Law Arizona House votes to repeal 1864 law banning abortions

[PhitePhan]

There are people in this thread describing a child as, idealistically, an unavoidable consequence of irresponsible behavior. Children are consequences, a sentence that must be served, and this is almost exclusively mentioned in the context of women.

I mean, a child is a potential consequence of unprotected sex, no? With regards to a “sentence to be served”, that is contrasted by exterminating a healthy fetus… you either “serve your sentence” aka take care of your child- or you kill it.

I do agree that men should have more say with regards to this topic though, you’re right there, at least.

 

[Sinister]

I mean, a child is a potential consequence of unprotected sex, no? With regards to a “sentence to be served”, that is contrasted by exterminating a healthy fetus… you either “serve your sentence” aka take care of your child- or you kill it.

I do agree that men should have more say with regards to this topic though, you’re right there, at least.

My 3 kids that my wife and I chose to have are neither consequences nor sentences. And any base ideology which views parenting as something like that, I'd argue, does more over all harm than good, and is about controlling behavior above all.

 

[RoastBeast]

My 3 kids that my wife and I chose to have are neither consequences nor sentences. And any base ideology which views parenting as something like that, I'd argue, does more over all harm than good, and is about controlling behavior above all.

con·se·quence
/ˈkänsəkwəns,ˈkänsəˌkwens/
noun

1. 1.
   a result or effect of an action or condition.
   
   
   

 

[Sinister]

con·se·quence
/ˈkänsəkwəns,ˈkänsəˌkwens/
noun

1. 1.
   a result or effect of an action or condition.
   
   

Uh huh, the word itself is almost exclusively used as a negative connotation. Neutral at best. In fact here is the Cambridge definition with examples:

"a result of a particular action or situation, often one that is bad or not convenient:

- serious consequences Not making a will can have serious consequences for your children and other family members.

- dire consequences Eating too much processed food can have dire health consequences.
as a consequence of Scientists think it is unlikely that any species will actually become extinct as a consequence of the oil spill.

- unintended consequence The discovery came about as an unintended consequence of a search for something else.

- suffer the consequences Well, if you insist on eating so much, you'll have to suffer (= accept and deal with) the consequences!

- face the consequences He will have to face the consequences of his actions.

- take the consequences If someone commits a crime, they have to take the consequences."

I wouldn't use any such connotations to describe the decision to be a parent.

 

[RoastBeast]

Uh huh, the word itself is almost exclusively used as a negative connotation. Neutral at best. In fact here is the Cambridge definition with examples:

"a result of a particular action or situation, often one that is bad or not convenient:

- serious consequences Not making a will can have serious consequences for your children and other family members.

- dire consequences Eating too much processed food can have dire health consequences.
as a consequence of Scientists think it is unlikely that any species will actually become extinct as a consequence of the oil spill.

- unintended consequence The discovery came about as an unintended consequence of a search for something else.

- suffer the consequences Well, if you insist on eating so much, you'll have to suffer (= accept and deal with) the consequences!

- face the consequences He will have to face the consequences of his actions.

- take the consequences If someone commits a crime, they have to take the consequences."

I wouldn't use any such connotations to describe the decision to be a parent.

If you haven't figured it out already, you're the one who is primarily using "consequence" and "sentence" to describe conceiving a child.

When does the baby fetus inside the mother's stomach have value? I'm guessing if a guy would have punched your wife in the stomach while she was 8 months pregnant and caused her to have a miscarriage, you would have absolutely lost your shit that your child got murdered like that.

Yet you also argue that it's perfectly okay to abort a child if the mother does not want it. And yes you've argued in the past that you are okay with abortion at any time before the child passes through the birth canal.

We don't give value to human life based on whether we love them or not.

 

[Sinister]

If you haven't figured it out already, you're the one who is primarily using "consequence" and "sentence" to describe conceiving a child.

When does the baby fetus inside the mother's stomach have value? I'm guessing if a guy would have punched your wife in the stomach while she was 8 months pregnant and caused her to have a miscarriage, you would have absolutely lost your shit that your child got murdered like that.

Yet you also argue that it's perfectly okay to abort a child if the mother does not want it. And yes you've argued in the past that you are okay with abortion at any time before the child passes through the birth canal.

We don't give value to human life based on whether we love them or not.

Your framing is very telling. I've said time and time again that I've had NO issue leaving the determination of viability to people more qualified than myself to do so. And that's not religious people or any other kind of political idealog. I also recognize that my wife is doing the bulk of the work here, so she has the final say. I feel that way despite your attempts to appeal to my emotions. I have argued that I was ok worth Roe (which banned late term abortions with the exception of medical emergencies), and with Casey, which further established standards for fetal viability.

But let me answer your question with the actual  consequence of this random man murdering my baby. You know it might not just pop right out, right? If the fetus dies because of that, it will still be INSIDE of her. Guess what...because of "Pro Life" d*ckheads who want women to be 2nd class citizens, all through the Southern US my wife would be FORCED to carry the dead fetus for another month, which could kill her, and even if she survived, could ruin her fertility after. That is the medical REALITY of blanket late-term abortion bans, and in these States where religious dingbats are speaking in tongues in legislative chambers (which is where her Father lives), she might even be brought up on charges of doing it herself because they wouldn't believe someone else did it. They would accuse her of trying to cause an abortion. Then the NY Post headline comes out:

"Woman in Arizona charged with attempted 8th month abortion" or some other bullsh*t like that because these cretins need an example to use for political fodder.

Sounds sensational and stupid right? Well, there have been women jailed for having miscarriages in places where abortions are banned. This is the reality of what they have to consider. And personally I find it distasteful that you would even contend value of life regardless of love in a thread where you've consistently taken your position essentially from the perspective of "these hoes be irresponsible."

 

[RoastBeast]

Your framing is very telling. I've said time and time again that I've had NO issue leaving the determination of viability to people more qualified than myself to do so. And that's not religious people or any other kind of political idealog. I also recognize that my wife is doing the bulk of the work here, so she has the final say. I feel that way despite your attempts to appeal to my emotions. I have argued that I was ok worth Roe (which banned late term abortions with the exception of medical emergencies), and with Casey, which further established standards for fetal viability.

But let me answer your question with the actual  consequence of this random man murdering my baby. You know it might not just pop right out, right? If the fetus dies because of that, it will still be INSIDE of her. Guess what...because of "Pro Life" d*ckheads who want women to be 2nd class citizens, all through the Southern US my wife would be FORCED to carry the dead fetus for another month, which could kill her, and even if she survived, could ruin her fertility after. That is the medical REALITY of blanket late-term abortion bans, and in these States where religious dingbats are speaking in tongues in legislative chambers (which is where her Father lives), she might even be brought up on charges of doing it herself because they wouldn't believe someone else did it. They would accuse her of trying to cause an abortion. Then the NY Post headline comes out:

"Woman in Arizona charged with attempted 8th month abortion" or some other bullsh*t like that because these cretins need an example to use for political fodder.

Sounds sensational and stupid right? Well, there have been women jailed for having miscarriages in places where abortions are banned. This is the reality of what they have to consider. And personally I find it distasteful that you would even contend value of life regardless of love in a thread where you've consistently taken your position essentially from the perspective of "these hoes be irresponsible."

I've never once agreed with any of that. In fact I would be willing to bet that there isn't a single pro life poster on this forum that would say that your wife should have to carry the dead fetus for another month, even if it cost her her own life. That's crazy.

I'm sure there are some nutcases out there in the world that think so but that is not even close to the status quo for the majority of pro life people.

You're just too wrapped up in dishonest hyperbole to have a serious conversation with. "These hoes be irresponsible" is just another dishonest way to frame me saying that people should be responsible when they have sex with each other if they don't want to create a baby. You're attempting to make me seem like a misogynist, which is an outright lie. Both people share a personal responsibility to not create a child that they cannot raise.

The fact that you think my take on that is radical is very telling. What's funny is you seem to think that there is no responsibility when it comes to sex, yet you're all about tons of graphic sexual "education" for minors for an act that you claim does not require personal responsibility. See how much of a hypocrite you are?

 

[Belaya Smert]

Really makes you wonder what they used if the 45-70 didn’t come out til 1872.

 

[Sinister]

I've never once agreed with any of that. In fact I would be willing to bet that there isn't a single pro life poster on this forum that would say that your wife should have to carry the dead fetus for another month, even if it cost her her own life. That's crazy.

I'm sure there are some nutcases out there in the world that think so but that is not even close to the status quo for the majority of pro life people.

You're just too wrapped up in dishonest hyperbole to have a serious conversation with. "These hoes be irresponsible" is just another dishonest way to frame me saying that people should be responsible when they have sex with each other if they don't want to create a baby. You're attempting to make me seem like a misogynist, which is an outright lie. Both people share a personal responsibility to not create a child that they cannot raise.

The fact that you think my take on that is radical is very telling. What's funny is you seem to think that there is no responsibility when it comes to sex, yet you're all about tons of graphic sexual "education" for minors for an act that you claim does not require personal responsibility. See how much of a hypocrite you are?

You've almost exclusively said "women" need to be responsible, until someone pointed out that you were saying that. I dont want people who dont want to be parents to be forced to be parents because they did a thing, when we have the technology for it. I dont think having sex qualifies anyone to be a parent, and I dont think it should require them to.

Nope, I never said there is no responsibility. I just dont sum that responsibility up as raising kids. There are lots of things kids should be educated on about sex that has nothing to do with parenting, specifically, and yet if they got that education, you'd end up with less teen parents and less people practicing unsafe sex. The better educated they are, the less abortions happen. And yet people who vote for people who not only want abortions banned, but who thinks that sexual education is ONLY the job of parents. In the States that are doing that, higher rates of teen pregnancies and STD's.

 

[idrankyourbeer]

Arizona senate passes repeal of 1864 near-total abortion ban​

Democrats pick up support of two Republicans to repeal law reinstated three weeks ago, with governor expected to ratify repeal

Arizona lawmakers have repealed the state’s 160-year-old statute banning nearly all abortions.

The 1864 law, which was reinstated by the state supreme court three weeks ago, has made abortion a central focus in the battleground state and galvanized Democrats seeking to enshrine abortion rights.

In the state senate, Democrats picked up the support of two Republicans in favor of repealing the ban. The Democratic governor, Katie Hobbs, is expected to ratify the repeal, which narrowly cleared the Arizona house last week after three Republicans joined with all the Democrats in the chamber.

Dozens of demonstrators for and against the right to abortion gathered at the capitol before the vote, and others packed into the chamber’s gallery to watch. As senators began to vote, Republicans in the chamber voiced bombastic protests and criticisms in floor speeches.

Antony Kern, a Republican who has been indicted as a fake elector in a plot to undermine the 2020 election results, said his fellow Republicans backing the ban were the “epitome of delusion”. He claimed the vote would take the state down a slippery slope towards acceptance of pedophilia, as supporters cheered from the gallery with silent claps. Kern also compared the chamber repealing the bill to Nazi Germany.

Another Republican senator, JD Mesnard, played a sonogram recording of his child’s heartbeat on the floor. He said: “These will be fewer, these heart beatings.”

Republican Shawnna Bolick gave a 20-minute speech in defense of her vote to support the repeal, covering stories about her own pregnancies, other pregnancies, and her critiques of the state’s Democratic governor. Ultimately, she said, repealing the ban would allow Republicans to maintain a less extreme version of abortion restrictions. She said: “We should be pushing for the maximum protection for unborn children that can be sustained. I side with saving more babies’ lives.”

The civil-war era statute, which predates Arizona’s statehood, bans nearly all abortions, including those sought by survivors of rape or incest. It also imposes prison terms for doctors and others who aid in abortions. The law had been blocked by the 1973 supreme court Roe v Wade decisions that granted the constitutional right to abortion.

“We are relieved that lawmakers have finally repealed this inhumane abortion ban – something extremist politicians refused to do for far too long,” said Victoria López, director of program and strategy for the ACLU of Arizona. “Unfortunately, cruel abortion bans like the law from 1864 have been at the center of political stunts for years, causing lasting harm to people who need abortions and their providers.”

Last month, the state’s Republican-appointed supreme court justices suggested it could be reinstated since Roe was overturned in 2022.

The repeal would not take effect until June or July, 90 days after the legislative session. Arizona’s attorney general, Kris Mayes, a Democrat, has vowed not to enforce the ban in the meantime. Providers, including Planned Parenthood, have been preparing resources to help patients seeking abortions to travel out of state during the time that the ban is in effect.

“Today’s vote by the Arizona senate to repeal the draconian 1864 abortion ban is a win for freedom in our state,” Mayes said.

Once the 1864 measure is stricken, a 2022 statue banning procedures after 15 weeks of pregnancy would supplant it as the state’s ruling abortion law.

Arizona senate passes repeal of 1864 near-total abortion ban

Democrats pick up support of two Republicans to repeal law reinstated three weeks ago, with governor expected to ratify repeal

www.theguardian.com

 

[RoastBeast]

You've almost exclusively said "women" need to be responsible, until someone pointed out that you were saying that. I dont want people who dont want to be parents to be forced to be parents because they did a thing, when we have the technology for it. I dont think having sex qualifies anyone to be a parent, and I dont think it should require them to.

Nope, I never said there is no responsibility. I just dont sum that responsibility up as raising kids. There are lots of things kids should be educated on about sex that has nothing to do with parenting, specifically, and yet if they got that education, you'd end up with less teen parents and less people practicing unsafe sex. The better educated they are, the less abortions happen. And yet people who vote for people who not only want abortions banned, but who thinks that sexual education is ONLY the job of parents. In the States that are doing that, higher rates of teen pregnancies and STD's.

Yes because we were talking about women getting pregnant so I was saying they should use personal responsibility and not get pregnant in the first place if they can't handle it. Obviously men have their own share of the blame as well.

It doesn't matter if you think having sex doesn't require someone to be a parent. Biology has dictated since the beginning of time that it does if you want your child to survive. We all know how babies are made so if you don't want a baby, don't risk making a baby. It doesn't get any more simple than that and it doesn't matter if we have the technology. You don't abort a third trimester baby because you have the technology to do it.

I asked the question about whether people had a personal responsibility to not make a baby in the first place and not a single one of you guys ever answered that simple question.

You're still exaggerating the hell out of everything. The vast majority of people don't want sex education banned. They just want the weird radical left version of it banned where they teach kids that they might be born in the wrong body or that getting molested by an uncle could feel pleasurable. You know...the weird shit that actually makes things worse for kids. I don't know of any right wingers who want the age old version of sex education banned that is safe for minors. Another lie in a long list of lies and hypocrisy from you man.

 

[Sweater of AV]

Arizona senate passes repeal of 1864 near-total abortion ban​

Democrats pick up support of two Republicans to repeal law reinstated three weeks ago, with governor expected to ratify repeal

Arizona lawmakers have repealed the state’s 160-year-old statute banning nearly all abortions.

The 1864 law, which was reinstated by the state supreme court three weeks ago, has made abortion a central focus in the battleground state and galvanized Democrats seeking to enshrine abortion rights.

In the state senate, Democrats picked up the support of two Republicans in favor of repealing the ban. The Democratic governor, Katie Hobbs, is expected to ratify the repeal, which narrowly cleared the Arizona house last week after three Republicans joined with all the Democrats in the chamber.

Dozens of demonstrators for and against the right to abortion gathered at the capitol before the vote, and others packed into the chamber’s gallery to watch. As senators began to vote, Republicans in the chamber voiced bombastic protests and criticisms in floor speeches.

Antony Kern, a Republican who has been indicted as a fake elector in a plot to undermine the 2020 election results, said his fellow Republicans backing the ban were the “epitome of delusion”. He claimed the vote would take the state down a slippery slope towards acceptance of pedophilia, as supporters cheered from the gallery with silent claps. Kern also compared the chamber repealing the bill to Nazi Germany.

Another Republican senator, JD Mesnard, played a sonogram recording of his child’s heartbeat on the floor. He said: “These will be fewer, these heart beatings.”

Republican Shawnna Bolick gave a 20-minute speech in defense of her vote to support the repeal, covering stories about her own pregnancies, other pregnancies, and her critiques of the state’s Democratic governor. Ultimately, she said, repealing the ban would allow Republicans to maintain a less extreme version of abortion restrictions. She said: “We should be pushing for the maximum protection for unborn children that can be sustained. I side with saving more babies’ lives.”

The civil-war era statute, which predates Arizona’s statehood, bans nearly all abortions, including those sought by survivors of rape or incest. It also imposes prison terms for doctors and others who aid in abortions. The law had been blocked by the 1973 supreme court Roe v Wade decisions that granted the constitutional right to abortion.

“We are relieved that lawmakers have finally repealed this inhumane abortion ban – something extremist politicians refused to do for far too long,” said Victoria López, director of program and strategy for the ACLU of Arizona. “Unfortunately, cruel abortion bans like the law from 1864 have been at the center of political stunts for years, causing lasting harm to people who need abortions and their providers.”

Last month, the state’s Republican-appointed supreme court justices suggested it could be reinstated since Roe was overturned in 2022.

The repeal would not take effect until June or July, 90 days after the legislative session. Arizona’s attorney general, Kris Mayes, a Democrat, has vowed not to enforce the ban in the meantime. Providers, including Planned Parenthood, have been preparing resources to help patients seeking abortions to travel out of state during the time that the ban is in effect.

“Today’s vote by the Arizona senate to repeal the draconian 1864 abortion ban is a win for freedom in our state,” Mayes said.

Once the 1864 measure is stricken, a 2022 statue banning procedures after 15 weeks of pregnancy would supplant it as the state’s ruling abortion law.

Arizona senate passes repeal of 1864 near-total abortion ban

Democrats pick up support of two Republicans to repeal law reinstated three weeks ago, with governor expected to ratify repeal

www.theguardian.com

Great news.

 

[BROWNPRIDE]

Imagine if we devoted the same energy to homelessness or poverty as we do the right to abort babies.
This country has lost its way.

You never seem to let us down with your post you ignorant fool!

 

[Sweater of AV]

Signed and officially repealed.

Arizona's Democratic governor signs a bill to repeal 1864 ban on most abortions

The near-total Civil War-era ban permits abortions only to save the patient’s life and provides no exceptions for survivors of rape or incest.

apnews.com