If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Huffington Post)   Fresh on the heels of approving laws that ban abortions based on fetal birth defects or after the sixth week of pregnancy, ND lawmakers apparently decide to try to go "all in" and ban any abortions occuring after the first picosecond of pregnancy   (huffingtonpost.com) divider line 11
    More: Asinine, North Dakota, University of North Dakota, criminal negligence, Personhood USA, abortions, IVF  
•       •       •

3121 clicks; posted to Politics » on 19 Mar 2013 at 12:45 PM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



Voting Results (Funniest)
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


Archived thread
2013-03-19 01:05:48 PM
5 votes:

Karac: Dr Dreidel: Magorn: They just passed a law banning abortions based on genetic defects?  What kind of sick farks would force an anacephalic baby to be born? (warning, DO NOT google, trust me you're better off not knwoing that such things can exist) or one with exterior interal organs?  And is it only "genetic" defects? Are deformities caused by teratogens also banned, or is aborting those babies okay?

There HAS to be an exception in there for "severe malformation" that would result in stillbirth or miscarriage - both of those also mean increased risk to mom's health.

There HAS to be.

I've seen your name on this tab often enough to remember it.  How are you still this optimistic?


With Dr. Dreidel, it always lands on gimel.
2013-03-19 12:53:47 PM
3 votes:
That's too bad because I really really wanted to move to North Dakota.
2013-03-19 12:49:24 PM
2 votes:
Laser like focus on jobs
2013-03-19 01:58:56 PM
1 votes:

willfullyobscure: THe Marquis de Sade argued for full legal equality for women, including emancipation and abortion on demand. He said it should be the mother's choice to abort for up to one year after the actual birth, since the infant was so dependent on the mother that it was still basically a part of her, consuming her resources and forcing her to care for it.


Yeah, I think he was quoted favorably in the last issue of Air America magazine before it was sold to the ay-rabs.

// I know some 36 month abortions I'd like to make sometimes...
// two year olds, ya know?
2013-03-19 01:44:29 PM
1 votes:

bruce4bruce: I think that if you are in favor of life for every fetus and you believe every inseminated egg is precious and deserves to live... you would also be in favor of universal health care and giving all people a chance to live.


Don't be ridiculous.  Once they're drawing breath, social responsibility to them ends and they have to bootstrap themselves.  We wouldn't want no parasites getting something for free, would we?  Fark Lucky Ducky anyhow.
2013-03-19 01:32:19 PM
1 votes:

Lord_Baull: So, as I understand it, zygotes will now have more legal status than gay partners.


well, except the gay Zygotes, of course

Oh now THERE's a fundy dilemma just waiting to happen.  IF science ever identifies the "gay gene" and develops a pre-natal test.....
2013-03-19 01:24:54 PM
1 votes:

Fluorescent Testicle: No, they don't give two shiats about whether it's "Murder" or not, they just really like to subjugate those dirty dirty sluts for having the sheer audacity to be born with a vagina.


AS a former 100% right to lifer, that's not true, and wasn't true for the vast majority of my fellow Christians, but feel free to keep punch that strawman's solar plexus.
2013-03-19 01:22:24 PM
1 votes:

phaseolus: what_now: Well the resulting law suit is an excellent use of the North Dakota's resources.


Forcing a challenge and fast-tracking it all the way up to the SCOTUS might be the whole point. Scalia and Thomas aren't getting any younger ...


Still, it's hard to see how this could survive strict scrutiny in light of Roe v Wade... oh who am I kidding, Scalia believes that the Constitution says whatever he believes it says.

/you might be right
2013-03-19 01:19:49 PM
1 votes:

Jim_Callahan: Lord Dimwit: It is not, until some point well after conception but still before birth, a "person".

Realistically, from a psychological and physiological perspective, not until significantly  after birth, actually.   Babies that are a couple months old don't have object permanence or any capacity for abstraction, so they don't actually have a mind yet, which is kind of a prerequisite for being a person.

We go with birth as the dividing line more for convenience than due to anything rigorous.

//By the "biological organism with distinct human DNA" logic, they need to ban antibiotics because that qualifies many of the bacteria in the average human body.  Yes, we share a substantial portion of genetic code with them.


At CPAC individuals like this are know as candidates
2013-03-19 12:59:15 PM
1 votes:

Dr Dreidel: Magorn: They just passed a law banning abortions based on genetic defects?  What kind of sick farks would force an anacephalic baby to be born? (warning, DO NOT google, trust me you're better off not knwoing that such things can exist) or one with exterior interal organs?  And is it only "genetic" defects? Are deformities caused by teratogens also banned, or is aborting those babies okay?

There HAS to be an exception in there for "severe malformation" that would result in stillbirth or miscarriage - both of those also mean increased risk to mom's health.

There HAS to be.


I've seen your name on this tab often enough to remember it.  How are you still this optimistic?
2013-03-19 12:50:55 PM
1 votes:
In all fairness, it's ND, you basically have to leave the state to get medical care, period.
 
Displayed 11 of 11 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report