SCOTUS blocks controversial abortion law

originally posted by: RazorV66

originally posted by: ErEhWoN

Chief Justice John Roberts sides with liberal justices to block a Louisiana measure that critics say would have closed nearly every clinic in the state
READ: Supreme Court opinion blockin

Washington (CNN)Chief Justice John Roberts sided with the liberal justices on the Supreme Court on Monday to block a controversial Louisiana abortion law that critics said would have closed nearly every clinic in the state.

The 5-4 ruling is a win for supporters of abortion rights who argued that the law was not medically necessary and amounted to a veiled attempt to restrict abortion. The law barred doctors from performing the procedure unless they had admitting privileges at a nearby hospital.

If you think CNN is not a valid news source, this thread ain't for you.

Seems the Conservative's plan to stack the deck in the SCOTUS is not exactly working as intended. LGBTQ, abortion, immigration...

Maybe one should vote on issues that effect the living, instead of taking people's rights away.

www.cnn.com...

Hmmm...this doesn’t affect the living?
I don’t have a dog in the abortion fight, this country has bigger issues that the Left has flagrantly pissed on.
But the blatant hypocrisy of the Leftists looking the other way on millions and millions of abortions is and has always been very telling.

Mostly black babies, BLM

a reply to: ErEhWoN
The original decision was abortion only in the first trimester, now they want to deliver the baby and then let the mother decide to let it live or be killed. This has been a creeping supposed right just like 2nd amendment restrictions on fire arms only in reverse.

originally posted by: bigfatfurrytexan

originally posted by: BrianFlanders
Good. Abortion is like literally one of the very few things modern medicine is doing right. The only thing that bugs me is abortion isn't done nearly often enough.

care to explain this?

What's to explain? It speaks for itself. It's not like I wrote it in another language or something.

a reply to: HalWesten

If those Democrat quotes don't make your skin crawl, you need to see a shrink.

Shall we compare with skin crawling quotes from Republicans?

Think I can find any?

a reply to: Wide-Eyes

You think those are the reasons people would prefer conservative judges?

It's what conservatives think, or what they say. What they prey for.

And yes, I am cute.

a reply to: Bluntone22

Having admitting rights doesn’t seem like it’s asking to much on the surface.

So do they consider Dentist have admitting rights, in the interest of patient safety of course.

How about the foot doctor that takes out ingrown toenails?

Botox injections? Laser sculpting?

Attention Please

Keep it civil please. You are not in the Mud Pit. Thanks and do not reply to this post.

originally posted by: ErEhWoN
a reply to: HalWesten

If those Democrat quotes don't make your skin crawl, you need to see a shrink.

Shall we compare with skin crawling quotes from Republicans?

Think I can find any?

Of course you can, I was responding to your previous post to make the point that it's not one-sided.

originally posted by: ErEhWoN
a reply to: DanDanDat

fear mongering from the left over these issues was unwarranted?

The 'fear mongering' from the left was pale in comparison to the rights rapture over the GOP picking judges. Seems this is what was unwarranted.

I don't even understand what that means.

originally posted by: PhilbertDezineck
a reply to: ErEhWoN
The original decision was abortion only in the first trimester, now they want to deliver the baby and then let the mother decide to let it live or be killed. This has been a creeping supposed right just like 2nd amendment restrictions on fire arms only in reverse.

Wrong!

Roe V Wade gives women and their doctors legal access to abortion up until "viability". Always...Nothing has changed.

A non-viable 7 month, 8 month or even 9 month old fetus is still non-viable.

Roe V Wade doesn't address how to treat a non-viable infant, born alive. Doctors and family members determine when to terminate life support, and insurance companies decide who is and who is not eligible for life support coverage.

originally posted by: Sookiechacha

originally posted by: PhilbertDezineck
a reply to: ErEhWoN
The original decision was abortion only in the first trimester, now they want to deliver the baby and then let the mother decide to let it live or be killed. This has been a creeping supposed right just like 2nd amendment restrictions on fire arms only in reverse.

Wrong!

Roe V Wade gives women and their doctors legal access to abortion up until "viability". Always...Nothing has changed.

A non-viable 7 month, 8 month or even 9 month old fetus is still non-viable.

Roe V Wade doesn't address how to treat a non-viable infant, born alive. Doctors and family members determine when to terminate life support, and insurance companies decide who is and who is not eligible for life support coverage.

Do you know what viable means?
www.google.com...
" Biology
(of a plant, animal, or cell) capable of surviving or living successfully, especially under particular environmental conditions.
Medicine
(of a fetus or unborn child) able to live after birth."

www.bellybelly.com.au...
"The earliest a baby has been born and survived is 21 weeks and 5 days. Two premature babies hold the record for this.

Surprisingly, the first record holder was born in 1987, a time when the medical care of premature babies (neonatology) was a very new field.

However, this is well before the accepted age of viability. Usually, the earliest a baby can survive is about 22 weeks gestation. The age of viability is 24 weeks.

At 22 weeks, there’s a 0-10% chance of survival; at 24 weeks the survival rate is 40-70%."

Let's do the math, 24 weeks is right at 6 months, which is the top end of accepted "viability". I thought the left was all about "science"?

originally posted by: panoz77

originally posted by: Sookiechacha

originally posted by: PhilbertDezineck
a reply to: ErEhWoN
The original decision was abortion only in the first trimester, now they want to deliver the baby and then let the mother decide to let it live or be killed. This has been a creeping supposed right just like 2nd amendment restrictions on fire arms only in reverse.

Wrong!

Roe V Wade gives women and their doctors legal access to abortion up until "viability". Always...Nothing has changed.

A non-viable 7 month, 8 month or even 9 month old fetus is still non-viable.

Roe V Wade doesn't address how to treat a non-viable infant, born alive. Doctors and family members determine when to terminate life support, and insurance companies decide who is and who is not eligible for life support coverage.

Do you know what viable means?
www.google.com...
" Biology
(of a plant, animal, or cell) capable of surviving or living successfully, especially under particular environmental conditions.
Medicine
(of a fetus or unborn child) able to live after birth."

www.bellybelly.com.au...
"The earliest a baby has been born and survived is 21 weeks and 5 days. Two premature babies hold the record for this.

Surprisingly, the first record holder was born in 1987, a time when the medical care of premature babies (neonatology) was a very new field.

However, this is well before the accepted age of viability. Usually, the earliest a baby can survive is about 22 weeks gestation. The age of viability is 24 weeks.

At 22 weeks, there’s a 0-10% chance of survival; at 24 weeks the survival rate is 40-70%."

Let's do the math, 24 weeks is right at 6 months, which is the top end of accepted "viability". I thought the left was all about "science"?

Roe V Wade protects a woman's choice up to viability, not until 21 or 24 weeks. A 24 week old fetus is not always viable. A 30 week old fetus is not always viable. a 40 week old fetus is not always viable.

Abortions done at these stages are done in almost always done in a hospital settings, not as out patient procedures in clinics.

originally posted by: Sookiechacha

originally posted by: panoz77

originally posted by: Sookiechacha

originally posted by: PhilbertDezineck
a reply to: ErEhWoN
The original decision was abortion only in the first trimester, now they want to deliver the baby and then let the mother decide to let it live or be killed. This has been a creeping supposed right just like 2nd amendment restrictions on fire arms only in reverse.

Wrong!

Roe V Wade gives women and their doctors legal access to abortion up until "viability". Always...Nothing has changed.

A non-viable 7 month, 8 month or even 9 month old fetus is still non-viable.

Roe V Wade doesn't address how to treat a non-viable infant, born alive. Doctors and family members determine when to terminate life support, and insurance companies decide who is and who is not eligible for life support coverage.

Do you know what viable means?
www.google.com...
" Biology
(of a plant, animal, or cell) capable of surviving or living successfully, especially under particular environmental conditions.
Medicine
(of a fetus or unborn child) able to live after birth."

www.bellybelly.com.au...
"The earliest a baby has been born and survived is 21 weeks and 5 days. Two premature babies hold the record for this.

Surprisingly, the first record holder was born in 1987, a time when the medical care of premature babies (neonatology) was a very new field.

However, this is well before the accepted age of viability. Usually, the earliest a baby can survive is about 22 weeks gestation. The age of viability is 24 weeks.

At 22 weeks, there’s a 0-10% chance of survival; at 24 weeks the survival rate is 40-70%."

Let's do the math, 24 weeks is right at 6 months, which is the top end of accepted "viability". I thought the left was all about "science"?

Roe V Wade protects a woman's choice up to viability, not until 21 or 24 weeks. A 24 week old fetus is not always viable. A 30 week old fetus is not always viable. a 40 week old fetus is not always viable.

Abortions done at these stages are done in almost always done in a hospital settings, not as out patient procedures in clinics.

A living human of any age is not always viable, you could drop dead in 3 minutes from now from a heart attack or stroke. Nothing is 100%, including you typing your next words. You are arguing viability, the ability to survive outside the womb, do you believe in science or not?

a reply to: panoz77

You are arguing viability, the ability to survive outside the womb, do you believe in science or not?

Do you?

Some fetuses will never attain viability.

originally posted by: Sookiechacha
a reply to: panoz77

You are arguing viability, the ability to survive outside the womb, do you believe in science or not?

Do you?

Some fetuses will never attain viability.

True, especially if they are vacuumed out of a womb in pieces. However, as early as 24 weeks if a baby is delivered is has at least a 40%-70% chance of viability and survival. I do believe in science and I backed it up with facts.