Arizona's current abortion law establishes a limit at 15 weeks fetal age. What's wrong with that?

[surada]

Fear mongering. Once Roe was gone the abortion restrictions side lost those who saw it as a constitutional issue for any effort of theirs to go national. They also lose people like me who are just fine and dandy with a birth control abortion restriction around 10-12 weeks. I used to be 15, but i've moved my high end down 3 weeks. Not budging on the 10 though, that's as low as I go.

The Hyde Amendment and Coverage for Abortion Services Under Medicaid in the Post-Roe Era | KFF

This brief details the federal programs that are affected by the Hyde Amendment and laws and regulations that have a similar goal, provides estimates on the share of women insured by Medicaid affected by the law, reviews the impact of the law on their access to abortion services, and discusses...

www.kff.org

The Hyde Amendment is a legislative provision that prohibits the use of federal funds for abortion, with some exceptions:

The life of the pregnant person is endangered

The pregnancy is the result of rape or incest

The pregnant person has a physical disorder, injury, or illness that would endanger their life if they carried the pregnancy to term

The Hyde Amendment was named after its chief sponsor, Republican Congressman Henry Hyde of Illinois. It was passed by the House of Representatives in 1976 and took effect in 1980. Congress has made several changes to the amendment since then.

The Hyde Amendment has several consequences, including:

Medicaid coverage
19 states and DC follow the Hyde Amendment, which restricts Medicaid coverage of abortion. Women of color are more likely to rely on Medicaid for family planning services and face financial barriers when seeking abortions.

Reproductive rights
The Hyde Amendment can limit a person's ability to make reproductive decisions for their body.

Democracy
Without the ability to make reproductive decisions, those who can become pregnant cannot participate equally in democracy.

 

[martybegan]

That's correct. And that is not a new development. Laws have governed the marketplace for a long time.

And they still can't override personal freedoms guaranteed by the amendments without a compelling government interest, and even then the situation has to be mitigated in the least invasive way possible.

Order ahead custom wedding cakes are not a compelling government interest, and fining the baker into bankruptcy isn't the least invasive method.

 

[martybegan]

The Hyde Amendment and Coverage for Abortion Services Under Medicaid in the Post-Roe Era | KFF

This brief details the federal programs that are affected by the Hyde Amendment and laws and regulations that have a similar goal, provides estimates on the share of women insured by Medicaid affected by the law, reviews the impact of the law on their access to abortion services, and discusses...

www.kff.org

The Hyde Amendment is a legislative provision that prohibits the use of federal funds for abortion, with some exceptions:

The life of the pregnant person is endangered

The pregnancy is the result of rape or incest

The pregnant person has a physical disorder, injury, or illness that would endanger their life if they carried the pregnancy to term

The Hyde Amendment was named after its chief sponsor, Republican Congressman Henry Hyde of Illinois. It was passed by the House of Representatives in 1976 and took effect in 1980. Congress has made several changes to the amendment since then.

The Hyde Amendment has several consequences, including:

Medicaid coverage
19 states and DC follow the Hyde Amendment, which restricts Medicaid coverage of abortion. Women of color are more likely to rely on Medicaid for family planning services and face financial barriers when seeking abortions.

Reproductive rights
The Hyde Amendment can limit a person's ability to make reproductive decisions for their body.

Democracy
Without the ability to make reproductive decisions, those who can become pregnant cannot participate equally in democracy.

Doesn't do anything to stop the States from stepping in. Why do women need federal funds for birth control abortions?

And as for "equally in democracy" how is giving men NO option for fatherhood treating them equally?

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

And they still can't override personal freedoms guaranteed by the amendments without a compelling government interest, and even then the situation has to be mitigated in the least invasive way possible.

Order ahead custom wedding cakes are not a compelling government interest, and fining the baker into bankruptcy isn't the least invasive method.

Sure they can. You can't just deny service to anyone you want, based on a religious belief.

What universe have you been living in? Step outside, get some fresh air. Join us in reality.

 

[martybegan]

Sure they can. You can't just deny service to anyone you want, based on a religious belief.

What universe have you been living in? Step outside, get some fresh air. Join us in reality.

They weren't denying point of sale services on non custom goods, that's the PA part of their business.

They didn't want to make a custom cake for a Same Sex Marriage reception.

So I can force a Jewish Deli to sell Bacon, or give me a slice of cheese on my Pastrami sandwich?

 

[Independent thinker]

The Democrats Lie campaign on abortion rages on in Arizona. I watch maybe 3 hours of TV a day. I am seeing at least 8 commercials on Arizona's "Abortion Ban" and how Kari Lake is going to force women to carry a Rape pregnancy to full term. These are 100 percent LIES! Is there no regulation on the content of political ads? Doesn't there have to be some shred of truth?

The current Arizona Law is a limit at 15 weeks of fetal age. There is also prop 139 which if passed will EXTEND the abortion limit to FULL TERM. Democrats are disgusting liars it's the only way they can win because they certainly can't run on their record.

I don't know the nuts and bolts of what is going on in Arizona but I'm guessing that their point is they think, if elected, Kari Lake will help pass a national abortion ban or help vote for even more conservative justices who might also aid in the endeavor. They might also be trying to claim that she is a card carrying member of Project 2025, which probably has that in their agenda.

 

[MarathonMike]

You cant pass rules that constrain doctors' care dipshit. You cant possibly list out every variable they have to respond to. Almost all abortions after 15 weeks are for medical reasons that dont need to pass a fucking legal test.

If you have a heart attack I would like them to run a background check to make sure you arent a murderer before treating you. What's a little background check while you are dying if it will stop a few murders? Just as ridiculous.

Anger and name calling is the last refuge of a FAILED ARGUMENT. Arizona has a 15 week abortion limit NOW. You abortion ghouls aren't happy unless a baby can be yanked from the uterus at 9 months and stabbed in the brain. The 15 week abortion limit is also what Trump supports. The whole abortion narrative is FAKE and would not be an issue at all in 99.5 percent of unwanted pregnancies if women would stop having sex without birth control or protection.

 

[citygator]

Anger and name calling is the last refuge of a FAILED ARGUMENT. Arizona has a 15 week abortion limit NOW. You abortion ghouls aren't happy unless a baby can be yanked from the uterus at 9 months and stabbed in the brain. The 15 week abortion limit is also what Trump supports. The whole abortion narrative is FAKE and would not be an issue at all in 99.5 percent of unwanted pregnancies if women would stop having sex without birth control or protection.

There are no recreational killing of babies occurring. If you carry a pregnancy to 30 weeks and have to get an abortion it’s not because you want to go on vacation in 9 months. I would bet anything you don’t even know what a woman looks like much less have a wife or daughter.

Evil men want to control women and relegate them to breeding but since they can’t in their own life they want the law to do it to other women who passed them by. Get a blow up doll.

 

[MarathonMike]

I don't know the nuts and bolts of what is going on in Arizona but I'm guessing that their point is they think, if elected, Kari Lake will help pass a national abortion ban or help vote for even more conservative justices who might also aid in the endeavor. They might also be trying to claim that she is a card carrying member of Project 2025, which probably has that in their agenda.

The "national abortion ban" is another boogeyman pushed by the lying Media. Kari Lake does NOT support a national abortion ban and DOES support the current 15 week abortion limit on fetal age just like Trump. But she will lose because of the very effective abortion gaslighting campaign waged by the Democrats. As a result Arizona will get another crap Democrat Senator Ruben Gallego.

 

[JoeB131]

No, it doesn't, again, just because you exchange money for a product doesn't mean you lose your constitutional rights.

It's certainly does if you are an employee.

In any event a contracted service is not a public accommodation.

Except it's a product, not a service.

Then get a judge to allow her to proceed. Exceptions shouldn't eliminate the rule.

Why should anyone go to a judge to get control of your own body? That's ridiculous.

Fuck off on the whole minding business part. As an American Citizen I can make it my business whenever I want to via voting and advocating.

In short, you want a nanny state, just your nanny state. Good to know.

YOu want government small enough to fit in a woman's hoo-ha.

That's a lie.

But, it's important for everyone to see that you baby-killers LOVE the idea of murdering children at any time for any reason, or no reason at all.

Next time you try to lie about it, I'll remember this.

Fetuses aren't children.

We don't count fetuses on the Census
We don't count fetuses as tax deductions
Even when Abortion was illegal, it was never charged as murder.

 

[citygator]

The "national abortion ban" is another boogeyman pushed by the lying Media. Kari Lake does NOT support a national abortion ban and DOES support the current 15 week abortion limit on fetal age just like Trump. But she will lose because of the very effective abortion gaslighting campaign waged by the Democrats. As a result Arizona will get another crap Democrat Senator Ruben Gallego.

National abortion ban is the point. Vance will lie to the masses but in a group of supporters will advocate for it. It’s a lie. Just like the justices lied about settled law. No one will ever believe that again. It’s why red states are approving abortion in their constitutions. Bans are highly unpopular by normies.

 

[Independent thinker]

The "national abortion ban" is another boogeyman pushed by the lying Media. Kari Lake does NOT support a national abortion ban and DOES support the current 15 week abortion limit on fetal age just like Trump. But she will lose because of the very effective abortion gaslighting campaign waged by the Democrats. As a result Arizona will get another crap Democrat Senator Ruben Gallego.

I was a little surprised that during the debate (which I really didn't see), that Walz didn't constantly bring up the Project 2025 thing, which they have been using nonstop to hang around the necks of Trump/Vance. Maybe they knew if they did that they would be called out on that as being a total lie, which it is.

 

[martybegan]

It's certainly does if you are an employee.

View attachment 1020988




Except it's a product, not a service.



Why should anyone go to a judge to get control of your own body? That's ridiculous.




In short, you want a nanny state, just your nanny state. Good to know.

YOu want government small enough to fit in a woman's hoo-ha.



Fetuses aren't children.

We don't count fetuses on the Census
We don't count fetuses as tax deductions
Even when Abortion was illegal, it was never charged as murder.

Employee and a point of sale item and owner and contracted item are not the same. false equivalence.

Same shit, different day

so is not making a law just because of a few possible exceptions.

Says the man who wants to ruin bakers over same sex marriage. at least my issue involves a life, and in my case my 10-12 week limit is a fair compromise.

Fetuses are human life.

 

[JoeB131]

Employee and a point of sale item and owner and contracted item are not the same. false equivalence.

If you are saying that your interpretation of religion gives you an absolute right to disregard rules of any sort, then there's an argument to be made that cashiers can refuse service just like owners.

Says the man who wants to ruin bakers over same sex marriage. at least my issue involves a life, and in my case my 10-12 week limit is a fair compromise.

Fetuses are human life.

Fetuses aren't people. The law doesn't see them as people. And, no, there isn't a fair compromise. A woman's body is her body, period, full stop. (And I would include that to mean prostitution or drug abuse as well!)

Whenever you Libertards talk about "Freedom", it usually means for those with wealth to abuse those without it.

 

[martybegan]

If you are saying that your interpretation of religion gives you an absolute right to disregard rules of any sort, then there's an argument to be made that cashiers can refuse service just like owners.



Fetuses aren't people. The law doesn't see them as people. And, no, there isn't a fair compromise. A woman's body is her body, period, full stop. (And I would include that to mean prostitution or drug abuse as well!)

Whenever you Libertards talk about "Freedom", it usually means for those with wealth to abuse those without it.

It's not an absolute right. You just need a compelling government interest, then you resolve the conflict using the least intrusive method possible.

Wedding cakes are not a compelling government interest and fining bakers into bankruptcy isn't the least intrusive method.

I've never called them people, I've called them human life.

Prostitution and drug use don't involve another human life in the equation.

 

[JoeB131]

It's not an absolute right. You just need a compelling government interest, then you resolve the conflict using the least intrusive method possible.

Non-discrimination is a compelling government interest.

I've never called them people, I've called them human life.

Prostitution and drug use don't involve another human life in the equation.

Again, fetuses aren't people, and there's no good reason to give them more rights than the women they are inside.

It's also... kind of impractical unless you are going to place a woman under house arrest for nine months.

Wedding cakes are not a compelling government interest and fining bakers into bankruptcy isn't the least intrusive method.

Except that the idiots sued themselves into bankruptcy. You see, when most people are caught BREAKING THE LAW, they admit it, and promise to not do it again.

Not the Homophobic Bakers, though. They do things like Dox the people who complain, subjecting them to violent threats from other people who hate Gays because Jesus said so.

 

[martybegan]

Non-discrimination is a compelling government interest.



Again, fetuses aren't people, and there's no good reason to give them more rights than the women they are inside.

It's also... kind of impractical unless you are going to place a woman under house arrest for nine months.

View attachment 1021061


Except that the idiots sued themselves into bankruptcy. You see, when most people are caught BREAKING THE LAW, they admit it, and promise to not do it again.

Not the Homophobic Bakers, though. They do things like Dox the people who complain, subjecting them to violent threats from other people who hate Gays because Jesus said so.

Not in such a small case, and not when countered by the person's right to free exercise.


I always love when twats like you bring up the Handmaid's tale and then suck Islamist dick in the next post.


The Law was being enforced unconstitutionally.

 

[JoeMoma]

If you are saying that your interpretation of religion gives you an absolute right to disregard rules of any sort, then there's an argument to be made that cashiers can refuse service just like owners.



Fetuses aren't people. The law doesn't see them as people. And, no, there isn't a fair compromise. A woman's body is her body, period, full stop. (And I would include that to mean prostitution or drug abuse as well!)

Whenever you Libertards talk about "Freedom", it usually means for those with wealth to abuse those without it.

If "we the people" were to legislate that fetuses are people, then would fetuses then be people? Is the qualification for being a person simply a construct of law.....which can be changed?

 

[JoeB131]

Not in such a small case, and not when countered by the person's right to free exercise.

Nope, people's human dignity to not encounter discrimination is more important than your groveling in front of an imaginary sky pixie. Keep your groveling in your church.

I always love when twats like you bring up the Handmaid's tale and then suck Islamist dick in the next post.

Not at all. WE SHOULD NOT BE FUCKING AROUND IN THEIR PART OF THE WORLD. Especially a piece of shit like you who never put on a uniform in your life and doesn't have to go over there.

The Law was being enforced unconstitutionally.

Nope. Again, if a baker can refuse to accommodate because Jesus said so, I should be able to cut out my enemy's heart because Quezatacoatl said so.

 

[JoeB131]

If "we the people" were to legislate that fetuses are people, then would fetuses then be people? Is the qualification for being a person simply a construct of law.....which can be changed?

That would be fantastically stupid.

If you are still unclear on the concept, once "We the People" decided to outlaw alcohol in 1919. Man, we showed them.

And then this funny thing happened. People kept drinking. People found ways to get around the law. Organized Crime was supercharged from huge profits made by selling "We the People" the alcohol "We the People" decided to outlaw. Eventually, everyone realized how fucking absurd it was, and that's why it was repealed a mere 14 years later.

This brings us to what the world was like before Roe v. Wade. The reality was that women had just as many abortions before Roe as after. Doctors performed them, wrote down something else on the chart, insurance paid for it, and everyone was happy. When seven SCOTUS Justices (INCLUDING FIVE REPUBLICANS!) overturned these state laws that were barely being followed, they thought they were just killing meaningless laws, like the Sodomy laws with Lawrence (2003) or the Contraception laws with Griswald (1965).

Outlaw abortion, and people will find ways to get them.

If you are unclear on the concept, I give you the Philippines. They have the kind of Gilead-like laws you crazies want. And yet it is estimated that Filipinas have 500,000 to 800,000 a year.

Now, there are ways to reduce abortions- Comprehensive sex education at an early age, easy access to contraception, paid family leave, and universal health care. All that commie stuff you guys hate.