My wife and I are pro-choice but…..24 weeks? (1 Viewer)

[KarmaPolice]

Your the one that seems to think it's a surprise package.    

Yes, my post was a reflection of my belief that a woman would have broccoli growing in her womb.   OR I was saying that we don't know for certain that it will become a living person (ie live until birth).   It was one of those two things.  

 

[Terminalxylem]

What if science one day allows us to put an embryo in some kind of fluid and keep it alive? Would it be considered viable?

Per your hypothetical scenario, alive outside the womb=viable.

Assuming the procedure could be performed with an assurance of maternal safety (a big if IMO), who would pay for it? Who would provide the embryo’s care thereafter?

In addition to bankrupting and overwhelming our neonatal healthcare system, delivering every currently aborted embryo would flood our long term care facilities with the subset of infants suffering from congenital abnormalities, as they’d likely not be adopted.

But considering the survival of the earliest premature babies hasn’t budged much in ~35 years, we’re unlikely to make that type of technological leap anytime soon. If it happens, abortion laws can be revisited.

 

[renesauz]

There's two ways to look at that.

The first way is your way. The second way is that Roe operated like a "Pause Button" that took away the power of state legislatures to decide for themselves on what was best for their constituents. What happens in Texas is not the same as what happens in New York is not the same in what happens in North Carolina.

You see overturning Roe as terrible precedent.

I see Roe, in the first place, as terrible precedent.

What's wrong with states "doing their own thing"?  Our Constitution provides for areas where states can do their own thing. Maybe the people of North Carolina tend to lean one way on things, whereas Texas will be the complete opposite.

Where a lot of tension arises is the GOP strategically, over the long term, put in massive resources, effort and personnel into winning individual state legislatures and built up the asset base/influence base to make overturning Roe happen. They didn't just sit around, they went out and tried to win as many elections as possible. They invested in areas so they could produce a SCOTUS candidate like Amy Coney Barrett.

The GOP took the long haul plan. Team Blue did the reactionary haphazard plan.

The other group that was immediately cast aside were the Pro Life Democrats. They lost their "voice" within the Party apparatus almost completely for 50 years. That was more fallout from Roe.

This isn't 1786. 98% of folks don't live in a single state their whole life. Strengthening the power of the states at the expense of the central government WILL make us weaker, not stronger

 

[Bottomfeeder Sports]

This isn't 1786.

Not yet, but the justices are pushing us there as fast as they can.

 

[BladeRunner]

Not yet, but the justices are pushing us there as fast as they can.

Uhm...no they're not. 

 

[KarmaPolice]

Uhm...no they're not. 

You're right, just 1875.   

 

[Gawain]

Just like gun control, there's a common sense solution that makes no one happy. I've moved to the left over the past six years and one of direct reports is a big R. We try to figure out common ground when we're killing time at work.

Our proposal was:

Unrestricted through week 12.

Week 13-20, medical diagnosis in best interest of mother.

Week 20+, fetal diagnosis incompatible with life/thriving or harm/life to mother.

 

[BladeRunner]

Just like gun control, there's a common sense solution that makes no one happy. I've moved to the left over the past six years and one of direct reports is a big R. We try to figure out common ground when we're killing time at work.

Our proposal was:

Unrestricted through week 12.

Week 13-20, medical diagnosis in best interest of mother.

Week 20+, fetal diagnosis incompatible with life/thriving or harm/life to mother.

I like this.  I like this a lot.  Although, I would say 13-15 medical diagnosis in best interest of mother and 15+ for fetal diagnosis.

 

[Rich Conway]

Week 13-20, medical diagnosis in best interest of mother.

Week 20+, fetal diagnosis incompatible with life/thriving or harm/life to mother.

I'm not clear on the distinction between these two.  Can you unpack?

 

[Terminalxylem]

I'm not clear on the distinction between these two.  Can you unpack?

I’m also unclear why 12 weeks marks the start of restrictions.

 

[Gawain]

I'm not clear on the distinction between these two.  Can you unpack?

Best interest would generally be mental health issues. Harm/Life of mother would cover physical risks. Both would require a Dr's directive.

Fetal diagnosis covers the cases where there's an issue found on a 20-28 week ultrasound.

I’m also unclear why 12 weeks marks the start of restrictions.

From my side, 12 weeks is how to keep medical abortions available to all. I think there's a widespread belief that 12 weeks marks the end of the first trimester as well, so the public at large is used to thinking in terms of weeks 1-12; 13-24 and 24-Birth.

From my anecdotal evidence working with upstate NY republicans, there's a big difference in thought towards a medical abortion and a D&C. Medical abortions can cover a woman through week 10 or so. Protecting access to this form of health care is the most beneficial in my eyes. Protecting women who have a diagnosed issue is the next biggest priority for me.