Three plaintiffs testified about the trauma they experienced carrying nonviable pregnancies.

  • MasterOBee Master/King@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    9
    ·
    1 year ago

    You believe that.

    Many don’t.

    Does that make them enslavers to women?

    Say they can survive outside the womb at 6 months. That’s the point that you say ‘okay, no more killing this being’?

    • rabbit_wren@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      They can survive outside the womb at 6 months with the right kind of medical care (very high mortality rate, though) and the previous cutoff for abortion was around 5 months, so, yeah I guess someone did say that very thing at some point.

      • MasterOBee Master/King@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        1 year ago

        Yeah, unfortunately, I think it’s just bad law. I think it’d be okay legislatively, which is why it’s sooooo incredibly odd that the democrats didn’t codify RvW despite having many many many opportunities. But ultimately, I think it was a terribly ruled case that I think the SC was right to overturn. Fun fact, RBG also shares my belief.

        • dragonflyteaparty@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          They didn’t actually have so many opportunities. Yes, it’s terrible that it isn’t enshrined in law, but no. Don’t blame Democrats when they didn’t have near as much chance as everyone claims.

        • dragonflyteaparty@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          They didn’t actually have so many opportunities. Yes, it’s terrible that it isn’t enshrined in law, but no. Don’t blame Democrats when they didn’t have near as much chance as everyone claims.

        • dragonflyteaparty@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          They didn’t actually have so many opportunities. Yes, it’s terrible that it isn’t enshrined in law, but no. Don’t blame Democrats when they didn’t have near as much chance as everyone claims.

          • MasterOBee Master/King@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            1 year ago

            They had dozens of opportunities…

            Don’t blame Democrats when they didn’t have near as much chance as everyone claims.

            Yes they did. They didn’t so idiots would keep voting for them and to say that your rights are ‘under attack’

            Have you heard of Stockholm syndrome? That’s where you’re at.

            • dragonflyteaparty@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              Where are the dozens of times that Democrats have had the majority Senate, House, and the presidency? You said specifically dozens, therefore there must have been dozens of democratic presidents who had a full democratic Congress. Who were all of these presidents?

              • MasterOBee Master/King@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                0
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                1 year ago

                1977-1979 under jimmy carter 1993-1995 under bill clinton 2007-2011 under Obama

                https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Party_divisions_of_United_States_Congresses

                You said specifically dozens, therefore there must have been dozens of democratic presidents who had a full democratic Congress.

                Not necessarily, it could be 10 times over 2 years.

                Regardless, I’ve listed at least 12 years that democrats had a president and majorities in senate and congress - yet, not once did they enshrine what you argue is a human right. Either they didn’t think it’s a human right, they didn’t want to codify it, or it’s just not high on their priority list. They’ve had plenty of opportunities, you only got the dems to blame.