Abortion Case in Texas - court allowed, court blocked
-
-
I'm not clear why the court is disallowing it, as from the description this is explicitly within allowable parameters for an abortion. I'm also not clear why the woman isn't driving a few hours to get an abortion.
-
Texas law allows someone to sue you for doing so or for assisting someone to. I suspect that makes it more difficult to get an abortion in another adjoining state. Providers may be hesitant to get involved. I believe Oklahoma's law is about the same as Texas. not sure about Louisiana.
-
I'd rather people who say they are Christian would show some human compassion rather than acting like ideologues. This poor woman is being put through needless additional suffering in what is already a terrible situation for her.
As is the unborn child they claim to care so much about.
@Doctor-Phibes said in Abortion Case in Texas - court allowed, court blocked:
I'd rather people who say they are Christian would show some human compassion rather than acting like ideologues. This poor woman is being put through needless additional suffering in what is already a terrible situation for her.
As is the unborn child they claim to care so much about.
The people who are Christian commit money, blood, sweat and tears to those things they believe in. There is a lot of love and compassion out there, if you wish to see it.
I'm the original poster on this case, predating this thread by several days. This is a very hard choice. As George noted in the other thread, the prognosis for this baby is grim. Hence, the first ruling.
From a political viewpoint rather than a personal theological one, this type of case does pose problems for pro life people. But, what is the greater good?
Is it Jon's observation that abortion cases are political anathema for the GOP? Or can the GOP successfully point out that many states have what the rest of the world would consider some of the most liberal abortion laws in the world.“Cry havoc and let slip the DOGE of war!”
Those who cheered as J-6 American prisoners were locked in solitary for 18 months without trial, now suddenly fight tooth and nail for foreign terrorists’ "due process". — Buck Sexton
-
@jon-nyc said in Abortion Case in Texas - court allowed, court blocked:
The pro choice side is literally undefeated in ballot initiatives since Dobbs.
That's right, 7 States in all.
Apparently the other 43 states haven't had a problem with Dobbs.
But I have to admit the baby killers have done a great job getting out the message about the unbeaten streak.
-
@Doctor-Phibes said in Abortion Case in Texas - court allowed, court blocked:
I'd rather people who say they are Christian would show some human compassion rather than acting like ideologues. This poor woman is being put through needless additional suffering in what is already a terrible situation for her.
As is the unborn child they claim to care so much about.
The people who are Christian commit money, blood, sweat and tears to those things they believe in. There is a lot of love and compassion out there, if you wish to see it.
I'm the original poster on this case, predating this thread by several days. This is a very hard choice. As George noted in the other thread, the prognosis for this baby is grim. Hence, the first ruling.
From a political viewpoint rather than a personal theological one, this type of case does pose problems for pro life people. But, what is the greater good?
Is it Jon's observation that abortion cases are political anathema for the GOP? Or can the GOP successfully point out that many states have what the rest of the world would consider some of the most liberal abortion laws in the world.From a political viewpoint rather than a personal theological one, this type of case does pose problems for pro life people. But, what is the greater good?
Respecting and facilitating the woman’s decision to terminate this pregnancy sooner rather than later for the sound medical and personal reasons presented before the courts.
The greater good is served by recognizing her choice. It is not served by meddling in her personal health matters.
Elbows up!
-
Personal health is important.
That includes the personal health of the baby.
Her choice happened when she dropped her trousers.
The baby hasn't made any choices yet.
We can discuss rape if we have to, but that is a small subset, about 1% of pregnancies I believe.
-
Personal health is important.
That includes the personal health of the baby.
Her choice happened when she dropped her trousers.
The baby hasn't made any choices yet.
We can discuss rape if we have to, but that is a small subset, about 1% of pregnancies I believe.
@Copper said in Abortion Case in Texas - court allowed, court blocked:
Personal health is important.
That includes the personal health of the baby.
Her choice happened when she dropped her trousers.
The baby hasn't made any choices yet.
We can discuss rape if we have to, but that is a small subset, about 1% of pregnancies I believe.
So you’ve decided the choices for everyone.
Got it. Case closed. No point in any further discussion.
Copper himself has decided the issue! This calls for a Te Deum to be sung.
-
From a political viewpoint rather than a personal theological one, this type of case does pose problems for pro life people. But, what is the greater good?
Respecting and facilitating the woman’s decision to terminate this pregnancy sooner rather than later for the sound medical and personal reasons presented before the courts.
The greater good is served by recognizing her choice. It is not served by meddling in her personal health matters.
@Renauda said in Abortion Case in Texas - court allowed, court blocked:
From a political viewpoint rather than a personal theological one, this type of case does pose problems for pro life people. But, what is the greater good?
Respecting and facilitating the woman’s decision to terminate this pregnancy sooner rather than later for the sound medical and personal reasons presented before the courts.
The greater good is served by recognizing her choice. It is not served by meddling in her personal health matters.
From whence is your morality and authority?
“Cry havoc and let slip the DOGE of war!”
Those who cheered as J-6 American prisoners were locked in solitary for 18 months without trial, now suddenly fight tooth and nail for foreign terrorists’ "due process". — Buck Sexton
-
@Renauda said in Abortion Case in Texas - court allowed, court blocked:
From a political viewpoint rather than a personal theological one, this type of case does pose problems for pro life people. But, what is the greater good?
Respecting and facilitating the woman’s decision to terminate this pregnancy sooner rather than later for the sound medical and personal reasons presented before the courts.
The greater good is served by recognizing her choice. It is not served by meddling in her personal health matters.
From whence is your morality and authority?
@Jolly said in Abortion Case in Texas - court allowed, court blocked:
@Renauda said in Abortion Case in Texas - court allowed, court blocked:
From a political viewpoint rather than a personal theological one, this type of case does pose problems for pro life people. But, what is the greater good?
Respecting and facilitating the woman’s decision to terminate this pregnancy sooner rather than later for the sound medical and personal reasons presented before the courts.
The greater good is served by recognizing her choice. It is not served by meddling in her personal health matters.
From whence is your morality and authority?
From a tradition of secular liberalism and the libertarian thought of Thomas Paine.
I have no expectation whatsoever that either of us can agree on this issue. I have said my piece and am finished with the discussion.
-
Back to the matter at hand. This is one of those cases that I am not equipped to judge, and neither is any court in the land. This should be in her hands to decide without interference or repercussions on the physician, if the facts of the case are as stated.
The Brad
-
And the Texas Supreme Court ruled against the woman:
The ruling: https://www.txcourts.gov/media/1457645/230994pc.pdf
Essentially the Texas Supreme Court unanimously ruled that the woman's doctor has not asserted that the woman's condition meets the legal exceptions to allow an abortion.
Sounds like the doctor saying that having a fatal fetus and the threat of losing her future futility is not enough to meet the Texas law's exceptions for threat to the woman's life or loss of a major bodily function.
Pro-Choice activist's reaction: "[this case] is proof that exceptions don’t work, and it’s dangerous to be pregnant in any state with an abortion ban."
-
Back to the matter at hand. This is one of those cases that I am not equipped to judge, and neither is any court in the land. This should be in her hands to decide without interference or repercussions on the physician, if the facts of the case are as stated.
@LuFins-Dad said in Abortion Case in Texas - court allowed, court blocked:
Back to the matter at hand. This is one of those cases that I am not equipped to judge, and neither is any court in the land. This should be in her hands to decide without interference or repercussions on the physician, if the facts of the case are as stated.
Agreed. If the facts are clear... termination of pregnancies should be allowed when they are medically necessary (fatal/risk).
Not to equate, but it's like saying the person has the right to surgically remove their arm if it risks the whole body whereas normally such a procedure (in my mind) should not be allowed voluntarily (e.g., I got a tattoo and now I don't want it so cut off my arm, please).
