortion as early as six weeks.

In a rarely seen maneuver, the providers asked the justices to leapfrog normal judicial process and decide whether the Texas Heartbeat Act is constitutional before lower courts have a chance to review it. The clinics say it's crucial the Court hears their case soon, as copycat measures proliferate across the country.

"Thousands of Texans are now unable to exercise their federal constitutional right to obtain an abortion," the petition reads. "Those with the means to do so are being forced to travel hundreds of miles out of state to exercise a constitutional right."

Lawmakers on both sides of the abortion issue are scrambling following successful implementation of the Heartbeat Act, which has ended most legal abortions in the nation’s second-most populous state. Republican lawmakers in six states are reportedly considering similar bills. The House of Representatives will vote Friday on legislation that guarantees abortion access through federal law in the event Roe v. Wade is overturned. The bill will likely not pass the Senate, but it reflects a Democratic sense that abortion could rejuvenate their moribund political prospects amid multiple crises.

The seldom-used procedure the providers invoked is called "certiorari before judgment." The justices prefer for lower courts to review cases before they do, so that they have the benefit of a thorough factual record and well-reasoned opinions to guide their deliberations. The Court’s rules, however, allow litigants to cut to the front of the line if their case is "of such imperative public importance as to justify deviation from normal appellate practice and to require immediate determination."

[Terraceth]

It would be great if the Supreme Court were to overturn Roe v. Wade entirely in their upcoming case, given (as I have argued for previously) Roe v. Wade was, regardless of what one thinks about abortion, simply terrible jurispudence. I feel that the much-derided Plessy v. Ferguson had better standing in terms of the text and original understanding of the 14th Amendment and prior precedent than Roe v. Wade did. This is not an endorsement of Plessy, but rather a statement that whatever problems Plessy had, Roe v. Wade had bigger problems.

It is not clear to me that the votes are there. Thomas is a certainty. Alito, while never explicitly advocating for an overturn, seems very likely. Sotomayor, Kagan, and Breyer, unless they've undergone a dramatic change in the last year, will vote to uphold it. The others are harder to figure out. But it is notable that the heartbeat bill is blatantly against the standard set by Planned Parenthood v. Casey, yet the Supreme Court still took it up. Given that ruling the law constitutional would require an overruling of Casey, it seems implausible that the Supreme Court will take up the case unless those who wanted to bring it up felt that overruling Casey was something to consider.

However, to take up a case requires 4 votes from the Supreme Court (short of the 5 required to decide a case). We do not know who those 4 were, either, or if there were more than 4. Nor do we know whether they felt that Casey's basic idea of a right to an abortion still existing was wrong, or if they disagreed with the standard Casey set.

I hope that the Supreme Court plans to, as Scalia suggested in his Casey dissent, get out of "the abortionumpiring business" which has been nothing but disastrous for our political system. But it is not clear to me that a majority of the Supreme Court is interested in going that far.

[Mountain Man]

Ohio is following in Texas' footsteps:

State lawmakers in Ohio introduced a bill this week that emulates abortion restrictions enacted in Texas that are currently being challenged at the Supreme Court.
The bill, House Bill 480, also known as the “2363 Act,” echoes Texas’ S.B. 8, the law that took effect Sept. 1 that bans all abortions after fetal heartbeat detection. S.B. 8 allows citizens to pursue legal action against anyone who provides an illegal abortion or “aids or abets” someone seeking an illegal abortion. Those who successfully bring lawsuits under S.B. 8 can receive $10,000.

Ohio’s H.B. 480 outlaws all abortions and allows lawsuits against anyone who “knowingly engages in conduct that aids or abets the performance of inducement of an abortion.” It includes a ban on administering, procuring, or selling of any instrument, medicine, or any other substance or means with the intent to terminate a pregnancy.

H.B. 480 allows a defense against civil action for abortions “designed or intended to prevent the death of a pregnant mother and the physician made reasonable medical efforts under the circumstances to preserve both the life of the mother and the life of the unborn child in a manner consistent with conventional medical practice.”

https://townhall.com/tipsheet/madeli...n-law-n2598506

[Cow Poke]

Ohio is following in Texas' footsteps:

State lawmakers in Ohio introduced a bill this week that emulates abortion restrictions enacted in Texas that are currently being challenged at the Supreme Court.
The bill, House Bill 480, also known as the “2363 Act,” echoes Texas’ S.B. 8, the law that took effect Sept. 1 that bans all abortions after fetal heartbeat detection. S.B. 8 allows citizens to pursue legal action against anyone who provides an illegal abortion or “aids or abets” someone seeking an illegal abortion. Those who successfully bring lawsuits under S.B. 8 can receive $10,000.

Ohio’s H.B. 480 outlaws all abortions and allows lawsuits against anyone who “knowingly engages in conduct that aids or abets the performance of inducement of an abortion.” It includes a ban on administering, procuring, or selling of any instrument, medicine, or any other substance or means with the intent to terminate a pregnancy.

H.B. 480 allows a defense against civil action for abortions “designed or intended to prevent the death of a pregnant mother and the physician made reasonable medical efforts under the circumstances to preserve both the life of the mother and the life of the unborn child in a manner consistent with conventional medical practice.”

https://townhall.com/tipsheet/madeli...n-law-n2598506

So now Ohio has "Bounty Hunters", too?