Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 11 to 15 of 15
Thanks Tree11Thanks

Thread: Iowa Bans Most Abortions As Governor Signs 'Heartbeat' Bill

  1. #11
    Veteran Member bajisima's Avatar
    Joined
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    46,330
    Thanks
    28363

    From
    New Hampshire
    Quote Originally Posted by Ian Jeffrey View Post
    That is really all that is going on here ... more test cases, wasting taxpayer dollars.

    Not that I have any personal experience in this area, but my understanding is a woman can easily not know she is pregnant until 6 weeks into the pregnancy. This law is clearly designed to prevent all abortion (with stated exceptions), and that is facially unconstitutional.
    Technology is rapidly improving, so its possible women can know sooner. But that usually happens if she is actively trying and aware. If not, she may wait 4-8 weeks or longer until she knows. This topic is going to be coming up again and again and I have no doubt it will be re-litigated at some point. If Trump gets another seat on the SC it might happen sooner than we think. I just dont know how it will turn out. I dont know the exact terms of Roe v Wade but it wouldnt surprise me to see a new court perhaps keep abortion overall legal but move the dates backwards. Again technology is determining what makes a fetus viable and thats heading back to 20-22 weeks. Several other countries have changed the time frames of legal abortions to reflect that.

  2. #12
    Spock of Vulcan Ian Jeffrey's Avatar
    Joined
    Mar 2013
    Posts
    64,864
    Thanks
    32888

    From
    Vulcan
    Quote Originally Posted by bajisima View Post
    Technology is rapidly improving, so its possible women can know sooner. But that usually happens if she is actively trying and aware. If not, she may wait 4-8 weeks or longer until she knows. ... {I}t wouldnt surprise me to see a new court perhaps keep abortion overall legal but move the dates backwards.
    Backward all the way to before conception, as I believe Arizona (I think it was AZ) tried to do, which would render contraception illegal contrary to Griswold v. Connecticut, 381 U.S. 479 (1965).

    Quote Originally Posted by bajisima View Post
    Again technology is determining what makes a fetus viable and thats heading back to 20-22 weeks. Several other countries have changed the time frames of legal abortions to reflect that.
    That may not be entirely unreasonable. Moving it back to six weeks, however, is plainly unreasonable under standards set by Roe, given that knowledge of pregnancy may not exist yet, thus requiring women to basically get a pregnancy test every month (or more often) for abortion to be permissible.
    Thanks from bajisima and Blueneck

  3. #13
    Banned Camp
    Joined
    Jan 2015
    Posts
    29,549
    Thanks
    7776

    From
    Great State of Texas


    No More Organ Harvesting for Iowans.

  4. #14
    Dick with my Buzz...Try DebateDrone's Avatar
    Joined
    Jul 2014
    Posts
    37,128
    Thanks
    32080

    From
    SWUSA
    Quote Originally Posted by John T Ford View Post


    No More Organ Harvesting for Iowans.
    Why would the State not ban fetal organ harvesting instead of banning abortions?
    Thanks from Blueneck and Ian Jeffrey

  5. #15
    Veteran Member bajisima's Avatar
    Joined
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    46,330
    Thanks
    28363

    From
    New Hampshire
    Quote Originally Posted by Ian Jeffrey View Post
    Backward all the way to before conception, as I believe Arizona (I think it was AZ) tried to do, which would render contraception illegal contrary to Griswold v. Connecticut, 381 U.S. 479 (1965).


    That may not be entirely unreasonable. Moving it back to six weeks, however, is plainly unreasonable under standards set by Roe, given that knowledge of pregnancy may not exist yet, thus requiring women to basically get a pregnancy test every month (or more often) for abortion to be permissible.
    Its very complicated and of course technology makes it more so. Another issue is that by 6 weeks even if the woman knows she is pregnant, I dont think there are too many tests that can determine the health of the fetus. So if the mother finds out after that point that the child is severely deformed there will be nothing she can do.
    Thanks from Ian Jeffrey

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 49
    Last Post: 14th December 2016, 02:53 PM
  2. Replies: 40
    Last Post: 14th April 2016, 06:02 AM
  3. Replies: 10
    Last Post: 30th March 2016, 12:38 PM
  4. Arizona Governor Signs Controversial Abortion Bill Into Law
    By John Marston in forum Current Events
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 31st March 2015, 09:09 AM
  5. Replies: 35
    Last Post: 10th May 2011, 09:04 AM

Tags for this Thread


Facebook Twitter RSS Feed