Started By
Message
re: The new Alabama abortion law, like it or no?
Posted on 5/19/19 at 7:59 pm to RollTide4Ever
Posted on 5/19/19 at 7:59 pm to RollTide4Ever
quote:
Will get overturned by SC.
Seems like it will. When even the Republican President and most Republican senators think the abortion law is too strict it's hard to see it holding up.
1
Posted on 5/19/19 at 8:20 pm to CrimsonFever
I think it's too strict. I'd prefer something like no abortions over 12 weeks. I also don't think it is a long term play. Feels like southern states are taking advantage of two justices from Trump. Only time will tell if those are impartial judges or republican judges.
Posted on 5/19/19 at 8:36 pm to CrimsonFever
They probably should’ve limited it but it’s intellectually consistent. If you think a life is a life and it shouldn’t be extinguished, then the circumstances of the conception should be irrelevant.
It’s a moot point because it will never go into effect, so there’s a lot of pearl clutching by people who are looking for a reason to freak out.
It’s a moot point because it will never go into effect, so there’s a lot of pearl clutching by people who are looking for a reason to freak out.
This post was edited on 5/19/19 at 9:13 pm
Posted on 5/19/19 at 8:51 pm to FairhopeTider
quote:Can we at least bitch about the millions of dollars it will cost to fight it?
so there’s a lot of pearl clutching by people who are looking for a reason to freak out.
How many abortions could you prevent with $2m of contraceptives?
This post was edited on 5/19/19 at 8:55 pm
Posted on 5/19/19 at 9:02 pm to pvilleguru
Not going to argue with you there, but the state’s general fund is around $2 Billion and the lawsuit will cost a few million over several years. I’m not justifying it, just saying it’s not really going to make a huge impact financially.
I’d like to see Roe v. Wade overturned, but not sure this bill was the best way to go about it strategically.
I’d like to see Roe v. Wade overturned, but not sure this bill was the best way to go about it strategically.
Posted on 5/19/19 at 11:02 pm to pvilleguru
It will be a lot less than the dems are wasting investigating Trump for the 7th time.. lol
This thread was doomed from the start..lol
This thread was doomed from the start..lol
This post was edited on 5/19/19 at 11:03 pm
Posted on 5/19/19 at 11:35 pm to CrimsonFever
Its fricking stupid. Makes the state look bad.
Posted on 5/19/19 at 11:44 pm to BamaBo7
quote:
It will be a lot less than the dems are wasting investigating Trump for the 7th time.. lol
Speaking of Trump, he is against Alabama's abortion law. So are most Republican senators.
This post was edited on 5/19/19 at 11:52 pm
Posted on 5/19/19 at 11:49 pm to CrimsonFever
quote:
When even the Republican President and most Republican senators think the abortion law is too strict it's hard to see it holding up.
It's not supposed to hold up, dumbass. It's a direct response to states that recently passed laws to allow abortion at birth.
It's only purpose is to force a legal challenge. That's why there is a six month delay before it takes effect.
Posted on 5/19/19 at 11:51 pm to FairhopeTider
quote:
It’s a moot point because it will never go into effect, so there’s a lot of pearl clutching by people who are looking for a reason to freak out.
This.
Posted on 5/19/19 at 11:53 pm to Evolved Simian
quote:
It's not supposed to hold up, dumbass.
If Tomi Lahren, Pat Robertson. and Mitt Romney think you've gone too conservative on an issue, you probably have.
This post was edited on 5/19/19 at 11:59 pm
Posted on 5/20/19 at 1:27 am to CrimsonFever
The purpose of the law as written is to take it all the way to the Supreme Court. R vs. W. has a significant weakness that this law was written to challenge. That weakness is in defining when life begins. The new law will not likely make it all the way thru as written but the intent is to make the SC determine when life begins.
Any exception weakens the foundation of the law and its argument before the court. Once the determination of when life begins is made the power of R. vs. W. is compromised and the law making goes back to the States where it belongs.
My guess is we end up with a "life begins" at 6 to 12 weeks and the states will craft their laws around that number based on what the specific States and their populations want.
I support the effort and purpose. Anything that get rid of birth control via abortion (convenience killing) is a good thing.
Any exception weakens the foundation of the law and its argument before the court. Once the determination of when life begins is made the power of R. vs. W. is compromised and the law making goes back to the States where it belongs.
My guess is we end up with a "life begins" at 6 to 12 weeks and the states will craft their laws around that number based on what the specific States and their populations want.
I support the effort and purpose. Anything that get rid of birth control via abortion (convenience killing) is a good thing.
Posted on 5/20/19 at 2:57 am to CrimsonFever
Abortion is immoral IMO. Bill was one of a few meant to push SCOTUS to define when life begins, hence the restrictiveness. It may do that...it may not. Time will tell. If there was no RvW and the bill was meant to actually be state law, it's too restrictive IMO.
If SCOTUS defines it at X-weeks, that will be a happy medium.
This is also a good opportunity to expand birth control access.
If SCOTUS defines it at X-weeks, that will be a happy medium.
This is also a good opportunity to expand birth control access.
Posted on 5/20/19 at 5:45 am to BamaBo7
quote:
It will be a lot less than the dems are wasting investigating Trump for the 7th time..
I didn't realize the state of Alabama was in charge of that.
Posted on 5/20/19 at 7:22 am to CrimsonFever
quote:
The new Alabama abortion law, like it or no?
I think the people who 'represent' the state shouldn't say they're pro life, but don't support a medical marijuana bill that would assist people dealing with a fatal disease, mental health issues, or any other conditions.
Posted on 5/20/19 at 7:27 am to Tw1st3d
quote:
That weakness is in defining when life begins.
When there is no agreed upon answer on this, why would anyone think that this foolish bill is going to push anyone to make that determination? It will not. That is why it is stupid.
Posted on 5/20/19 at 7:55 am to CrimsonFever
I'm completely against the law.
I don't think abortion should be (or is often) used as a first resort for birth control. But, I also think there are many times when an abortion is the best option for all involved. I think, done early enough, it's just a mass of cells.
I know some people think that it's a functioning human as soon as the egg is fertilized. That's fine, if that's what you think. You don't have to get an abortion.
I don't think abortion should be (or is often) used as a first resort for birth control. But, I also think there are many times when an abortion is the best option for all involved. I think, done early enough, it's just a mass of cells.
I know some people think that it's a functioning human as soon as the egg is fertilized. That's fine, if that's what you think. You don't have to get an abortion.
This post was edited on 5/20/19 at 8:10 am
Posted on 5/20/19 at 8:13 am to Funky Tide 8
quote:
When there is no agreed upon answer on this, why would anyone think that this foolish bill is going to push anyone to make that determination? It will not. That is why it is stupid.
quote:
no agreed upon answer
That is the point. Alabama's law places the answer at conception. Georgia and other states say it is when the Heart Beat can be detected - 6 weeks. NY and others say it is not alive until it is fully born. VA failed but tried to say convenience killing is ok even after the child is born. With this wide range of states saying when life begins and that date is what triggers when you can legally kill the child the SCOTUS will have to determine a date as the foundation for their ruling. Without defining a date or passing on the ruling altogether, the varied state laws and their district federal courts will be defining what the law is. The West Coast and District 9 will say life begins at birth. The Northeast will likely say life begins at birth. The Southeast will likely determine life begins at 6 to 12 weeks (heart beat detection).
Once that happens, State's Law take precedence over Roe vs Wade. The problem the SCOTUS faces with choosing a date after the heartbeat is detected will be that it opens the legal door for the State (at large) having choice when it is ok to kill anyone they choose at the other end of the life spectrum (just because someone with a black robe thinks convenience killing because someone is old enough to draw Social Security or too much health care money) is a good idea.
Posted on 5/20/19 at 8:23 am to Tw1st3d
quote:
NY and others say it is not alive until it is fully born. VA failed but tried to say convenience killing is ok even after the child is born.
In both of these bills there were very clear circumstances where a 3rd trimester abortion could be performed. Neither were written to allow a pregnant woman to just up and decide to terminate her pregnancy in the 3rd trimester.
Regardless of the intent of this bill(which I think will fail), the optics of it are awful. Par for the course for this state and its awful leaders.
Posted on 5/20/19 at 8:58 am to imjustafatkid
quote:What?
Again, the birthing process will occur regardless. The options are giving birth to a live baby or a dead one. Some of y'all need to educate yourselves on abortion.
Women who get abortions go through the birthing process?
Page 2 of 11
Latest Alabama News
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News