NY Reproductive Health Act


mikbone
 Share

Recommended Posts

Anyone going to comment on NY throwing a party and lighting up the world trade center for the legalization of late term abortions, etc.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.lifesitenews.com/mobile/news/one-world-trade-center-lit-up-to-celebrate-abortion-includes-a-memorial-to

Edited by mikbone
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Godless
4 hours ago, JohnsonJones said:

I'm not educated enough to say anything on it yet.  If it really says they can abort right up until birth, it seems as if something evil may be afoot with a law like that. 

I don't know enough about the reasons or why it was written currently to say anything about it other than that.

The wording of the bill states that abortions after 24 weeks are only permissible if the fetus is unviable and/or continuing the pregnancy would put the mother's life/health at risk. It does not leave room for elective abortions past 24 weeks.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Godless said:

The wording of the bill states that abortions after 24 weeks are only permissible if the fetus is unviable and/or continuing the pregnancy would put the mother's life/health at risk. It does not leave room for elective abortions past 24 weeks.

The problem there is the change from “Life at risk” to “Life and Health”.  Health is a very broad term.  Pre-partum depression, for example, is health.  You can kill your baby if you’re suffering from pre-partum depression.  Gestational diabetes is health.  Heck, swollen feet is health.  Do you see where this is going?  

The law changed so that a viable baby is only required to be saved AFTER live birth.  So there’s no provision to prevent a viable baby to be killed prior to it passing the birth canal.

The change comes with removal of the requirement that abortions after 24 weeks have to be performed in a hospital as an inpatient procedure.  This removes the checks and balance of a hospital team setup.  You can now get late-term abortions at Planned Parenthood.  The change also removes the requirement for a 2nd attending physician.  And to top it off, the procedure is covered full protection of medical privacy.

It would be very naive for anybody to think these changes secure that abortions only occur to remove non-viable fetus or to save a mother’s life.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest MormonGator

Setting aside the personal feelings on this deeply polarizing issue, it's safe to say that the pro life side in the political world has not been wildly successful lately. It's time to either 1) accept defeat and move on or 2) drastically change tactics. 
 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, MormonGator said:

Setting aside the personal feelings on this deeply polarizing issue, it's safe to say that the pro life side in the political world has not been wildly successful lately. It's time to either 1) accept defeat and move on or 2) drastically change tactics. 
 

You only think that because liberal media filters the message you receive.  Right to Life, Fetal Heartbeat, et al have been passed in other states.  Personal views will be irrelevant when humanity is standing before Heavenly Father explaining infanticide.

Edited by Grunt
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest MormonGator
8 minutes ago, Grunt said:

You only think that because liberal media filters the message you receive.  Right to Life, Fetal Heartbeat, et al have been passed in other states.  Personal views will be irrelevant when humanity is standing before Heavenly Father explaining infanticide.

See, this is what I love about talking about abortion. Peoples personal views on the subject sort of delude them. This isn't about "personal views". Like I said, I'm putting that aside. 

Ireland was a defeat. This New York bill was a defeat. The Virginia bill will be a defeat. 

Blaming "the liberal media" won't work. 

Edited by MormonGator
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, MormonGator said:

See, this is what I love about talking about abortion. Peoples personal views on the subject sort of delude them. This isn't about "personal views". Like I said, I'm putting that aside. 

Ireland was a defeat. This New York bill was a defeat. The Virginia bill will be a defeat. 

Blaming "the liberal media" won't work. 

Of course, it will work.   Facts work.  Here are some wins you failed to mention:

Alabama Amendment 2

West Virginia Amendment 1

LA Admitting privileges law

NIFLA v. Becerra

Abortion clinic closure rates

et al

You can't put "personal views" aside when discussing abortion.  If you believe infanticide is a view that can be put aside, you're evil.  It's really that simple.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest MormonGator
6 minutes ago, Grunt said:

You can't put "personal views" aside when discussing abortion.  If you believe infanticide is a view that can be put aside, you're evil.  It's really that simple.

Fight on brother! 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

46 minutes ago, MormonGator said:

Setting aside the personal feelings on this deeply polarizing issue, it's safe to say that the pro life side in the political world has not been wildly successful lately. It's time to either 1) accept defeat and move on or 2) drastically change tactics. 
 

You mean like unsuccessful in retaking the Supreme Court?   :D   Now all we have to do is wait until and abortion law gets challenged all the way up.  Oh hey look what law New York just passed...  Something toxically repulsive enough to over come the conservative bias in favor of existing law.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest MormonGator
1 minute ago, estradling75 said:

You mean like unsuccessful in retaking the Supreme Court?   :D   Now all we have to do is wait until and abortion law gets challenged all the way up.  Oh hey look what law New York just passed...  Something toxically repulsive enough to over come the conservative bias in favor of existing law.

My memory isn't what it used to be. But I seem to remember people saying that Souter and O'Connor will overturn Roe vs Wade. Than Planned Parenthood vs Casey came out. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, MormonGator said:

My memory isn't what it used to be. But I seem to remember people saying that Souter and O'Connor will overturn Roe vs Wade. Than Planned Parenthood vs Casey came out. 

That is a possibility...  However you were claiming the pro-life had not been successful lately... When in fact the pro-life recent success with the Supreme Court caused all kinds of heart-burn, and outrage from the anti-life folks

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest MormonGator
3 minutes ago, estradling75 said:

That is a possibility...  However you were claiming the pro-life had not been successful lately... When in fact the pro-life recent success with the Supreme Court caused all kinds of heart-burn, and outrage from the anti-life folks

You just proved my point. If putting a guy on the supreme court who has yet to decide a single case on abortion while on the supreme court classifies as a "win" than the pro-life side is in serious trouble. 

Edited by MormonGator
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, MormonGator said:

You just proved my point. If putting a guy on the supreme court who has yet to decide a single case on abortion while on the supreme court classifies as a "win" than the pro-life side is in serious trouble. 

And yet and yet all you have to do is listen to their cries to realize it was a victory in the minds of the Pro-life opponents...

Or to turn it around on you... You are calling this New York Law a victory but one states unproven law is weak sauce.  It is the Supreme Court that decides the Laws of the land.  Until the Supreme Courts rules the New York Law is just as much a victory (or not a victory) as the Conservative appointment to the Court.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest MormonGator
1 minute ago, estradling75 said:

And yet and yet all you have to do is listen to their cries to realize it was a victory in the minds of the Pro-life opponents...

Or to turn it around on you... You are calling this New York Law a victory but one states unproven law is weak sauce.  It is the Supreme Court that decides the Laws of the land.  Until the Supreme Courts rules the New York Law is just as much a victory (or not a victory) as the Conservative appointment to the Court.

I'm actually against the New York law (even evil incarnate has a soft side @Grunt 😉) .  I've always had reservations about minors and late term abortions.  I think the New York law goes too far. That it passed was a serious blow to the pro life side though. It's a loss no matter how you cut it. 

I'd be cautious about claiming victory on Kavanuagh or a "conservative" supreme court. The Obamacare decision proved that it wasn't the case. So did PP vs Casey.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, MormonGator said:

I'm actually against the New York law (even evil incarnate has a soft side @Grunt 😉) .  I've always had reservations about minors and late term abortions.  I think the New York law goes too far. That it passed was a serious blow to the pro life side though. It's a loss no matter how you cut it. 

I'd be cautious about claiming victory on Kavanuagh or a "conservative" supreme court. The Obamacare decision proved that it wasn't the case. So did PP vs Casey.  

It's not even the least bit funny.  Anyone who thinks killing a child of God is OK is on the wrong side.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Grunt said:

One should worship the LORD before they worship politics or political stances...

Errm...I suppose they missed the memo...they address it in the article, but DOWNPLAY the importance of what the actual stance is.

LDS slant on abortion

Quote

Church leaders have said that some exceptional circumstances may justify an abortion, such as when pregnancy is the result of incest or rape, when the life or health of the mother is judged by competent medical authority to be in serious jeopardy, or when the fetus is known by competent medical authority to have severe defects that will not allow the baby to survive beyond birth. But even these circumstances do not automatically justify an abortion. Those who face such circumstances should consider abortion only after consulting with their local Church leaders and receiving a confirmation through earnest prayer.

So, apparently there are General Authorities that support abortion.

The Key isn't about whether to support abortion or not, but when and in what situation an abortion may be appropriate vs. when it is NOT appropriate.

Roe vs. Wade wasn't about ELECTIVE abortion in many minds, but whether or not DOCTORS could perform life saving procedures when the life of an individual was in danger or on the line.  It was also about allowing DOCTORS to make the best decision for the health of their patients rather than government and non-medically trained individuals.

MANY would say that allowing a doctor to make the best decision about medical care is a WISE decision.

Apparently, the Church seems to agree.  Thus, the church actually SUPPORTS abortion.

That said, I would NEVER want to be one to personally agree to an abortion.  I am not a woman though.  I luckily was never put into that situation where I had to choose between a mother or her baby (aka...my wife or the baby...or even a daughter and the baby).  If I had, and the question was on me to answer, I would probably have sided with trying to save the baby first.  That's just me though.  In any instance, I would NEVER agree to an abortion personally or with a personal family member.  However, as they are adults, they normally have call to determine their own agency with their doctor.

We must be careful about when we say never or other such things.  Overall, we could say, the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints heavily discourages abortion.  They do not agree with the idea of individuals who simply choose an elective abortion because that is what they desire.  They do not agree with abortion as a  form of birth control.  However, there ARE exceptional circumstances where it may be justified.

It goes far beyond just physical health that the Church supports abortions regarding...

policies and procedures (1973)

Quote

The Church opposes abortion and counsels its members not to submit to or perform an abortion except in the rare cases where, in the opinion of competent medical counsel, the life or good health of the mother is seriously endangered or where the pregnancy was caused by rape and produces serious emotional trauma in the mother. Even then it should be done only after counseling with the local presiding priesthood authority and after receiving divine confirmation through prayer.

And even more succinct but in accordance with what it states today and what it stated previously...

Church and abortion (1991)

Quote

In view of the widespread public interest in the issue of abortion, we reaffirm that The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints has consistently opposed elective abortion. More than a century ago, the First Presidency of the Church warned against this evil. We have repeatedly counseled people everywhere to turn from the devastating practice of abortion for personal or social convenience.

“The Church recognizes that there may be rare cases in which abortion may be justified—cases involving pregnancy by incest or rape; when the life or health of the woman is adjudged by competent medical authority to be in serious jeopardy; or when the fetus is known by competent medical authority to have severe defects that will not allow the baby to survive beyond birth. But these are not automatic reasons for abortion. Even in these cases, the couple should consider abortion only after consulting with each other, and their bishop, and receiving divine confirmation through prayer. The practice of elective abortion is fundamentally contrary to the Lord’s injunction, ‘Thou shalt not steal; neither commit adultery, nor kill, nor do anything like unto it.’ (D&C 59:6.) We urge all to preserve the sanctity of human life and thereby realize the happiness promised to those who keep the commandments of the Lord.

The Church does NOT oppose abortion itself when utilized as a valid medical practice in being used in regards to the life or health of the potential mother.

Instead of making a blanket statement that a Member of the Church cannot support abortion, a more correct statement would be that a Member should NOT SUPPORT ELECTIVE ABORTION.

In the many decades abortion has come to be less about Medically determined situations regarding the life of the mother and abortion, and turned into an abomination of what it used to be.  Now, instead of being a procedure determined by a doctor in certain situations, it has turned into a terrible thing in it's own right where people elect to have an abortion for no more reason than they do not want a baby.  It was used immediately after Roe vs. Wade with that decision trying to support this idea...and via other lawsuits and cases that brought up before the courts in the 80s and 90s gained a LOT more power.  In the 90s one could see where the tide shifted completely and the illusionary stance of medically determined abortions was dropped completely in favor of it simply being an ELECTIVE ABORTION idea.  Elective Abortion is now almost synonymous with abortion in common usage, BUT there is a big difference (IN MY OPINION).  ELECTIVE ABORTION is something that I think is a terrible and horrible thing to be done commonly in our day. 

The church has consistently opposed ELECTIVE ABORTION...but when it comes down to the valid medical practice of the actual life and health being protected or saved, the Church has a much different approach.  One should have a great deal of prayer and thought along with consultation with their doctor and church authorities in regards to if they should or should not have this procedure...but if they receive and affirmative answer and their life or health is truly in danger...the Church has issued it's statements.

Personally, I made the choice long ago to never want to be party to an abortion if I could help it and I HOPE that if the situation ever comes up that I can still remain strong on that point and refuse to allow an abortion.  I MAY be swayed if it was proven that the fetus was already dead or was going to die soon, but otherwise I would hope to be strong enough in my convictions to make the choice against an abortion. I  have been blessed to NEVER deal with that thus far, and I am grateful.

Not everyone has that choice, and when one has and they come to their Bishop or other church authority later on, the stories can be heart wrenching and the letters and decisions can be a difficult thing to navigate through and help the individual so plagued by the choice to come to a spiritual resolution.  I have seen others struggle, even when it was obvious that the church approved that they made the right decision.  I am glad that the church has some understanding of the difficulties of these types of things and the types of situations people have to deal with at times in regards to this and is a little more lenient than many may think the Church is.  The General Authorities have a great deal of the spirit and revelation and probably have a great more mercy than many of us (including I) have.  I am just glad I have been blessed thus far in life that I have not had to make a decision on that scale yet.

If one is faced with the decision between the life of their wife or the baby...that is such a awful choice to have to choose between that even when one may think they already know what choice they will make, it may be a tougher decision than they ever expected.

Edited by JohnsonJones
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Simple line is... is a fetus 'Human'?

If the unborn is Human then we already have plenty of Law and Ethical standards, and Religious Guidance on when it might be acceptable to kill (The mother acting in Self Defense is right up there).

If the unborn is not Human then it is property to be used or disposed of as the owner wishes. We also already have this covered in Laws, Ethics, and Religious Guidance.

We do not have a clear understanding of when the unborn goes from a mass of cells (aka property) to a Human.  And that is the problem.

Sadly some of the greatest tragedies  in our History come from people treating other people as property. Slavery, the Holocaust, etc are just a few.  I know those that support elective abortion are on the wrong side of God, and I predict they will find themselves on the wrong side of History. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, estradling75 said:

 

We do not have a clear understanding of when the unborn goes from a mass of cells (aka property) to a Human.  And that is the problem.

 

 

You don't think we have a clear understanding?  I think we do.  I think people try to cloud that understanding to further their goals.  

When a sperm joins with an egg, it becomes one.  At that moment, the result is an organism with its own DNA that starts a developmental journey that lasts until its death.  It is undeniably human.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Grunt said:

You don't think we have a clear understanding?  I think we do.  I think people try to cloud that understanding to further their goals.  

When a sperm joins with an egg, it becomes one.  At that moment, the result is an organism with its own DNA that starts a developmental journey that lasts until its death.  It is undeniably human.

I was talking Legally (because we are talking Laws in this thread)...  Legally no we do not...  If we had the Legal Understanding of Human life that you gave here, Roe vs Wade would have never happened. This law from New York would have never had a chance.  If we want a long term legal victory on this subject it must be on the basis that fetus are Human and therefore entitled to basic Human rights.  Letting the argument be about choice and the mother's body is an argument we will never win.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, estradling75 said:

I was talking Legally (because we are talking Laws in this thread)...  Legally no we do not...  If we had the Legal Understanding of Human life that you gave here, Roe vs Wade would have never happened. This law from New York would have never had a chance.  If we want a long term legal victory on this subject it must be on the basis that fetus are Human and therefore entitled to basic Human rights.  Letting the argument be about choice and the mother's body is an argument we will never win.

Ahhh.  I agree.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

http://thefederalist.com/2019/01/31/new-yorks-new-law-abortions-john-c-calhoun-moment/

It is remarkable that Northam finds his career threatened, not for openly supporting murder; but for having failed thirty years ago to be sufficiently apologetic for Calhoun’s legacy.  If Trump were at all smart, he’d tweet something about the statistics of white abortions versus black abortions and then go quiet for a week or so.

Jeremiah Wright said the right thing all those years ago; he was just saying it for the wrong reason.  We have much to atone for . . .

Edited by Just_A_Guy
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Abortion is wrong.  I delivered my last 5 children at home.

I have 11 children.  We were told one of our babies had a pancreatic tumor.  We were told one had a heart condition and likely had down syndrome.  We just stopped all prenatal tests after our fourth. All of our children are healthy.

And our first Ob/Gyn doc in Provo, asked if we wanted to give up our child for addoption.  Our son was born in the coventant to a mother starting law school and a father just finishing undergrad and applying to medical school.  (I almost punched him).

As a doctor, I would warn everyone to not trust your doctors, and fire them if you dont like them.  And seek a second opinion if you feel uneasy.

The fact that we are now celebrating abortions with parties is what I now find disturbing.

Edited by mikbone
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share