It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by charles1952
reply to post by windword
I'm not willing to believe that everyone who has an unfavorable opinion of it wants to ban it. So, we're looking at what, maybe 10% of the people who would like to ban it? Dear windword, you can find 10% of the population willing to ban anything.
I don't understand your cause for concern.
Since most contraception have an added protection, should fertilization occur, they make the uterus hostile to implant, thus redefining "The Pill" "Norplant" "The IUD" and all emergency birth control fall in the category of abortion. This has the ramification that could require extra costly tests for a woman just to obtain her regular form of control, because, by their logic, now she is asking for an abortion, even before she's pregnant, and may require and vaginal ultra sound and a 24 hour wait period!
The all male budget committee has also redefined the term "Viability" beyond what the Supreme Court and the AMA believe to be true. (4) "Viable pregnancy" means a pregnancy in which a fetal sac is located inside the pregnant woman's uterus and fetal cardiac activity is present within the fetal sac."
SOURCE
The fetal heart starts beating during the embryonic stage of pregnancy at 22 days after conception
North Dakota enacted the “fetal heartbeat” ban to criminalize all abortion services after just 6 weeks of pregnancy.
Read more: communities.washingtontimes.com...
Follow us: @wtcommunities on Twitter
So after the first trimester, the state is allowed to do many things which have the effect of reducing the availability of abortions. Further:
With respect to the State's important and legitimate interest in the health of the mother, the "compelling" point, in the light of present medical knowledge, is at approximately the end of the first trimester. This is so because of the now-established medical fact that, until the end of the first trimester mortality in abortion may be less than mortality in normal childbirth. It follows that, from and after this point, a State may regulate the abortion procedure to the extent that the regulation reasonably relates to the preservation and protection of maternal health. Examples of permissible state regulation in this area are requirements as to the qualifications of the person who is to perform the abortion; as to the licensure of that person; as to the facility in which the procedure is to be performed, that is, whether it must be a hospital or may be a clinic or some other place of less-than-hospital status; as to the licensing of the facility; and the like. (Emphasis added)
2. The State may define the term "physician," as it has been employed in the preceding paragraphs of this Part XI of this opinion, to mean only a physician currently licensed by the State, and may proscribe any abortion by a person who is not a physician as so defined
Originally posted by charles1952
reply to post by windword
Dear windword,
I agree with you that six weeks seems extreme. How about 13, the end of the first trimester?
Fetal viability is the ability of a fetus to survive outside the uterus. en.wikipedia.org...
I hadn't read Roe v. Wade in a while, so I went back to it. There are some interesting things there.
So after the first trimester, the state is allowed to do many things which have the effect of reducing the availability of abortions. Further:
Examples of permissible state regulation in this area are requirements as to the qualifications of the person who is to perform the abortion; as to the licensure of that person; as to the facility in which the procedure is to be performed, that is, whether it must be a hospital or may be a clinic or some other place of less-than-hospital status; as to the licensing of the facility; and the like. (Emphasis added)
2. The State may define the term "physician," as it has been employed in the preceding paragraphs of this Part XI of this opinion, to mean only a physician currently licensed by the State, and may proscribe any abortion by a person who is not a physician as so defined
But, I'm still not persuaded that the decision of North Dakota will be copied in many other states, if any. We know the law will be challenged immediately, and will be struck down. I hate to sound flip, but "No worries."
there has been a documented upsurge in uterus removals in older women who started using the pill back in the 70s
Originally posted by Logarock
reply to post by CB328
I am amazed but you may be young yet. It is well known that by the 1990s many many women that were on birth control since the 70s were having parts of their reproductive systems removed due to several common bad developments therein such as cysts, tumors ect.
Do young think those concerned with making money from female reproductive products are going to broadcast these facts?
There have been a lot of confusing headlines, so here's the bottom line. One: Despite what you may have heard, taking the Pill has no impact on breast cancer risk. Two: It drastically reduces the lifetime risk of ovarian and endometrial cancers—by 80 percent in women who take it for at least 10 years. Three: It slightly raises the chance of cervical cancer, but the extra risk disappears soon after you stop taking it. All in all, the good news far outweighs the bad
www.womenshealthmag.com...
"Today's Pill raises the likelihood of having a blood clot threefold," Kaunitz says. "By contrast, pregnancy and childbirth elevate your chances five-to tenfold." As long as you don't already have cardiovascular risk factors like high blood pressure or diabetes and you're not a smoker, OCs don't increase the risk for heart attack and stroke, and you can safely take them until menopause.
www.womenshealthmag.com...
What "war on women"?? Do you think the only people against abortion are men?
Originally posted by windword
Originally posted by Logarock
reply to post by CB328
I am amazed but you may be young yet. It is well known that by the 1990s many many women that were on birth control since the 70s were having parts of their reproductive systems removed due to several common bad developments therein such as cysts, tumors ect.
Do young think those concerned with making money from female reproductive products are going to broadcast these facts?
I'd like to see where you get those "well known" statistics.
There have been a lot of confusing headlines, so here's the bottom line. One: Despite what you may have heard, taking the Pill has no impact on breast cancer risk. Two: It drastically reduces the lifetime risk of ovarian and endometrial cancers—by 80 percent in women who take it for at least 10 years. Three: It slightly raises the chance of cervical cancer, but the extra risk disappears soon after you stop taking it. All in all, the good news far outweighs the bad
www.womenshealthmag.com...
Originally posted by phishyblankwaters
reply to post by NOTurTypical
What "war on women"?? Do you think the only people against abortion are men?
Men are unable to give birth, do not take birth control pills or the morning after pill, so yeah, this is a war on women. That doesn't mean thickheaded housewives aren't there holding signs looking like idiots too.
Originally posted by charles1952
Public Policy Polling for Daily Kos & SEIU. 2/23-26. Registered voters. MoE ±3.1% (no trendlines):
Q: Do you have a favorable or unfavorable opinion of birth control?
Favorable: 66
Unfavorable: 16
Not sure: 18
www.dailykos.com...
I don't understand your cause for concern.
Do you favor or oppose background checks on potential gun buyers?
Favor 94%
Oppose 6%
Originally posted by NOTurTypical
reply to post by windword
What "war on women"??
Do you think the only people against abortion are men?
Originally posted by phishyblankwaters
reply to post by NOTurTypical
What "war on women"?? Do you think the only people against abortion are men?
Men are unable to give birth, do not take birth control pills or the morning after pill, so yeah, this is a war on women. That doesn't mean thickheaded housewives aren't there holding signs looking like idiots too.
Originally posted by jimmyx
Originally posted by NOTurTypical
reply to post by windword
What "war on women"??
Do you think the only people against abortion are men?
most of those against abortion are men....I think women should demand a law that all men immediately get their testicles snipped until they get married and want to have children...after all it's not their body, and women should have an equal say in what men can do inside their own body, just like the republican Taliban here in America can do