US Minnesota governor signs broad abortion rights bill into law - Third trimester abortions a-ok. Can I sacrifice babies to Baal now?

1675250425857.png
ST. PAUL, Minn. -- Gov. Tim Walz enshrined the right to abortion and other reproductive health care into Minnesota statutes Tuesday, signing a bill meant to ensure that the state's existing protections remain in place no matter who sits on future courts.

Democratic leaders took advantage of their new control of both houses of the Legislature to rush the bill through in the first month of the 2023 legislative session. They credit the backlash against the U.S. Supreme Court decision last summer to reverse Roe v. Wade for their takeover of the state Senate and for keeping their House majority in a year when Republicans expected to make gains.

“After last year's landmark election across this country, we're the first state to take legislative action to put these protections in place,” Walz said at a signing ceremony flanked by over 100 lawmakers, providers and other advocates who worked to pass the bill.

Abortion rights were already protected under a 1995 Minnesota Supreme Court decision known as Doe v. Gomez, which held that the state Constitution protects abortion rights. And a district court judge last summer declared unconstitutional several restrictions that previous Legislatures had put in place, including a 24-hour waiting period and a parental notification requirement for minors.

Opponents decried the bill as “extreme,” saying that it and other fast-tracked legislation will leave Minnesota with essentially no restrictions on abortion at any stage of pregnancy.

The leaders of the Senate and House GOP minorities, Sen. Mark Johnson, of East Grand Forks, and Rep. Lisa Demuth, of Cold Spring, urged Walz in a letter Monday to veto the bill, saying the Democratic majorities rejected dozens of amendments that Republican lawmakers proposed as guardrails, including prohibitions on third-trimester abortions except to save the patient's life.

But the White House welcomed Walz's signature on the bill, noting that Minnesota is the first state Legislature to codify protections into law this year. Press Secretary Karine Jean-Pierre noted that voters also turned out for ballot initiatives to defend access to abortion in California, Kansas, Kentucky, Michigan, Montana, and Vermont.

“While Congressional Republicans continue their support for extreme policies including a national abortion ban, the President and Vice President are calling on Congress to restore the protections of Roe in federal law," Jean-Pierre said in a statement. "Until then, the Biden-Harris Administration will continue its work to protect access to abortion and support state leaders in defending women’s reproductive rights.”

While the new law will have little immediate further impact on access to abortion in Minnesota, the governor, legislative leaders and sponsors of the bill said it provides a critical new layer of protection in case the composition of the state courts someday changes, as it did on the U.S. Supreme Court before it struck down Roe v. Wade.

“To Minnesotans, know that your access to reproductive health, and your right to make your own health care decisions, are preserved and protected,” Walz said. “And because of this law, that won't change with the political winds and the makeup of the Supreme Court.”

The House passed the bill 69-65 less than two weeks ago, and party discipline held firm during a 15-hour debate in the Senate that ended in a 34-33 vote early Saturday.

“Fundamentally this legislation is about who decides,” said House Speaker Melissa Hortman, of Brooklyn Park. “Who should be legally entitled to make reproductive health care decisions for an individual. ... It can't be decided by politicians. It can't be decided by judges.”

Abortion is currently considered illegal at all stages of pregnancy, with various exceptions, in 13 states, including neighboring Wisconsin and South Dakota. Bans in several states, including neighboring North Dakota, remain on hold for the moment pending court challenges. Because of restrictions elsewhere, Minnesota has seen a surge of pregnant patients coming to the state for abortions.

Minnesota's new law is named the “PRO Act,” short for “Protect Reproductive Actions.” It establishes that “every individual has a fundamental right to make autonomous decisions about the individual’s own reproductive health” including abortion and contraception.

There are other bills to protect abortion rights in the Legislature's pipeline as well, including one to delete the statutory restrictions that the district court declared unconstitutional last summer. It's meant to safeguard against those limits being reinstated if that ruling is overturned on appeal. Hortman said she expected House floor votes to approve them as early as next week.

(+)
 
Liberals don't care about logical consistency, and that's not even an insult. They really just don't.

Michael Knowles had a debate with some baby killing cunt and she said baby is an inappropriate term to use around "pregnant people" because it "anthropomorphizes" the baby fetus and that isn't good because mothers may not want to kill it without the euphemisms and cognitive dissonance at play. But she went on to say it's okay if it's known that the mother wants to keep the baby.

These infanticide advocates are demons and they know exactly what they're doing.
My favorite leftist double think to witness is when they talk about what constitutes murder. Their oversocialized-ness shows really hard when they talk about that. To them any form of killing is murder but when a protected class commits murder it magically becomes self defense because the victim was bruising the murderer's face with desperate punches. They perch very high up on their trash heap when they talk about their wicked idea of "self defense" and they always like to say conservitards or right wingers somewhere in their drabble.
 
They already are the highest consumers of it. Sanger would be proud.
And the only category where black lives don't matter. They only matter when it's killed by cop.

Edit: The guys of American Thinker posted a good rant about this.

February 2, 2023

There is something wrong with people who celebrate this….​

By Silvio Canto, Jr.


What's the celebration all about in Minnesota? Did the Vikings win? Twins add a shortstop? The Wild on the road to the Stanley Cup? The answer is not about sports or a drop in crime rates in Minneapolis. The answer is a celebration about abortion, or "reproductive rights" as they call it these days.
After Roe was overturned, we knew that states would decide the issue on their own. And so they did. Elections have consequences as we see in a 34-33 party-line vote. And in Minnesota they had a huge celebration to go with it. Not one Democrat had the guts to stand up and look at the abortion fanatics and say: This is too much. You can't go this far.
It's pathetic and so weak that it makes you wonder how these people sleep at night. I guess they sleep by calling it protecting reproductive health.
 
Lol. I literally heard the same anti logic from my flatmate. She said that it's a baby if the mom wants to keep it, but not if she doesn't. I said you can't have it both ways and she got legit annoyed and said "Why not?".

Yes you can absolutely have it both ways. Its a concept based on bodily autonomy, really not that hard to understand. Women have it both ways all the time when they decide to terminate or carry to term, since it's a woman's body only she can decide if whatever's growing inside of her is a baby or a parasite.

A bunch of dudes commenting here on a thing they will never ever be able to understand. Stick to talking about your cocks and your balls with which you're obsessed anyway and stay away from women's issues because it makes you look as bad as troons.
 
Based

The later the abortion, the more likely the mother is a disfunctional fuckup who is unfit to raise a child
If you get to 9 months and suddenly realise you need an abortion you're also likely to get to the bottom of the bag of peanuts you're feeding it before realizing it has a peanut allergy, or gorilla glue it's hair or other slow in da mind behaviours
 
This is absolute nonsense taken from some pro life website I'm guessing. Third term abortions are performed using dilation and extraction techniques (or dilation and evacuation). Evacuation is the removal of the contents of the uterus. The evacuation procedure is performed with a combination of suction aspiration and surgical instruments. Two-Day and/or Late Second Trimester procedures are performed on two consecutive days. You don't have to give birth.

This really ain't some secret medical knowledge so I don't know why people here make up some crazy shit.
The women I know who had this done, (2, one for severe foetal abnormality found after 24 weeks and one for a baby who had died in utero about 36 weeks ) had to give birth. Intact foetus = autopsy if wanted.
It should be allowed only for serious issues that will kill either party - choice abortion this late is abhorrent. Pretty abhorrent at any stage imo.
 
Yes you can absolutely have it both ways. Its a concept based on bodily autonomy, really not that hard to understand. Women have it both ways all the time when they decide to terminate or carry to term, since it's a woman's body only she can decide if whatever's growing inside of her is a baby or a parasite.

A bunch of dudes commenting here on a thing they will never ever be able to understand. Stick to talking about your cocks and your balls with which you're obsessed anyway and stay away from women's issues because it makes you look as bad as troons.
"This is nonsense."
'Yeah, but as a woman, I can spout nonsense!'
Real slam dunk there lol.
 
At least this will keep the Somali population down.
Why? Somalians may mutilate their daughters' genitals in their homeland (and maybe here, as well?), but they're not stupid enough to actively champion self-extermination like "white" and black Americans.

Frankly, nobody else in the world is. Even the Japanese and South Koreans are only not having sex, which is different than taking a Dyson to your uterus.
 
since it's a woman's body only she can decide if whatever's growing inside of her is a baby or a parasite.
And what if she falls into a coma after becoming pregnant? Schrodinger's baby?

You're a retard; it's scientifically proven to be a human life from the very moment of conception, and never meets the scientific definition of "parasite", period.

A bunch of dudes commenting here on a thing they will never ever be able to understand.
First of all, men can get pregnant now bigot, but second, people can understand things they don't experience. Like you will never understand what it's like to be honest or have a conscience, but you can comprehend the concepts.

Stick to talking about your cocks and your balls with which you're obsessed anyway and stay away from women's issues because it makes you look as bad as troons.
Troons who don't kill babies are better than you.
 
I don't think early-term abortion should be illegal but I still find it fucking disgusting how the nu-left glamourizes and trivializes an extremely difficult and painful process that should be a last resort when all other options are not available/have failed. And don't get me started on late-term ones: you know you are absolutely retarded when you're proposing something that even fucking Sweden won't implement.
 
Yes you can absolutely have it both ways. Its a concept based on bodily autonomy, really not that hard to understand. Women have it both ways all the time when they decide to terminate or carry to term, since it's a woman's body only she can decide if whatever's growing inside of her is a baby or a parasite.

A bunch of dudes commenting here on a thing they will never ever be able to understand. Stick to talking about your cocks and your balls with which you're obsessed anyway and stay away from women's issues because it makes you look as bad as troons.
If you use your autonomy to kill your own baby, you deserve basically any punishment you get.
 
Yes you can absolutely have it both ways. Its a concept based on bodily autonomy, really not that hard to understand. Women have it both ways all the time when they decide to terminate or carry to term, since it's a woman's body only she can decide if whatever's growing inside of her is a baby or a parasite.

A bunch of dudes commenting here on a thing they will never ever be able to understand. Stick to talking about your cocks and your balls with which you're obsessed anyway and stay away from women's issues because it makes you look as bad as troons.
At a minimum, there are two women in this thread besides you. One of them is me. I have no idea how or when not wanting to kill your own child became bootlicking for the patriarchy, but I want off that ride. Consider all the men that are pro-abortion and absolutely will spend their last dime for it and driving the woman to it. I have no idea why it is always framed as it is men trying to keep women down forcing them to give birth to their children, when there are just as many fathers willing to kill their children as mothers. Think of all the women pressured into abortions because it is an option. But that is never brought up.
 
Back