The writer led with that to show that 40 years later some legislators still push laws that are blatantly unconstitutional and in some cases they get close to becoming law. You couldn't bother with three other bullet points? Okay. I guess I will quote them for you here. "Three states have banned the most common method of second-trimester abortions (Alabama, Mississippi and West Virginia), while 13 in all have tried. Louisiana's governor is deciding whether to sign a similar law." "Two states, Louisiana and Kentucky, lengthened the waiting period to get an abortion." "South Dakota and South Carolina voted to enact abortion bans after 20 weeks, making them the 16th and 17th states to do so." "Indiana, which already has some of the most restrictive abortion laws in the nation, made it illegal to abort a fetus because it is diagnosed with Down syndrome or because of its race or gender." Those would be solid examples of the anti-abortion crowd dictating law. All have the goal of deterring women from receiving abortions. If you went and asked the legislators supporting those bills if they supported overturning Roe v. Wade, they would say yes 99/100 times. Aren't you from Mississippi? Here is article from two weeks ago: Planned Parenthood Pushes Challenge of Mississippi Law Quote from the first paragraph: "Planned Parenthood is asking a federal judge to quickly rule in its favor and overturn a Mississippi law that bans Medicaid spending with any health care provider that offers abortion." This is the most bizarre debate I've ever had.
Getting close to becoming law? By every single piece of legislation being shot down in every state it was introduced in? Yeah, that's was a close call alright. I won't argue that. How exactly do you see the anti-abortion stance of people in fly over states that can't even get an full blown anti abortion law passed in their own little state as a threat to the whole country that overwhelmingly thinks differently?
Did you skip the bullet points I quoted? I think you skipped the bullet points. Anti-abortion doesn't just mean proposing bills that outlaw abortion outright. It does include a slew of efforts to make it difficult for women to obtain and in places in like Mississippi and Texas it can become impossible for lots of women. I have this wild theory that Mississippi, Texas, Oklahoma, Kansas, etc. will vote for Trump and Republican representatives and senators who oppose Roe v. Wade and those elected officials will go to a lot of lengths to overturn it or limit the rights granted therein. Just a thought. I dunno. I could be wrong about that one. Toss up really.
So your wild theory, delusion, fear, whatever, is that a small percentage of the population will somehow enforce their will on the majority of the country? Even when they can't enforce their will in their own backyard? Personally, I think you're giving into fears concocted by folks that want you to be afraid. But maybe that's just me.
Well, I think somewhere around 40% of the country identifies as pro-life these days. Is that a small percentage? And you seem to forget that people are very effectively enforcing their will in their own backyard. It takes a 4 hour drive (one way) for women in my city to obtain medical services deemed constitutional by Roe v. Wade. That could effectively mean it's impossible for some women (and those who need it most--i.e the poor). If these people are so weak and run in opposition to so much of the country how did they manage to ensure that their party's President and Vice President nominees go along with them? Why would Trump even have to pay lip-service to them? Why is this even an issue 40 years later? But it's cool. Sure, I'm just a big scaredy cat putting on blinders and willfully working to see the world only how I want to see it dismissing all evidence to the contrary. If it looks like a duck, swims like a duck, and quacks like a duck it is just the Liberal Media telling me it's a duck.
Don't just pull numbers out of your ass because you "think" that's what it is and it feeds your narrative... let's see a few sources for that number.
Heh. Okay. Gallup puts pro-life at 46% for 2016. While I'm here according to Gallup, 19% of people believe that abortion should be illegal in all circumstances. 50% believe it should be legal only under certain circumstances. 29% believe it should be legal under any circumstances. Let's see his small percentage number while we're at it as that most definitely favors his narrative.
I'm pro-choice and live in Mississippi. Getting an abortion in this state is not remotely as hard as the national media would like you to believe. Sure there are protesters around but there always will be. The only law I remember passing is that the doctors at the abortion clinics had to be associated or have admitting rights in case something went wrong with the procedure. That seems fair to me. But hell what do I know considering most of the country considers my entire state to be populated by ignorant, illiterate, obese rednecks..
And as far as the 2nd Amendment goes I am fully in favor of some more stringent checks on buying any gun but only if it can be integrated into the FBI check that exists now. Considering that most gun crimes are committed by people who legally shouldn't have them I see no point in enacting new laws. Enforcing the laws on the books regarding felons in possession of guns makes more sense. As far as the Brady Bill and banning "assault" or "military" weapons I would get behind it if the idiots introducing the legislation actually understood what they were talking about. I own a Ruger 10/22 ( one of the most popular .22 rifles) which happens to have a folding stock, flash suppressor, and 2 30-round banana magazines duct taped together. It looks fearsome yet it is still semi-auto and is fully compliant with the law. Hell if one of the moronic mass shooters had any sense they would use a high capacity shotgun such as a benelli. Yet shotguns are never brought up in the debate.
Im very pro-life, but I don't think outlawing abortion is the way to solve anything. Not sure what that categorizes me as? But I would rather we focus on the advancement of medical technology and innovation to a point where a woman has no need to get an abortion except in the most dire of circumstances. I think abortion is pretty barbaric, but I understand that its unfortunate best option available in many circumstances. As for the second amendment, Massachusetts is again at the forefront of mental retardation on gun control. The state's attorney general decided a few months ago that guns that "look" like an AR-15 are banned and not only that, if you have ever owned one, you broke the law. She even called the AR-15 "Assault Rifle 15" on the local news. Thats how little she understands what shes talking about. And the kicker is, guns that have the exact same functionality as the AR-15 but dont look black and scary are still perfectly legal. She demanded that all owners of the AR-15 and similar guns turn them over to state police immediately. Gun owners across the state just kind of laughed at her and didnt do anything. The Governor just shrugged and pretended it didnt happen.
It's remarkable that today 69% of the country is opposed to abortion in some way, but Roe v Wade stands 53 years later. I don't know what that means, but it's interesting.
Nothing shocking. But if it really got out to a big news source, it could cost her Bernie supporters and she needs every single one.
At this point do you think anyone even vaguely left leaning will not turn out to vote against Trump? It's a crazy situation to think that had this been any other election cycle voter apathy could have catapaulted a boring semi centrist republican into the white house but my guess is Trump is going to get trounced for being so damn polarizing.
yes to all of this. She makes my skin crawl. But at least in her presidency she has the added pressure of not fucking our country completely because she's the first woman to hold thd office.
Ugh, fine. FIIINNNNNEEEEE. Sure, if having only one abortion provider in an entire state that was recently targeted specifically to close it down so there would be no providers left in the state with the TRAP law you referred to, which is a huge financial and logistical burden for something completely medically unnecessary seeing as how the safety rate for abortion is so low that part of the reason why abortion providers have trouble qualifying for these relationships with hospitals is because the hospitals require these kinds of partners to admit a certain number of patients per year or they lose their admitting privileges and they are historically unable to meet those numbers and is obviously bullshit anyway when compared to the other medical services that don't require providers have relationships with hospitals (like my favorite: gastroenterologists not needing to do this despite colonoscopies have more than a 40 time higher mortality rate than abortions)... AND if you can get an appointment at the one abortion provider within the time frame of abortion being a legal option because you are having to essentially compete with every other woman in the state who's looking for an abortion at that time AND be able to get to one abortion provider especially if you are poor and/or trying to do it privately AND if you can power through the 24 hour mandated waiting period after an unnecessarily extensive ultrasound routine AND a "counseling" session where the provider is required by law to tell you medically inaccurate information about abortion and gestation that are both designed to trick you out of getting an abortion AND you can get back to the provider for your appointment after that waiting period is up AND you can get back to that one provider for your followup appointment, each time passing through those protesters who are calling you a murderer who's going to hell isn't as remotely as hard as the national media would like you to believe. It categorizes you as pro-choice.
Sure, if by not hard you mean having to compete with every woman in the state to book an appointment with the ONE clinic in the whole state that does them. Seems easy. If guys could get pregnant we would be able to have them done at gas stations. Or ATMs I forget what the joke is but its true. The governments continued war on what women can and can't do with their own bodies is mind boggling to me. EDIT: Audrey said it better
And here's your bombshell trump article. NYT got their hands on his 1995 tax records, which shows he recorded nearly a $1 BILLION loss in that year alone. The tax implications from this are explored in the article, and they don't look good for him from a PR standpoint. That sound you just heard is every Trump aid simultaneously crapping their pants.
There are two opposing groups of people standing in the street in front of my house yelling at each other at the top of their lungs in Spanish. Somehow I doubt they are cordially debating wine choices or even Ford vs Chevy. Yes, let's give all these fuckers asylum and immunity for sneaking into this country illegally. It sounds like a good, humanitarian thing to do until they're angrily yelling at each other in your fucking yard at 10PM. Fuck that noise.