Yep. But that’s not who is in their mind’s eye when they dream of enforcing. It’s Lena Dunham and all those young single professional urban women on TV that joke disparagingly about men
Yep. If they do this it'll be like prohibition where they realized years later the damage being done to society, the economy, etc, then repealed prohibition. Problem is how many women will suffer/die needlessly over it. Not that some care about that part though.
Prohibition is the key word. There are lots of things - abortion included - that I am not a fan of, but I am most certainly not for prohibition as a "solution". I am almost never in favor of prohibition. It's lazy, dumb, usually counter productive & certainly anti freedom.
the big gov loving pubs will scream about states rights until they get a majority. they no more care about states rights than they do any form of limited gov. They HAVE scrapped limited gov & they will scrap democracy if they have to if it does not give them the control over people that they want. ends justify the means
Agreed. They used to be the party of 'family values'. LOL They used to be the party of 'limited government'. LOL Its becoming increasingly clear that the only thing they all share in common is being disgruntled, scared white people.
A leaked Homeland Security memo warns business leaders their companies could be targeted if they ‘facilitate travel for those seeking abortions’
Yep. This is going to cost businesses employees/future employees. I mean not those that want to live in the 1850s or the kind of folks that believe women should be seen and not heard and shouldn't have rights, of course. But it will definitely make people especially women think twice about accepting jobs in dangerous states. If it was me and it affected me? I'd quit & move. With all the jobs available I'd literally move ASAP. I wouldn't put my health & safety on the line like that.
I'm going to disagree a bit. In some instances, I don't think their measures are rationally calculated to maximize power but merely to harm their political adversaries. That seems to be the end more so than the acquisition of power
Paternity support obligations already exist under law. It's just a problem with enforceability, especially if the father does not have demonstrable resources to support. And of course, financial support alone does not equal the burden of carrying a pregnancy to term and raising the child. Not even close.
Doctors in Alabama Already Turn Away Miscarrying Patients. This Will Be Our New Normal Across the Country. I came to this realization when I saw a patient in active miscarriage (bleeding, passing clots, cramping) who had just had an office visit with her primary physician. She was forced to wait more than 48 hours in order to get the results of her bloodwork. Doctors will sometimes check a patient’s levels of HCG, or human chorionic gonadotropin, to help distinguish miscarriages from ongoing pregnancies or ectopic pregnancies. I could not understand why someone with all of the clinical signs of a miscarriage in progress was required to wait for much-needed intervention, all the while bleeding and cramping and suffering. I was angry that the patient’s doctor did not just provide the standard medical treatment for a miscarriage: surgically removing the contents of her uterus, which would stop her pain and bleeding. Then I saw a different patient who was actively miscarrying, and a lightbulb clicked on: The doctors were afraid of being attacked by the state of Alabama. Medical providers who treat pregnancy-related issues in red states exist in a constant state of fear of performing any procedure that can be classified as an abortion—even while the procedures remain legal. We know that we face the risk of being prosecuted, having our licenses revoked, or even being thrown in jail if we fail to precisely follow every regulation, no matter how arcane or medically unnecessary it is. (We can be cited if the clinic’s janitor’s closet isn’t the size deemed appropriate by the state, for example.)
Oh I know. But the support laws start at birth. This person is saying if it's a person it should start/be retroactive to conception. Also in some states percentages are fine, in others it's a joke. Men will then quit their jobs & go work under the table & claim they make less than they do so they don't pay. And compliance is a joke in some places. How many adult kids are getting support that was owed for them that their moms didn't get? But the woman can't defer any of that or refuse. She has to do it or give up the kid. Just thought it was a good point. Also brings us to the point. That the government doesn't allow for support, tax deductions, insurance, etc until birth because it's not an actual PERSON until BIRTH. So can't have it both ways.