snopes.com  

Go Back   snopes.com > SLC Central > Soapbox Derby

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 16 March 2013, 01:38 AM
snopes's Avatar
snopes snopes is offline
 
Join Date: 18 February 2000
Location: California
Posts: 109,638
Icon13 North Dakota Senate approves "heartbeat" abortion ban

The North Dakota Senate has approved what would be the most restrictive abortion law in the United States, a measure banning the procedure in most cases once a fetal heartbeat can be detected, as early as six weeks.

http://news.yahoo.com/north-dakota-s...195819350.html
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 16 March 2013, 02:27 AM
LadyLockeout's Avatar
LadyLockeout LadyLockeout is offline
 
Join Date: 09 May 2004
Location: Dallas, TX
Posts: 7,178
Default

Quote:
The "heartbeat" bill provides exceptions if an abortion would prevent the death or irreversible impairment of a pregnant woman but no exceptions for rape.
Excuse me. I must go vomit profusely now.
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 16 March 2013, 11:57 AM
Drakkon Drakkon is offline
 
Join Date: 07 February 2005
Location: Windsor, MO
Posts: 65
Default

No worries, the female body has ways to shut that whole process down if it is a legitimate rape...I mean if you get pregnant you probably gave pre-consent, or asked for it by dressing provocatively.
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 16 March 2013, 04:13 PM
Ramblin' Dave's Avatar
Ramblin' Dave Ramblin' Dave is offline
 
Join Date: 11 May 2005
Location: Singapore
Posts: 13,120
Default

All joking aside, thanks to the various responses to Rep. Akin, we now know a substantial number of politicians (at least one of whom is also a doctor) believe that tripe. I wouldn't be at all surprised if a number of the legislators who voted for this are among them.
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 16 March 2013, 06:27 PM
Auburn Red's Avatar
Auburn Red Auburn Red is offline
 
Join Date: 13 June 2010
Location: St. Louis area, Missouri
Posts: 2,140
Default

WHAT IS THIS???
Are these states in competition as to which one hates women the most? I wish I could say something more comprehensive, but I already wasted my words on the thread about Arkansas.
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 16 March 2013, 07:21 PM
mags's Avatar
mags mags is offline
 
Join Date: 23 February 2006
Location: Springboro, OH
Posts: 5,104
Default

I think they've finally come to the realization that they're losing traction in the fight to treat gays, blacks, and other minorities as second class citizens. But, there are more women than men, so they're free game, right? *headdesk*
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 21 March 2013, 06:07 PM
Dakarai Dakarai is offline
 
Join Date: 06 October 2012
Location: Pullman, WA
Posts: 27
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by LadyLockeout View Post
Excuse me. I must go vomit profusely now.
To be fair, if one is of the type that abortion is murder, no exceptions should be made.

Now I'm not saying this is right, but at least they're being consistent.
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 21 March 2013, 06:21 PM
Lainie's Avatar
Lainie Lainie is online now
 
Join Date: 29 August 2005
Location: Suburban Columbus, OH
Posts: 74,211
Default

No, they're not, because the law does include exceptions -- just not one for rape.
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 21 March 2013, 06:22 PM
Ryda Wong, EBfCo. Ryda Wong, EBfCo. is offline
 
Join Date: 14 December 2005
Location: Denver, CO
Posts: 24,019
Default

What I really don't get is why anti-choicers want to grant a fetus rights that no other human would EVER have? What other human gets to attach themselves to another individual's body and leech off of it and use it without consent? If a born human tried to do that, killing that human would certainly be justified.
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 21 March 2013, 06:34 PM
erwins's Avatar
erwins erwins is offline
 
Join Date: 04 April 2006
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 11,759
Default

They would totally give another human those rights if that human attached themselves specifically to a slutty slutty woman who had teh dirty wrong seks without being married and fully prepared to take the consequences, which include having another human attach themselves to her for 9 months.
Reply With Quote
  #11  
Old 21 March 2013, 09:13 PM
Esprise Me's Avatar
Esprise Me Esprise Me is offline
 
Join Date: 02 October 2005
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Posts: 6,633
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ryda Wong, EBfCo. View Post
What I really don't get is why anti-choicers want to grant a fetus rights that no other human would EVER have?
This is the part that really sticks in my craw, too. Even around here, tempers flare whenever we discuss making organ donation the default with an opt-out provision, because our bodies are so sacrosanct that taking a part of them without permission after we're dead, even to save the life of another, is unacceptable to many.

In my darker moments I think this preference for embryos/fetuses over women reflects not only a deeply-seated misogyny, but a general misanthropy as well (after all, about half the embryos/fetuses are female too.) It's as if you've decided, without knowing anything about them, that all the women alive today deserve so little respect that the state must step between them and their doctors. The only folks who matter are those who can't have done anything wrong because they've never done anything at all.
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 21 March 2013, 09:58 PM
htonl's Avatar
htonl htonl is offline
 
Join Date: 19 July 2006
Location: Cape Town, South Africa
Posts: 1,640
Default

This law would be incompatible with Roe v. Wade, presumably?
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 21 March 2013, 10:02 PM
Wintermute's Avatar
Wintermute Wintermute is offline
 
 
Join Date: 04 July 2003
Location: Walnut Creek, CA
Posts: 6,535
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by htonl View Post
This law would be incompatible with Roe v. Wade, presumably?
Until a court says that it is unconstitutional then it is the law of the land. I don't see anything special about this that would go against previous court cases.
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 21 March 2013, 10:04 PM
Ryda Wong, EBfCo. Ryda Wong, EBfCo. is offline
 
Join Date: 14 December 2005
Location: Denver, CO
Posts: 24,019
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Esprise Me View Post
It's as if you've decided, without knowing anything about them, that all the women alive today deserve so little respect that the state must step between them and their doctors.
Our uterus are more regulated than our guns. Something is really wrong with that.
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 21 March 2013, 10:05 PM
Ryda Wong, EBfCo. Ryda Wong, EBfCo. is offline
 
Join Date: 14 December 2005
Location: Denver, CO
Posts: 24,019
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by htonl View Post
This law would be incompatible with Roe v. Wade, presumably?
yes. the point of laws such as this are to a) make pro-choice organizations waste time and money fighting them b) make things as hard for women as possible and c) challenge RvW in the supreme court.
Reply With Quote
  #16  
Old 22 March 2013, 12:04 AM
Auburn Red's Avatar
Auburn Red Auburn Red is offline
 
Join Date: 13 June 2010
Location: St. Louis area, Missouri
Posts: 2,140
Default

That's why they use all of these cloak and dagger phrases "heartbeat," "12 weeks," what have you! They can't or won't challenge RvW directly so they just nibble at it until there isn't anything left!
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 22 March 2013, 12:06 AM
Lainie's Avatar
Lainie Lainie is online now
 
Join Date: 29 August 2005
Location: Suburban Columbus, OH
Posts: 74,211
Default

They can, in fact, challenge Roe directly, and have been trying to do so for years. See Ryda's point C.

ETA: And if these laws are "cloak and dagger," I've been misunderstanding the term all these years.
Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old 22 March 2013, 12:11 AM
Auburn Red's Avatar
Auburn Red Auburn Red is offline
 
Join Date: 13 June 2010
Location: St. Louis area, Missouri
Posts: 2,140
Default

I meant they either can't or won't create bills to make abortion illegal period, so they try these things like a woman can't have an abortion after 12 weeks, or when the first heartbeat. I can't describe it better than almost trying to be secretive about their true agenda which is making abortion illegal, period everywhere in the U.S. They do it little by little, state by state, trimester by trimester rather than all at once.
Reply With Quote
  #19  
Old 23 March 2013, 06:57 AM
Rebochan's Avatar
Rebochan Rebochan is offline
 
Join Date: 19 February 2002
Location: Montreal, QC
Posts: 11,611
Default

Houston, we have "personhood."

North Dakota comes closer to ‘personhood’ amendment outlawing abortion

Quote:
Members of the North Dakota House of Representatives on Friday passed an amendment granting legal right to embryos from the time of fertilization, a measure that could ban all abortions in the state.

The vote, 57 to 35, comes on the heels of its passage in the Senate. It's the first state "personhood" amendment passed by a legislature in the United States.

The measure recognizes “the inalienable right to life of every human being at any stage of development must be recognized and protected.”
I'm a little confused - according to the article, this puts it on the ballot - does that essentially mean it's not actually a law until then?
Reply With Quote
  #20  
Old 23 March 2013, 07:48 AM
Auburn Red's Avatar
Auburn Red Auburn Red is offline
 
Join Date: 13 June 2010
Location: St. Louis area, Missouri
Posts: 2,140
Default

I have a feeling I'm going to cross North Dakota out of states where I will be applying for librarian jobs along with Arizona,, Texas, and Arkansas, aren't I?
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On

Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
South Dakota governor signs extended abortion wait period law snopes Soapbox Derby 1 09 March 2013 02:08 AM
Wisconsin public defender refers a minor seeking abortion to "Crisis Pregnancy Center Ryda Wong, EBfCo. Soapbox Derby 2 13 February 2013 12:24 AM
SC Republican Fiercely Opposes "North American Union" and the "Amero" Bohemian Rhapsody in Blue Sightings 13 31 May 2008 11:46 PM
North American Union and V-chip "truth" stacnbake Spook Central 1 08 December 2007 06:18 AM


All times are GMT. The time now is 12:43 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.