Texas' 6-week abortion ban goes into effect after U.S. Supreme Court stays silent - Wine aunts on suicide watch

Source, https://archive.is/WREvN
Washington — A controversial Texas law banning abortions after six weeks of pregnancy went into effect at midnight after the U.S. Supreme Court did not act on a request from pro-abortion rights groups and providers to block it before early Wednesday.
The law is one of the nation's most restrictive, prohibiting nearly all abortions in the state, the abortion rights groups warned. The high court is expected to issue a decision on the bid from the providers.
In addition to outlawing abortion as early as six weeks into a pregnancy — before most women know they're pregnant — the measure allows private citizens to bring civil lawsuits against anyone who provides an abortion after six weeks or helps a woman access the procedure, such as a friend who drives a woman to obtain an abortion, or clinic staff. Those found in violation of the law are required to pay at least $10,000 to the person who successfully brought the suit.
The pro-abortion rights organizations had warned that, if permitted to take effect, the ban "would immediately and catastrophically reduce abortion access in Texas." The groups included Planned Parenthood, the Center for Reproductive Rights, the ACLU and abortion providers. They estimated that at least 85% of women who undergo abortions in Texas are at least six weeks pregnant and warned the law would force many clinics to close.
"Patients who can scrape together resources will be forced to attempt to leave the state to obtain an abortion, and many will be delayed until later in pregnancy," lawyers representing the abortion providers wrote to the Supreme Court. "The remaining Texans who need an abortion will be forced to remain pregnant against their will or to attempt to end their pregnancies without medical supervision."
But Texas officials argued the claims raised by the abortion providers and advocacy groups were "hyperbolic" and said they "have not shown that they will be personally harmed by a bill that may never be enforced against them by anyone, much less by the governmental defendants."
"If any party is facing irreparable injury in this application, it is respondents, along with the state they serve and its people," they said in a filing with the Supreme Court.
Governor Greg Abbott, a Republican, signed the measure into law in May, with Texas joining a dozen other states that have passed laws banning abortions at early stages in pregnancy. Known as "heartbeat bills," they seek to ban the procedures after a fetal heartbeat can first be detected.
But pro-abortion rights advocates argue the measures, which have been blocked by federal courts from taking effect, are unconstitutional and violate Roe v. Wade, the landmark 1973 Supreme Court decision that established a woman's right to an abortion. The court has found a woman can terminate a pregnancy before fetal viability, which generally occurs around 24 weeks.
Abortion rights groups argue the Texas law differs from the others because it incentivizes members of the public, rather than state officials, to enforce the ban, and they claim state lawmakers designed the measure that way to insulate it from federal judicial review.
"Texans, like everyone else in this country, should be able to count on safe abortion care in their own state," Amy Hagstrom Miller, president and CEO of Whole Woman's Health, which runs abortion clinics, said in a statement Monday. "No one should be forced to drive hundreds of miles or be made to continue a pregnancy against their will, yet that's what will happen unless the Supreme Court steps in."
The groups' request for Supreme Court action in the dispute came after a federal appeals court in Texas delayed a district court hearing set for Monday and denied their bid to speed up consideration of the case or stop the law from taking effect pending appeal.
The pro-abortion rights groups warned that without Supreme Court intervention, Texas would be allowed to ban abortions after six weeks before the justices consider a legal battle over an abortion law from Mississippi this fall.
The Supreme Court said in May it would take up a blockbuster dispute over Mississippi's ban on abortions after 15 weeks of pregnancy, presenting the first test of the limits of abortion access to go before the court's expanded conservative majority.
In that case, Republican-led states including Texas are calling for the court to overrule Roe and uphold Mississippi's 15-week ban.
 
You want less child abuse, you want fewer criminals, you want fewer single mothers? The answer is more abortion, not less. If you can get over your jealousy that other people are getting laid for 5 seconds, most of these people are unfit to be parents.
Then the solution isn't abortion but forced sterilization and an expand death penalty.
 
it was those poor decisions that helped me value my virginity and the prospect of sex. I just really don't care for having sex with someone that's not also going to bear my children as well. I know I'll end up pair-bonding pretty strongly with the person I do have sex with,
  • put off by casual, hedonic sex
  • views casual sex as dehumanizing and exploitative
  • holds women in higher regard than pleasure dispensers
  • wants strong pairbond before he grows attached through sex, because the consequences of a bad relationship are lifelong
  • Probably values the verse 'Do not awaken love before it is time.'
  • wants his family planning to be just that, a series of deliberate choices to bring a child into the world on the foundation of a strong marriage
Clearly Zero Day doesn't value women. Such a misogynist.

Poorlyplannedparenthood.png
 
For anyone who is unaware, this user has admitted to having never had sex or been in a relationship before.
Keep that in mind whenever he says something about abortion
The classic conundrum. Either you're an incel or a hypocrite.

The abortion issue is a complete legal shitshow that politicians punted to the court system. The Roe v Wade decision is retarded, but the justices know that overturning it would be like pulling the pin on a nuclear hand-grenade.
 
guys just see us as warm wet holes to be used and discarded.
What the fuck?

Just because the only men you associate with are Chad and Tyrone, and the only thing you do with Chad and Tyrone is get your back broken because neither of them want to risk a relationship with you, doesn't mean that even most men view women that way.

Wait... that was a joke, right? You don't actually think that, right?
 
Dred Scott v. Sandford only helped kill less than a million people via the Civil War and it wasn't the only reason the Civil War happened

Tens of millions have been killed since Roe v. Wade and it is the only reason those tens of millions are dead
My point is that both Dred Scott and Roe said that a specific class of humans didn't have any rights and that nebulous "rights" (the "rights" to own people as a property and kill unborn babies) trump the very real rights to liberty and life.
 
Back