New York legislature votes to legalize abortion up to birth, let non-doctors commit abortions

originally posted by: Xenogears

originally posted by: amazing
Am I wrong? And correct me cause I'm not so bright. That appeared to mean, only if the baby wouldn't survive anyways and to save the mother? That's the intent right? If I'm wrong, please just tell me.

Think I read the law abolishes the survival protections of the baby. That seems to suggest that if the attempted abortion fails and the baby survives they are free to kill it.

But why would they?
Unless American doctors and whatever medical practitioners are absolute monsters....

originally posted by: EternalSolace

originally posted by: Xtrozero
I haven't read all the posts, but does this also mean that a murder will not be charged with a double homicide for killing a pregnant mother even if the birth is days from happening?

What a stupid post. You know just as well as anyone else that the subject who kills a woman in any stage of pregnancy can be charged with fetal homicide.

also if he or she induces involuntary miscarriage or abortion, late term, I think it is called murder.

originally posted by: snowspirit

originally posted by: Xenogears

originally posted by: amazing
Am I wrong? And correct me cause I'm not so bright. That appeared to mean, only if the baby wouldn't survive anyways and to save the mother? That's the intent right? If I'm wrong, please just tell me.

Think I read the law abolishes the survival protections of the baby. That seems to suggest that if the attempted abortion fails and the baby survives they are free to kill it.

But why would they?
Unless American doctors and whatever medical practitioners are absolute monsters....

Earlier in the thread, it was said to get around the law they inject toxins to kill the baby while inside the mother if late abortion. Who knows if they'd be subject to legal penalties or future suing from the child.

Also what was requested was to kill the baby not give it up for adoption.

a reply to: Xenogears

only if they want to be federally charged for the crime?
federal law stands above state law. it doesn't matter what the state law says or doesn't say on this if the federal law requires all health care providers to provide emergency lifesaving care to people, even an infant that might survive an attempted abortion.

a reply to: Xenogears

Expecting only reassurance, Kate knitted a pink sweater for Laurel while chatting freely with the technician who quickly grew silent. There was a big black spot on Laurel’s brain. “This baby is different,” the technician said. She left the room and returned with a maternal fetal specialist and a specialist in training.

“That’s when they started telling me,” Kate says. The fetus had Dandy-Walker malformation, a set of abnormalities of the cerebellum.


“The problems we didn’t see last time, we are seeing today,” said the specialist. She offered Kate adoption and abortion, “if it was still a legal option”. They used to send women to Kansas for abortions, she told her, but that was before Dr Tiller was shot in the face at a Sunday church service.

Kate asked if children with Dandy-Walker malformation are ever normal. “Yes,” said the specialist.

“And that, honestly, is so hard to hear because you just want something definitive”, Kate recalls. “On the one hand, of course you want your child to be normal. On the other hand, you want to know, is your kid going to be okay, is your kid going to receive a devastating diagnosis?” But the specialist had no definitive answers and recommended an MRI to determine whether Laurel would be okay or “incompatible with life”.

Kate couldn’t get the MRI for the next 48 hours. The wait was excruciating. At home, she could find no peace and substituted knitting her baby’s sweater for sleeping. She curled up on her living room sofa and cried until her husband scooped her up each night and took her to bed.

“When you’re imagining futures beyond the miracle happy ending, it’s sinking in,” she says.

The day of the MRI finally arrived. She was 35 weeks, 0 days. By the end of it, Kate and her husband had the hardest answers they’ve ever received.

Their daughter had moderate to severe Dandy-Walker malformation. But that wasn’t the only diagnosis; Laurel also had a brain condition in which fluid builds up in the ventricles, eventually developing into hydrocephalus and possibly crushing her brain. She had a congenital disorder too, in which there was complete or partial absence of the broad band of nerve fibers joining the two hemispheres of the brain.

What this meant was Laurel was expected to never walk, talk, or swallow. That was if she survived birth.

Kate asked her doctor: “What can a baby like mine do? Sleep all the time?”

“Babies like yours are not generally comfortable enough to sleep,” the neurologist said.

“That is when it became very clear what I wanted to do,” she says. “The MRI really ruled out the possibility of good health for my baby.”

www.abovetopsecret.com...

Evil. Pure evil. This is the caliber of "law makers" we have?
"Civil law" defying the "law of nature"?
Geegats, women! Keep your knees together! If you don't understand how "sex", makes babies. Keep your knees together or at least? Die trying!
Buy a weapon, learn how to use it and defend your right to not be raped? (Because baby killers always ask, what about rape?)
I have no doubt, that a lot of Dem politicians have some "children/babies" out there, they don't want to share their "name" with. To them, "legal suiciding" is better than honor.

"Empires, are "judged" only after they fall. By the "educated idiots" of the future. It is our job, as a people. To leave our mark on the land. In the rock. Let a future "scientist" dig up, your bones, wrapped around a sword. Let them sift the burnt earth around you. Leave the scholars of the future with no boubt, that you, "died with the Philistines". That you died, with a smile on your face." -SSG. M. Murphy (Ret.)

originally posted by: TinySickTears

originally posted by: Bloodworth

originally posted by: TinySickTears
i love how these members are so passionate about this life.!!!!!!!!

but then you get in other threads and they seem pretty callous.
about life in general and treatment of people that are you know. alive.

getting them scopes dialed in

but the babies man

Lol you came back to double down, everyone is on the same page except you.
..

People are compassionate about helpless beings that have zero choice, not for grown humans who make stupid decisions.

What kind of a loser do you have to be to have so much unprotected sex that you would need to kill this thing inside you asap before it grows into a human.

Then on the flip side, 90% of the women showing up for abortions are the bottom of the barrel, the losers of society that will.probably cause more problems for society then contribute.

There were times when these losers would be killed before they could even have babies.

Catch 22, do you make the cum dumpsters have their kids so people are not responsible for actually killing a baby or be happy the losers are not breeding ?

Bottom of the barrel cum dumpsters.

Got it

You're just proving my point.

You lot care about some life.

It's all negotiable.

You think all people are equal? You don't believe the world would be better off without child kidnappers and rapist?

You care about their life?

When a "civilized society" makes it "legal" to suicide its future?
Kind of makes one wonder? ..

1. Why did they "need" a "law", to make it legal? If it was already okay to do?

2. I'm paying S.S. "benefits" for pass generation that never paid that much into it to begin with? As my generation is paying into it.
3. The government is sanctioning the murder of future surfs, paying into my "social security"?
Sounds like a lot of evil/liberal "ideals" need to be unf'ed! Before they start "offing", killing my future "retirement supporters". Lol!
F'n commie/libs! Going to have to start killing people to keep up with their "social contracts". F'n educated idiots. Couldn't, "government themselves out of a wet paper bag".

a reply to: Bloodworth

We are not talking about kidnappers and rapists.

We are talking about pregnant women

originally posted by: TinySickTears
a reply to: Bloodworth

We are not talking about kidnappers and rapists.

We are talking about pregnant women

We are talking about pregnant women?

We are talking about babies.....

Some lives matter some do not

a reply to: murphy22

2. I'm paying S.S. "benefits" for pass generation that never paid that much into it to begin with? As my generation is paying into it.

first, please adjust for the insane deflation we've seen in our dollar and if you still fell that your generation is paying for much more.. well

are you sure about that?? I mean, most of the people back in the day were actually working, families were staying together, social welfare programs weren't really that great. and most people had someone in the household earning a living wage!!! and most of the money being paid out to employees were more equally spread around, not being bestowed to the few at the top of the latter, thus making them non-taxable income when it comes to social security...

irreagardless, like I already pointed out.
abortions rates have been steadily dropping since the 80s and are at their lowest level since roe came into effect.

www.npr.org...

it's not abortion that is screwing up the demographics, it's women opting not to have children and using birth control.

originally posted by: Bloodworth

Some lives matter some do not

so who decides?
you?

originally posted by: TinySickTears

originally posted by: Bloodworth

Some lives matter some do not

so who decides?
you?

Did you not get the left, progressive, extremist, feminism, anti male everything memo?


A baby is not a baby unless a woman wants it to be a baby. And man can have no claim to to it unless the woman wants entrapment or nothing to do with the obituaries.

originally posted by: EternalSolace

originally posted by: TinySickTears

originally posted by: Bloodworth

Some lives matter some do not

so who decides?
you?

Did you not get the left, progressive, extremist, feminism, anti male everything memo?


A baby is not a baby unless a woman wants it to be a baby.

my memo said a baby is not baby if it is not born.

originally posted by: TinySickTears

originally posted by: EternalSolace

originally posted by: TinySickTears

originally posted by: Bloodworth

Some lives matter some do not

so who decides?
you?

Did you not get the left, progressive, extremist, feminism, anti male everything memo?


A baby is not a baby unless a woman wants it to be a baby.

my memo said a baby is not baby if it is not born.

And life experience says the roadside emergency c-section I was a part of says you're full of #.

originally posted by: TinySickTears

originally posted by: EternalSolace

originally posted by: TinySickTears

originally posted by: Bloodworth

Some lives matter some do not

so who decides?
you?

Did you not get the left, progressive, extremist, feminism, anti male everything memo?


A baby is not a baby unless a woman wants it to be a baby.

my memo said a baby is not baby if it is not born.

Scary mentality....

originally posted by: Bloodworth

Scary mentality....

thats how i feel about people who think of some of these women as bottom of the barrel cum dumpsters.

it is what it is

a reply to: dawnstar

okay, a women is in her 20th, her husband and her have spent a large sum of money over the years at various fertility clinic and finally, they concieved!! they are overjoyed! but then well someone breaks into their house, and because of something that was done, she ends up miscarrying.. why isn't this couple's loss thought to be less than the couple that you have imagined?

Please clarify......
Are you saying the loss should NOT be criminalized during any timeline or it should be criminalized for the whole period?
Or are you saying the prosecutor should be given some leeway given the traumatic damage done?
Imagine a rape victim that was 50/50 on having an abortion but then decides against it, but an accident causes her to lose the baby, she decides she doesn't want to press charges, and the state declines as well.
As think the mother should have the final say if the procedural charges move forward that protect her from stupid charges on accidents and also in cases like we described where she is devastated and she could move forward with a murder charge.

I don't know how feminists could ever be against case law where the female has the absolute final say in this matter, they would be against their own self interests. And it would make people against that, and are pro-choice the biggest hypocrites in the world.

But then again do we offer no protection to the baby that is 8 months, and the mother decides to get drunk and go on drugs, causing the baby to die or become permanently damaged ? Maybe not a murder charge but what about involuntary manslaughter that carries a lesser charge ?

originally posted by: dawnstar

ever think to consider that a person could have a child that they consider a baby, one, or two year old and be pregnant at the same time?? it might be a stupid position to be in, but it was one that I found myself in!! and yes, the doctor was yelling at me at every visit to stop lifting the kids, which I didn't have really much choice about!!!

What...in the world... There is something really wrong with you. First of all, when you claimed that "what about a woman who is charged with murder for picking up her baby, or falling downstairs" you did not say that "she is pregnant and also has a 2 year old... You keep making s#it up as you go along. BTW, you have NEVER provided any case from New York showing how "a woman was charged with murder of her unborn for falling downstairs..." Don't claim you have, because you have not.

You keep making claims that are not even based on reality, you ignore what the law actually states, and instead you keep trying to drag this thread talking about "first and second trimester, and how women could be charged with murder of their unborn for falling downstairs," and other completely inane arguments.

originally posted by: dawnstar
by the way, we've been here so many times before, I have brought the same stories as these to your attention plus plenty more. I've gotten tired of tracking down the sources to the stories and posting them and well, I know that you have been provided links to them many times...

False... you only make false allegations that only exist in your imagination, and you keep trying to drag threads like this one with nonsense. It should be easy for you to show of a pregnant woman who fell downstairs and was charged with the murder of her unborn baby...

originally posted by: dawnstar
so, no, I don't see you backing up the allegation that groups are "forcing" abortions on women in third world countries, you haven't provided any links to stories of babies being ripped from their mother's wombs days before their birth date.

The Gates have given millions of their money to such programs, but they also do fundraising, mostly using U.S. U.K aid, to pay for these programs. A few years back, both Bill and Melinda claimed that they would stop providing their own money for these programs, but they keep doing fundraising, using tax payer money, to fund these same programs.

Even Bill Gates has stated that "his vaccination, and healthcare programs will help in population control." How does "vaccination, and healthcare programs" help with "population control"?

...
"The world today has 6.8 billion people... that's headed up to about 9 billion. Now if we do a really great job on new vaccines, health care, reproductive health services, we could lower that by perhaps 10 or 15 percent."

www.goodreads.com...

In the above comment made by Bill Gates, he includes "vaccines and healthcare" as part of the solution to lower the future world's population. Yes, he also talks about "reproductive health services," but he does includes "new vaccines and healthcare" as part of the solution to lower the future world population.

Vaccination, and healthcare programs are supposed to help combat diseases and illness, they are "supposedly" intended to improve life, and lower deaths. But Bill Gates says in that comment that they are intended for "population control."

Gethin Chamberlain

Sat 14 Apr 2012 19.06 EDT
First published on Sat 14 Apr 2012 19.06 EDT

Tens of millions of pounds of UK aid money have been spent on a programme that has forcibly sterilised Indian women and men, the Observer has learned. Many have died as a result of botched operations, while others have been left bleeding and in agony. A number of pregnant women selected for sterilisation suffered miscarriages and lost their babies.

The UK agreed to give India £166m to fund the programme, despite allegations that the money would be used to sterilise the poor in an attempt to curb the country's burgeoning population of 1.2 billion people.

Sterilisation has been mired in controversy for years. With officials and doctors paid a bonus for every operation, poor and little-educated men and women in rural areas are routinely rounded up and sterilised without having a chance to object. Activists say some are told they are going to health camps for operations that will improve their general wellbeing and only discover the truth after going under the knife.
...
Court documents filed in India earlier this month claim that many victims have been left in pain, with little or no aftercare. Across the country, there have been numerous reports of deaths and of pregnant women suffering miscarriages after being selected for sterilisation without being warned that they would lose their unborn babies.

Yet a working paper published by the UK's Department for International Development in 2010 cited the need to fight climate change as one of the key reasons for pressing ahead with such programmes. The document argued that reducing population numbers would cut greenhouse gases, although it warned that there were "complex human rights and ethical issues" involved in forced population control.
...

UK aid helps to fund forced sterilisation of India's poor

In the UK, the main agency that provides aid "for family planning in third world countries" is the UK's Department for International Development, which has been amid many scandals including prostitution, intimidation, sexual harassment, and harassment in general to whistleblowers.

IPPF given £132m aid despite allegations of sexual misconduct

Government knew about sexual abuse scandal in the aid sector involving 300 people, former Aid Secretary Priti Patel says

The Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation has been working for over a decade with the UK's Department for International Development for "charity programs" including vaccinations, healthcare, and population control alongside "education" in third world countries.

These people hide behind "charitable programs" to force their Liberal view to the world which includes forced sterilizations, forced abortions, etc, all in the name of "fighting Climate Change and for the betterment of humanity, blah blah blah..."

In developed countries these "rich Liberals" like the Gates, George Soros, the Rockefellers, ect, don't need to push for "forced sterilizations and abortions anymore" because they have convinced millions of women that "murdering the unborn gives them power."

BTW, it wasn't my intention to get off a tangent, but since you want to claim I have never posted this evidence I had to prove you wrong.

originally posted by: TinySickTears

originally posted by: Bloodworth

Scary mentality....

thats how i feel about people who think of some of these women as bottom of the barrel cum dumpsters.

it is what it is

But isn't people like you who think like that?... After all you think it is okay for women to have abortions "at least" up to the due date of the baby, and for any reason.

Most of us who are against what is obviously infanticide believe that perhaps women should learn to control themselves, or ask for a hysterectomy, better protect themselves, or even give their newborns for adoptions instead of being what you called them in your above comment, and then they "can have abortions on demand and for any reason..."

It is people like you who see women as you described in your comment above...

Despite the claims from the left that "death gives women power," the most powerful gift women have is that they carry new human life. The most powerful gift women have is LIFE, not DEATH.

a reply to: ElectricUniverse

What...in the world... There is something really wrong with you. First of all, when you claimed that "what about a woman who is charged with murder for picking up her baby, or falling downstairs" you did not say that "she is pregnant and also has a 2 year old... You keep making s#it up as you go along. BTW, you have NEVER provided any case from New York showing how "a woman was charged with murder of her unborn for falling downstairs..." Don't claim you have, because you have not.

it's the same story I've told over and over on threads regarding abortions on ATS, if you look back on this thread, you see I mention it. the only difference is that I was more concerned with falling with my baby than I was with losing the child I was carrying... something that probably would have been considered a "you should have known better moment also"!!

and, yes, I am pretty sure that I have posted links to the women falling down the stairs story, although I do have to apologize, I was mistaking about one point, they dropped the charges against her. she was jailed for two days instead of home caring for her two young daughters though because, well she fall down some stairs!!!

here's another link to the story.
www.cbsnews.com...