176
Texas AG threatens to prosecute doctors in emergency abortion
(www.reuters.com)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 08 Dec 2023
176 points (98.9% liked)
News
23435 readers
854 users here now
Welcome to the News community!
Rules:
1. Be civil
Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.
2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.
Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.
Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.
5. Only recent news is allowed.
Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.
6. All posts must be news articles.
No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.
7. No duplicate posts.
If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.
8. Misinformation is prohibited.
Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.
9. No link shorteners.
The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.
10. Don't copy entire article in your post body
For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
And this woman also WANTS to have the baby. She and her husband were trying to get pregnant. Unfortunately, the fetus has abnormalities that mean it won't survive. Without an abortion, she will need to wait until she hits term, have a C Section, and then have a dead baby.
Oh, and thanks to her medical history, she'll likely be unable to have another pregnancy after that C-section. So it's either give birth to a dead baby now and have no more or have an abortion now and (after she recovers) try to have another baby. Only one of these options might result in a baby that's alive and it's the option that includes abortion.
But Paxton will scream about how he's "protecting the unborn baby" without caring that the fetus has a nearly zero chance of survival and without caring that the woman faces potential severe (possibly life threatening) medical complications if she's forced to continue the pregnancy. He'll force women to carry pregnancies to term even if it kills them!
This should surprise no one by now.
My only surprise is that this kind of scenario came up so fast. I expected years of matricide before all the right spines aligned.
Roe was passed in the courtroom on privacy - which another future court can still make a solid case for - but it was sold to the people as protecting women. Abortion is going to happen, that's the hard truth. How many women, and girls, have to needlessly die? That's just future mothers being removed from the field. Population goes down when abortion is outlawed, because girls will travel, or take it into their own hands. There isn't some mythical white baby boom. There is, however, a marked decline in crime starting ~20 years after Roe was passed. Cuz all the unwanted children weren't born and raised being reminded that they're unwanted their whole life.
I'm not a fan of abortion as elective birth control, but I can acknowledge when my opinions would make terrible policy. The "irresponsible" women who couldn't stick to a pill a day, or re-up on her implant appropriately, if she can't handle that, do we want her to raise children?
That's rhetorical. The answer doesn't matter. It's the implied reasoning that's the point.
In my humble opinion, Paxton can't leave this planet fast enough, Texas needs to go blue, and Republicans can prattle on and on on Fox news until they become a meme, the face of white fragility.
I'd love to see abortions be safe, legal, and rare. If people want to reduce how many abortions occur, they should find out why women get abortions and then figure out ways to help women so that they aren't in those situations.
For example, if women are getting pregnant and resorting to abortion as "birth control," then give better sex education and make contraceptives as affordable and available as possible.
Sadly, the right seems to want to make it so more women NEED abortions while less have access to them. Using birth control again, they like pushing abstinence only sex education (which doesn't work) while restricting access to birth control. Some have even been calling for making birth control illegal!
Paxton doesn't give a shit about the fetus. He wants this woman to suffer and be unable to have children because he believes she deserves it.