Page 1 of 6 12 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 35 of 202

Thread: Lindsey Grahamís abortion bill

  1. #1
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Location
    the hills
    Posts
    67,882

    Default Lindsey Grahamís abortion bill

    Does any of this make sense?

    https://www.washingtonpost.com/polit...ationwide-ban/

    Sen. Lindsey O. Graham (R-S.C.) on Tuesday introduced a bill that would ban abortions after 15 weeks of pregnancy nationwide, the most prominent effort by Republicans to restrict the procedure since the Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade in June.
    ďI think we should have a law at the federal level that would say, after 15 weeks, no abortion on demand except in cases of rape, incest or to save the life of the mother,Ē Graham said at a news conference. ďAnd that should be where America is at.Ē

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    2 states: NJ and confusion
    Posts
    44,020

    Default Re: Lindsey Grahamís abortion bill

    Why one earth can't they just let the pregnant person decide?
    "Banning books and not guns seems backwards. Can't think of anyone ever shot by a book

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Northeast
    Posts
    20,414

    Default Re: Lindsey Grahamís abortion bill

    Quote Originally Posted by LeeG View Post
    Does any of this make sense?

    https://www.washingtonpost.com/polit...ationwide-ban/

    Sen. Lindsey O. Graham (R-S.C.) on Tuesday introduced a bill that would ban abortions after 15 weeks of pregnancy nationwide, the most prominent effort by Republicans to restrict the procedure since the Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade in June.
    “I think we should have a law at the federal level that would say, after 15 weeks, no abortion on demand except in cases of rape, incest or to save the life of the mother,” Graham said at a news conference. “And that should be where America is at.”
    Distraction from his and FPOTUS ongoing legal issues. They're working really hard at deflection right now.
    "The pessimist complains about the wind; the optimist expects it to change; the realist adjusts the sails."
    -William A. Ward



  4. #4
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Posts
    4,641

    Default Re: Lindsey Grahamís abortion bill

    Yes it makes a 100% sense since the GQP is in a full panic after seeing the results of a ballot initiative in KS, now also on the ballot in MI.

    They never thought the SCOTUS would actually ever weigh in on the issue, so they could rail against the procedure till they were blue in the face in order to look like they were doing something.

    Well the dog finally caught the car and for the life of them they can't figure out how not to lose the so called "soccer moms, suburban moms, and security moms.

    There will be so much backpedaling moving forward that they could win the TDF riding backwards.
    "Unrepentant Reprobate"
    Lew Barrett



  5. #5
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Northeast
    Posts
    20,414

    Default Re: Lindsey Grahamís abortion bill

    Quote Originally Posted by Kevin T View Post
    Well the dog finally caught the car and for the life of them they can't figure out how not to lose the so called "soccer moms, suburban moms, and security moms.

    There will be so much backpedaling moving forward that they could win the TDF riding backwards.


    "The pessimist complains about the wind; the optimist expects it to change; the realist adjusts the sails."
    -William A. Ward



  6. #6
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    New Hampshire
    Posts
    40,090

    Default Re: Lindsey Grahamís abortion bill

    Quote Originally Posted by John Smith View Post
    Why one earth can't they just let the pregnant person decide?
    Votes.

    Quote Originally Posted by Kevin T View Post
    Yes it makes a 100% sense since the GQP is in a full panic after seeing the results of a ballot initiative in KS, now also on the ballot in MI.
    Which is why the Democratic Party must run on a platform of "Return to Roe v Wade".

    The GOP is doubling down on what looks like an unpopular opinion outside their base, so feed it to them with both hands!
    "Where you live in the world should not determine whether you live in the world." - Bono

    "Live in such a way that you would not be ashamed to sell your parrot to the town gossip." - Will Rogers

    "Those are my principles, and if you don't like them... well, I have others." - Groucho Marx

  7. #7
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Location
    the hills
    Posts
    67,882

    Default Re: Lindsey Grahamís abortion bill

    It’s weird. “Let the states decide!” and now another dumbass bill ignoring medical reality while attempting to paper over their neofascist persuasion.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    Fredericton, New Brunswick
    Posts
    49,542

    Default Re: Lindsey Grahamís abortion bill

    There's video footage of Graham on August 7 arguing that abortion laws are wholly a "State's Rights" issue, and that the Feds should stay out. And video footage of Graham today arguing that the Feds should absolutely institute a nation-wide abortion ban at 15 weeks, introducing his bill saying so.

    Same guy. About 5 weeks apart.

    What's consistent is his stupefying hypocrisy. Wouldn't it be nice if he was up for re-election this November, but alas. He's only a third of the way into his term.
    If I use the word "God," I sure don't mean an old man in the sky who just loves the occasional goat sacrifice. - Anne Lamott

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Sep 1999
    Location
    Norwalk, Ohio
    Posts
    34,689

    Default Re: Lindsey Grahamís abortion bill

    ^
    Furthermore that is not "where America is at."
    "I'll tell you why [religion's] not a scam. In my opinion, all right? Tide goes in, tide goes out. Never a miscommunication. You can't explain that."Bill O'Reilly

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    2 states: NJ and confusion
    Posts
    44,020

    Default Re: Lindsey Grahamís abortion bill

    Quote Originally Posted by CWSmith View Post
    Votes.



    Which is why the Democratic Party must run on a platform of "Return to Roe v Wade".

    The GOP is doubling down on what looks like an unpopular opinion outside their base, so feed it to them with both hands!
    I believe that will be a large part of their platform.
    "Banning books and not guns seems backwards. Can't think of anyone ever shot by a book

  11. #11
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    2 states: NJ and confusion
    Posts
    44,020

    Default Re: Lindsey Grahamís abortion bill

    Quote Originally Posted by TomF View Post
    There's video footage of Graham on August 7 arguing that abortion laws are wholly a "State's Rights" issue, and that the Feds should stay out. And video footage of Graham today arguing that the Feds should absolutely institute a nation-wide abortion ban at 15 weeks, introducing his bill saying so.

    Same guy. About 5 weeks apart.

    What's consistent is his stupefying hypocrisy. Wouldn't it be nice if he was up for re-election this November, but alas. He's only a third of the way into his term.
    Graham speaks with forked tongue. Couldn't tell the truth is his tongue was notarized.
    "Banning books and not guns seems backwards. Can't think of anyone ever shot by a book

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    N. Fal on Cape Cod
    Posts
    18,435

    Default Re: Lindsey Grahamís abortion bill

    Every thing Graham does is to keep his closet door from being dragged open.
    A society predicated on the assumption that everyone in it should want to get rich is not well situated to become either ethical or imaginative.

    Photographer of sailing and sailboats
    And other things, too.
    http://www.landsedgephoto.com

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    New Hampshire
    Posts
    40,090

    Default Re: Lindsey Grahamís abortion bill

    Quote Originally Posted by TomF View Post
    There's video footage of Graham on August 7 arguing that abortion laws are wholly a "State's Rights" issue, and that the Feds should stay out. And video footage of Graham today arguing that the Feds should absolutely institute a nation-wide abortion ban at 15 weeks, introducing his bill saying so.

    Same guy. About 5 weeks apart.

    What's consistent is his stupefying hypocrisy. Wouldn't it be nice if he was up for re-election this November, but alas. He's only a third of the way into his term.
    Graham has no core beliefs. None.
    "Where you live in the world should not determine whether you live in the world." - Bono

    "Live in such a way that you would not be ashamed to sell your parrot to the town gossip." - Will Rogers

    "Those are my principles, and if you don't like them... well, I have others." - Groucho Marx

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Saint Helena Island, SC
    Posts
    12,598

    Default Re: Lindsey Grahamís abortion bill

    Quote Originally Posted by elf View Post
    Every thing Graham does is to keep his closet door from being dragged open.

    Yea, Lady Graham.
    It is funny how the same folks that scream for states rights want a national ban.
    Fight Entropy, build a wooden boat!

  15. #15
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Rockford, IL
    Posts
    13,168

    Default Re: Lindsey Grahamís abortion bill

    His announce,emt comes just in time for any repug up for election who favors pro life to be defeated. Thanks Graham, first decent thing you've done in months.

  16. #16
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    Valley of the Sun
    Posts
    119,238

    Default Re: Lindsey Grahamís abortion bill

    Quote Originally Posted by Reynard38 View Post
    It is funny how the same folks that scream for states rights want a national ban.
    other than for ridiculously poorly conceived pro gun arguments, when was the last time you heard state's rights being trotted out in favor of anything other than as an excuse to oppress some minority group or another?
    Simpler is better, except when complicated looks really cool.

  17. #17
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    N/A
    Posts
    11,741

    Default Re: Lindsey Grahamís abortion bill

    I have no problem with a ban after the first trimester with the exception for rape, incest, and/or the health of the mother. What would be nice is if science would definitionally chime in about when pain is registered.
    In the US this perverted idea of ďblood and soilĒ over ďconstitutional principlesĒ is the most radical and anti-democratic and anti-Conservative idea I have heard in my lifetime.

    ~C. Ross

  18. #18
    Join Date
    Feb 2014
    Location
    Kitty Hawk, NC
    Posts
    12,127

    Default Re: Lindsey Grahamís abortion bill

    Quote Originally Posted by LeeG View Post
    Does any of this make sense?

    https://www.washingtonpost.com/polit...ationwide-ban/

    Sen. Lindsey O. Graham (R-S.C.) on Tuesday introduced a bill that would ban abortions after 15 weeks of pregnancy nationwide, the most prominent effort by Republicans to restrict the procedure since the Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade in June.
    “I think we should have a law at the federal level that would say, after 15 weeks, no abortion on demand except in cases of rape, incest or to save the life of the mother,” Graham said at a news conference. “And that should be where America is at.”
    It appears to be an offer of a compromise between the positions of the political parties. So it makes sense.

    I think it is a bad offer and should be rejected. The current Congress most likely will.

    I would think 9 months would be a better choice than 15 weeks, but I don't get to vote.
    Life is complex.

  19. #19
    Join Date
    Oct 1999
    Location
    St. Paul, MN, USA
    Posts
    62,254

    Default Re: Lindsey Grahamís abortion bill

    Mike, every piece of meat we eat was part of an organism that could feel pain. I submit that the important distinction is not that, but human consciousness, which if brain scans can tell us anything, happens no earlier than the current standard for viability, possibly a bit later. And very late abortions are extremely rare and done for only the most compelling reasons; severe heath problems, severe deformity resulting in a non-viable fetus, that kind of thing. My wife could give you several earfulls. Nobody wants to do that, and stupid laws will only make tragic situations far worse.

    And guys, while I don't like Lindsey Graham any better than you do, he's not a fool. 'Veteran cynic' is true, if a bit too polite. I think Ed Kilgore is right; he's trying to limit the damage. He might succeed, although I suspect the "A 128-cell blastocycst has all the rights of a citizen!!" crowd will prevent it'

    Lindsey Graham Clears a Path for Republicans to Retreat on Abortion
    By Ed Kilgore

    During most of the era in which the Supreme Court generally blocked pre-viability abortion bans, the Republican Party followed a dual-track strategy. They quietly espoused the most extreme positions available (e.g., a constitutional amendment banning abortion everywhere) when pressed by the anti-abortion activists who formed an increasingly powerful segment of the party’s base, but they focused almost exclusively on very narrow ground when trying to make abortion a campaign issue (promoting bans on late-term abortions, which are both rare and unpopular). While this dishonest tactic had its critics in hard-core anti-abortion circles, it was tolerated by the general public because it was all academic as long as Roe v. Wade and Casey v. Planned Parenthood were the reigning federal constitutional precedents.

    Once Dobbs swept these precedents away, Republicans had to decide which track to pursue. The rush by Republican state lawmakers to go hog wild with extreme bans amid the Dobbs decision (with 12 states enacting total or near-total bans and three others trying to overcome court orders preventing such laws) represented the first and most activist-satisfying option. But now that the backlash to Dobbs is threatening to thwart a much-anticipated Republican midterm victory, a retreat from abortion extremism into a new phase of cynical gradualism appears to be fully underway. It’s evident in the repositioning of Republican candidates in battleground states, such as Arizona senate candidate Blake Masters.

    And now veteran Republican cynic Lindsey Graham is sounding the retreat for the party nationally. On Tuesday, he introduced legislation that would ban abortions after 15 weeks with exceptions for rape, incest, and the life of the mother, down from the 20-week threshold in previously bills he introduced. “Graham’s bill is designed to present Republicans as being more mainstream on abortion by pushing a partial ban over either a full ban either a full ban or what they characterize as Democrats’ ‘abortion on-demand’ position,” as Axios reports.

    Graham’s shift is designed to make the tactical retreat more palatable to Republicans who would prefer total or near-total bans. The rhetorical packaging of the proposal as designed to stop “late-term abortions” is clever, if also cynical, since the term used to be applied to post-viability abortions occurring after about 24 weeks of pregnancy. At the same time, a 15-week ban — the standard adopted, though without exceptions, in the Mississippi law that led to Dobbs — would leave 93 percent of abortions legal. That’s a feature for poll-savvy Republicans candidates but a bug to those who believe every abortion is murder.

    It will be interesting to see if other Republicans and anti-abortion activists line up behind Graham. For one thing, backing any national abortion ban requires abandoning the ancient fable that Republicans believe policy in this area should be set by the states, not the federal government (clearly that was just agitprop aimed at Roe). But more important, a lot of Republicans very recently supported more extreme federal bans, ranging from the Life at Conception Act, which would have established fetal personhood and banned all abortions, to a six-week ban Graham’s colleague Joni Ernst floated after the Dobbs decision was leaked this spring.

    If Graham’s gambit does provide a rallying point (and a defensive crouch) for Republicans without alienating anti-abortion activists, that will mean the latter are convinced the former will go on the offensive once the midterms are over, particularly if they control Congress. To be clear, even in that eventuality, Democrats will be able to block a national abortion ban as long as they control 41 Senate seats to maintain a filibuster or the White House. But if Republicans gain a governing trifecta after 2024, the internal debate among Republicans will likely revolve around demands that they kill the filibuster to make a national ban possible.
    "For a successful technology, reality must take precedence over public relations,
    for nature cannot be fooled."

    Richard Feynman

  20. #20
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Location
    the hills
    Posts
    67,882

    Default Re: Lindsey Grahamís abortion bill

    Quote Originally Posted by McMike View Post
    I have no problem with a ban after the first trimester with the exception for rape, incest, and/or the health of the mother. What would be nice is if science would definitionally chime in about when pain is registered.
    How about if a fetal deformity was discovered at 20 weeks that pretty much said the birth would bring forth a dying baby and the woman wasn’t at any more risk than a normal birth. Force her to carry to term because Lindsey Graham and you said so?
    Last edited by LeeG; 09-13-2022 at 05:59 PM.

  21. #21
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    N/A
    Posts
    11,741

    Default Re: Lindsey Grahamís abortion bill

    Quote Originally Posted by LeeG View Post
    How about if a fetal deformality was discovered at 20 weeks that pretty much said the birth would bring forth a dying baby and the woman wasn’t at any more risk than a normal birth. Force her to carry to term because Lindsey Graham said so?
    There has to be moral line somewhere. I'm Autistic . . . and more productive than 80% of this country, testing would have given my mother the opportunity to abort me. What you're talking about is eugenics.

    Scientists studied the brains of 13 boys and found those with autism had 67% more brain cells than typically developing boys. They specifically looked at the part of the brain called the prefrontal cortexbecause its the part that's responsible for social, emotional, communication and language development. Having too many neurons or nerve cells in the part of the brain that controls the very features that children with autism struggle with may explain the origin of autism, the study suggests.
    So there is a lot of debate as to whether a mother should be allowed to abort a child because they may or may not be able to lie or look someone in the eye . . . And is quite possibly not a malformity but instead a trait. Would you allow mothers to abort because they were having a girl vs a boy? Where do you personally draw the line?
    In the US this perverted idea of ďblood and soilĒ over ďconstitutional principlesĒ is the most radical and anti-democratic and anti-Conservative idea I have heard in my lifetime.

    ~C. Ross

  22. #22
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Location
    the hills
    Posts
    67,882

    Default Re: Lindsey Grahamís abortion bill

    Quote Originally Posted by McMike View Post
    There has to be moral line somewhere. I'm Autistic . . . and more productive than 80% of this country, testing would have given my mother the opportunity to abort me. What you're talking about is eugenics.

    So there is a lot of debate as to whether a mother should be allowed to abort a child because they may or may not be able to lie or look someone in the eye . . . And is quite possibly not a malformity but instead a trait. Would you allow mothers to abort because they were having a girl vs a boy? Where do you personally draw the line?
    What you’re talking about isn’t what I’m talking about. YOU in all your productive glory are not the topic. YOU with your male bits are not being TOLD how to manage your reproductive capacity.

  23. #23
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    N/A
    Posts
    11,741

    Default Re: Lindsey Grahamís abortion bill

    Quote Originally Posted by Keith Wilson View Post
    Mike, every piece of meat we eat was part of an organism that could feel pain. I submit that the important distinction is not that, but human consciousness, which if brain scans can tell us anything, happens no earlier than the current standard for viability
    I would submit that we don't know exactly where that line is and I'd like to be certain. I'm not interested in a soul or any religion, just the facts. I think, as with a lot of the social safety nets as well, that the government should not be in the business of protecting adults from their lack of personal responsibility.


    . . . so, according to the quote, 15-20 weeks is probably a good line.
    In the US this perverted idea of ďblood and soilĒ over ďconstitutional principlesĒ is the most radical and anti-democratic and anti-Conservative idea I have heard in my lifetime.

    ~C. Ross

  24. #24
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    N/A
    Posts
    11,741

    Default Re: Lindsey Grahamís abortion bill

    Quote Originally Posted by LeeG View Post
    What you’re talking about isn’t what I’m talking about. YOU in all your productive glory are not the topic. YOU with your male bits are not being TOLD how to manage your reproductive capacity.
    Dude, shut up. you can easily turn that around to the rights of the unborn child. I'm entertaining the discussion based on science, not the giant spaghetti monster in the sky. At some point, the child has to be considered as a separate entity from the mother. If you think that's at birth, I suggest you're not thinking hard enough, or you can't.
    In the US this perverted idea of ďblood and soilĒ over ďconstitutional principlesĒ is the most radical and anti-democratic and anti-Conservative idea I have heard in my lifetime.

    ~C. Ross

  25. #25
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Location
    the hills
    Posts
    67,882

    Default Re: Lindsey Grahamís abortion bill

    Quote Originally Posted by McMike View Post
    Dude, shut up. you can easily turn that around to the rights of the unborn child. I'm entertaining the discussion based on science, not the giant spaghetti monster in the sky. At some point, the child has to be considered as a separate entity from the mother. If you think that's at birth, I suggest you're not thinking hard enough, or you can't.
    dude, the hypohetical I gave is not your reality. The “line” you seek does not represent reality. Entertain yourself.






    https://19thnews.org/2022/08/abortio...ly-exceptions/

  26. #26
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    N/A
    Posts
    11,741

    Default Re: Lindsey Grahamís abortion bill

    Quote Originally Posted by LeeG View Post
    dude, the hypohetical I gave is not your reality. The “line” you seek does not represent reality. Entertain yourself.






    https://19thnews.org/2022/08/abortio...ly-exceptions/
    I asked you where you'd draw the line and you gave me sh17 for being a man . . . as if I'm not allowed an opinion because I have penis. It's not a valid argument. So, 2nd chance; what's your line?
    In the US this perverted idea of ďblood and soilĒ over ďconstitutional principlesĒ is the most radical and anti-democratic and anti-Conservative idea I have heard in my lifetime.

    ~C. Ross

  27. #27
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    2 states: NJ and confusion
    Posts
    44,020

    Default Re: Lindsey Grahamís abortion bill

    I ask again: Why not let the pregnant person decide?
    "Banning books and not guns seems backwards. Can't think of anyone ever shot by a book

  28. #28
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Location
    the hills
    Posts
    67,882

    Default Re: Lindsey Grahamís abortion bill

    Quote Originally Posted by McMike View Post
    I asked you where you'd draw the line and you gave me sh17 for being a man . . . as if I'm not allowed an opinion because I have penis. It's not a valid argument. So, 2nd chance; what's your line?
    I would not “draw a line” because life and life’s decisions are not two dimensional. I did not give you chit for being a man, I gave you chit because you mischaracterized what I said while introducing your personality characteristics as somehow relevant. Read the article I linked to.

  29. #29
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    N/A
    Posts
    11,741

    Default Re: Lindsey Grahamís abortion bill

    Quote Originally Posted by John Smith View Post
    I ask again: Why not let the pregnant person decide?
    Because humans will justify eating sh17 as a good decision. We have laws and justice because humans can't seem to follow rules without consequences to defying them. Being a woman who is carrying a child is not a qualification for intelligence or the emotional capacity to make good choices. In fact, it seems that most parents are horrible at it and shouldn't have had children. With a nearly 20% child obesity rate, I would submit that there is at least a 20% parental shi77yness rate, 20% criminality rate. 20% of parents that should pay society back for the care of their children when their adults, and the children should be able to civilly sue their parents for being shi77y. You want to allow for a blanket reliance upon the old school thoughts that parents know best . . . when empirically, that's just not true.
    In the US this perverted idea of ďblood and soilĒ over ďconstitutional principlesĒ is the most radical and anti-democratic and anti-Conservative idea I have heard in my lifetime.

    ~C. Ross

  30. #30
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Location
    the hills
    Posts
    67,882

    Default Re: Lindsey Grahamís abortion bill

    Quote Originally Posted by John Smith View Post
    I ask again: Why not let the pregnant person decide?
    Because this is a means of reinforcing one’s internal reality by managing the external reality. Basically might makes right. Then there’s using it as marker for political identity. The woman and “life” she carries is secondary if they rate at all.

  31. #31
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    N/A
    Posts
    11,741

    Default Re: Lindsey Grahamís abortion bill

    Quote Originally Posted by LeeG View Post
    dude, the hypohetical I gave is not your reality. The “line” you seek does not represent reality. Entertain yourself.






    https://19thnews.org/2022/08/abortio...ly-exceptions/
    I did. Elizabeth D. should have been able to abort the child. That's not the discussion. The standard limit should be 15-20 weeks according to Keith's "viability" definition.
    In the US this perverted idea of ďblood and soilĒ over ďconstitutional principlesĒ is the most radical and anti-democratic and anti-Conservative idea I have heard in my lifetime.

    ~C. Ross

  32. #32
    Join Date
    Oct 1999
    Location
    St. Paul, MN, USA
    Posts
    62,254

    Default Re: Lindsey Grahamís abortion bill

    Quote Originally Posted by McMike View Post
    The standard limit should be 15-20 weeks according to Keith's "viability" definition.
    Just to be very clear, I don't think viability is a very useful measure. The problem is that it's technology-dependent. Many premature infants who would almost certainly have died 100 years ago have a reasonable chance of surviving now. As we learn more, the age gets earlier and earlier, at least for those who have access to the latest technology and best care to get them through the first months. (The ones right on the edge are very problematic, when the parents have to decide whether to let them go or try heroic measures to save them; my wife can give you several earfulls about that as well - but it's really beside the point.) And eventually we may be able to grow a fertilized egg into a baby in a purely artificial environment; there's no real reason that we won't be able to figure that out. That would not really mean that viability occurs at fertilization, but that 'viability' isn't a very good criterion for deciding when abortion should be restricted.

    I suggested a limit based on higher brain function, the thing that divides us from other mammals, the beginning of human consciousness, which if we can tell by measuring brain activity, starts about the beginning of the third trimester. But exceptions for later abortions for medical reasons are essential.

    Again, late abortions are very rare, and are almost always done for only the most dire of medical reasons; very severe problems with the fetus, or danger to the mother. Stupid laws written to keep anti-abortion folks happy would do no good, and would make already tragic situations far worse.



    (Source here, data from 2019)
    Last edited by Keith Wilson; 09-13-2022 at 10:12 PM.
    "For a successful technology, reality must take precedence over public relations,
    for nature cannot be fooled."

    Richard Feynman

  33. #33
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Entry Level
    Posts
    25,790

    Default Re: Lindsey Grahamís abortion bill

    Used to be, under Roe, no outright ban until 2d trimester.

    9 months = 36 weeks 36/3 = 12. The objection was: arbitrary, not "based on science".

    How is a 15 week cutoff -- 3 weeks longer -- "based on science" and not arbitrary?
    If Russia wins, there will be no Ukraine; if Ukraine wins, there will be a new Russia.

    -- Dmytro Kuleba, Foreign Minister of Ukraine

  34. #34
    Join Date
    Oct 1999
    Location
    St. Paul, MN, USA
    Posts
    62,254

    Default Re: Lindsey Grahamís abortion bill

    Used to be, under Roe, no outright ban until 2d trimester
    No, third trimester, 24 weeks. Based on fetal viability.
    "For a successful technology, reality must take precedence over public relations,
    for nature cannot be fooled."

    Richard Feynman

  35. #35
    Join Date
    Oct 1999
    Location
    St. Paul, MN, USA
    Posts
    62,254

    Default Re: Lindsey Grahamís abortion bill

    Heather Cox Richardson today:

    In contrast, Senator Lindsey Graham (R-SC) today announced he will introduce a national abortion ban. This is a pretty transparent attempt by the Republicans to deal with the political toxicity of the Republican-dominated Supreme Court’s overturning Roe v. Wade, a toxicity unlikely to go away while news breaks, as it did today, that the state of Texas will not publish data on maternal death until after the midterm elections, suggesting the data will be bad indeed.When the court ended the recognition of the constitutional right to reproductive rights in June, Republicans tried to manage the backlash by saying that the decision would simply return to the states the right to decide the status of abortion within their boundaries. The idea was actually that of enslavers in the 1830s: that true democracy operated at the state level because lawmakers there were closer to their constituents and would represent them better than those at the national level, thus enabling them to dismiss national pressure against enslavement as interference in state rights.

    Graham himself echoed this line. As recently as August 7, 2022, according to White House press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre, he said, “I've been consistent. I think states should decide the issue of marriage and states should decide the issue of abortion.”
    Now, as those opposing the end of the national protection of abortion rights warned, Graham is calling for a national abortion ban. He tried to explain away the change by saying that after the Democrats had announced what they stood for—presumably, President Joe Biden’s recent warning that Trump and the MAGA Republicans endanger our rights and our democracy, while the Democrats have rebuilt the economy for everyone—he wanted to make sure the Republicans did, too.

    But the Republicans can read the polls as well as anyone and are facing the reality that their base might well not turn out without Trump on the ballot, while opponents of the Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health decision overturning Roe v. Wade are showing up in big numbers to vote against Republicans. Graham’s offer to impose a national ban on abortion seeks to bring the Republican base to the polls. “If we take back the House and the Senate, I can assure you we’ll have a vote on our bill,” he said today. “If the Democrats are in charge, I don’t know if we’ll ever have a vote on our bill.”

    But while Graham courted the Republicans’ extremist base, he also tried to make his proposal palatable for those who support reproductive rights by framing it as a moderate one that would simply bring the U.S. in line with European countries by banning abortion after 15 weeks, ignoring that European countries have much better access to contraception, early abortion, exceptions to the laws, and maternity care.

    The proposal is neither moderate nor in line with European countries. But it is also a giant red flag for our democracy, showing that the argument that the federal government should turn issues back to the states was the lie opponents said it was. Graham is calling for the federal government to impose a law backed only by an extremist minority on the entire country. It is the same principle that so-called “originalists” pretended to reject in the Dobbs decision, now reimposed to reflect not the will of the majority, but the tyranny of the minority.

    Some Republican Senators are distancing themselves from Graham’s proposal, but that distancing reflects the attempt to muddy the waters so voters can believe what they want. The proposal reflects both concern on the part of Republican leaders going into the midterms, and a determination to hide what they are really calling for. CNN Capitol Hill reporter Melanie Zanona reported this afternoon that at least 80 House Republicans are introducing their own bill, similar to Graham’s.
    "For a successful technology, reality must take precedence over public relations,
    for nature cannot be fooled."

    Richard Feynman

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •