New Texas Abortion Law

The forum for general posting. Come join the madness. :)
Message
Author
User avatar
Bob78164
Bored Moderator
Posts: 20026
Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 12:02 pm
Location: By the phone

Re: New Texas Abortion Law

#26 Post by Bob78164 » Thu Sep 02, 2021 12:43 pm

BackInTex wrote:
Thu Sep 02, 2021 12:28 pm
Bob Juch wrote:
Thu Sep 02, 2021 11:44 am
tlynn78 wrote:
Thu Sep 02, 2021 11:06 am
To the extent that it doesn't literally kill another human being 100% of the time, yes.
I don't consider something the size of a pomegranate seed a human being.
At what point do you consider an unborn child a human being?
That question is unanswerable because there's no such thing as an "unborn child." To be a child, the organism has to be born. I'm pretty sure you're referring to a fetus.

But in any event, that's the wrong question. The right question is at what point, if ever, does a woman lose the right to decide that her body cannot be conscripted against her will to support another organism. --Bob
"Question with boldness even the existence of a God; because, if there be one, he must more approve of the homage of reason than that of blindfolded fear." Thomas Jefferson

User avatar
kroxquo
Posts: 2479
Joined: Sun Feb 17, 2008 12:24 pm
Location: On the Road to Kingdom Come
Contact:

Re: New Texas Abortion Law

#27 Post by kroxquo » Thu Sep 02, 2021 12:49 pm

Bob78164 wrote:
Thu Sep 02, 2021 12:00 pm
Beebs52 wrote:
Thu Sep 02, 2021 11:47 am
Bob Juch wrote:
Thu Sep 02, 2021 11:44 am
I don't consider something the size of a pomegranate seed a human being.
Hmm
You're trolling, Bob. Obviously BiT does, which answers your original question to him. --Bob
Bob, I was wondering if you as a lawyer have any thoughts on my original post about standing. How do they justify a random stranger having standing to sue about an abortion that has no bearing on them? Or are they just ignoring this point of law?
You live and learn. Or at least you live. - Douglas Adams

User avatar
tlynn78
Posts: 7262
Joined: Tue Oct 09, 2007 9:31 am
Location: Montana

Re: New Texas Abortion Law

#28 Post by tlynn78 » Thu Sep 02, 2021 1:02 pm

Bob78164 wrote:
Thu Sep 02, 2021 12:43 pm
BackInTex wrote:
Thu Sep 02, 2021 12:28 pm
Bob Juch wrote:
Thu Sep 02, 2021 11:44 am
I don't consider something the size of a pomegranate seed a human being.
At what point do you consider an unborn child a human being?
That question is unanswerable because there's no such thing as an "unborn child." To be a child, the organism has to be born. I'm pretty sure you're referring to a fetus.

But in any event, that's the wrong question. The right question is at what point, if ever, does a woman lose the right to decide that her body cannot be conscripted against her will to support another organism. --Bob
When will you fools learn that you MUST clear your questions with Bobbo the Wonder Lawyer before posting?
To argue with a person who has renounced the use of reason is like administering medicine to the dead. -Thomas Paine

User avatar
Beebs52
Queen of Wack
Posts: 11869
Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 11:38 am
Location: Location.Location.Location

Re: New Texas Abortion Law

#29 Post by Beebs52 » Thu Sep 02, 2021 1:08 pm

Bob78164 wrote:
Thu Sep 02, 2021 12:43 pm
BackInTex wrote:
Thu Sep 02, 2021 12:28 pm
Bob Juch wrote:
Thu Sep 02, 2021 11:44 am
I don't consider something the size of a pomegranate seed a human being.
At what point do you consider an unborn child a human being?
That question is unanswerable because there's no such thing as an "unborn child." To be a child, the organism has to be born. I'm pretty sure you're referring to a fetus.

But in any event, that's the wrong question. The right question is at what point, if ever, does a woman lose the right to decide that her body cannot be conscripted against her will to support another organism. --Bob
https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/1841#d
Aren't there violent crimes that have been prosecuted against those who take drugs, abuse spouses...
Well, then

User avatar
Bob Juch
Posts: 24203
Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 11:58 am
Location: Oro Valley, Arizona
Contact:

Re: New Texas Abortion Law

#30 Post by Bob Juch » Thu Sep 02, 2021 1:19 pm

BackInTex wrote:
Thu Sep 02, 2021 12:28 pm
Bob Juch wrote:
Thu Sep 02, 2021 11:44 am
tlynn78 wrote:
Thu Sep 02, 2021 11:06 am


To the extent that it doesn't literally kill another human being 100% of the time, yes.
I don't consider something the size of a pomegranate seed a human being.
At what point do you consider an unborn child a human being?
When it could survive being born prematurely.
I may not have gone where I intended to go, but I think I have ended up where I needed to be.
- Douglas Adams (1952 - 2001)

Si fractum non sit, noli id reficere.

Teach a child to be polite and courteous in the home and, when he grows up, he'll never be able to drive in New Jersey.

User avatar
Bob Juch
Posts: 24203
Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 11:58 am
Location: Oro Valley, Arizona
Contact:

Re: New Texas Abortion Law

#31 Post by Bob Juch » Thu Sep 02, 2021 1:22 pm

Beebs52 wrote:
Thu Sep 02, 2021 12:12 pm
https://www.mayoclinic.org/healthy-life ... t-20045302

Apparently my pomegranate sized neural tube captured some shit to surprise me years later.
Interestingly, the Mayo Clinic says week six is four weeks after conception.
I may not have gone where I intended to go, but I think I have ended up where I needed to be.
- Douglas Adams (1952 - 2001)

Si fractum non sit, noli id reficere.

Teach a child to be polite and courteous in the home and, when he grows up, he'll never be able to drive in New Jersey.

User avatar
Beebs52
Queen of Wack
Posts: 11869
Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 11:38 am
Location: Location.Location.Location

Re: New Texas Abortion Law

#32 Post by Beebs52 » Thu Sep 02, 2021 1:28 pm

Bob Juch wrote:
Thu Sep 02, 2021 1:22 pm
Beebs52 wrote:
Thu Sep 02, 2021 12:12 pm
https://www.mayoclinic.org/healthy-life ... t-20045302

Apparently my pomegranate sized neural tube captured some shit to surprise me years later.
Interestingly, the Mayo Clinic says week six is four weeks after conception.
So you think the Texas law should indicate 2 weeks.
Well, then

User avatar
Bob78164
Bored Moderator
Posts: 20026
Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 12:02 pm
Location: By the phone

Re: New Texas Abortion Law

#33 Post by Bob78164 » Thu Sep 02, 2021 2:09 pm

kroxquo wrote:
Thu Sep 02, 2021 12:49 pm
Bob78164 wrote:
Thu Sep 02, 2021 12:00 pm
Beebs52 wrote:
Thu Sep 02, 2021 11:47 am
Hmm
You're trolling, Bob. Obviously BiT does, which answers your original question to him. --Bob
Bob, I was wondering if you as a lawyer have any thoughts on my original post about standing. How do they justify a random stranger having standing to sue about an abortion that has no bearing on them? Or are they just ignoring this point of law?
Subject to the constraints of the state constitution, states can set more or less any standing rules they want. --Bob
"Question with boldness even the existence of a God; because, if there be one, he must more approve of the homage of reason than that of blindfolded fear." Thomas Jefferson

User avatar
Bob78164
Bored Moderator
Posts: 20026
Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 12:02 pm
Location: By the phone

Re: New Texas Abortion Law

#34 Post by Bob78164 » Thu Sep 02, 2021 2:14 pm

tlynn78 wrote:
Thu Sep 02, 2021 1:02 pm
Bob78164 wrote:
Thu Sep 02, 2021 12:43 pm
BackInTex wrote:
Thu Sep 02, 2021 12:28 pm
At what point do you consider an unborn child a human being?
That question is unanswerable because there's no such thing as an "unborn child." To be a child, the organism has to be born. I'm pretty sure you're referring to a fetus.

But in any event, that's the wrong question. The right question is at what point, if ever, does a woman lose the right to decide that her body cannot be conscripted against her will to support another organism. --Bob
When will you fools learn that you MUST clear your questions with Bobbo the Wonder Lawyer before posting?
I've noticed that you have a habit of mocking questions, usually in in personam terms, when you don't have an answer. I guess that's the professional politician in you -- when you don't want to answer a question, try to change the subject.

When do you think a woman loses the right to decide that her body cannot be conscripted against her will to support another organism? --Bob
"Question with boldness even the existence of a God; because, if there be one, he must more approve of the homage of reason than that of blindfolded fear." Thomas Jefferson

User avatar
tlynn78
Posts: 7262
Joined: Tue Oct 09, 2007 9:31 am
Location: Montana

Re: New Texas Abortion Law

#35 Post by tlynn78 » Thu Sep 02, 2021 2:17 pm

Bob78164 wrote:
Thu Sep 02, 2021 2:14 pm
tlynn78 wrote:
Thu Sep 02, 2021 1:02 pm
Bob78164 wrote:
Thu Sep 02, 2021 12:43 pm
That question is unanswerable because there's no such thing as an "unborn child." To be a child, the organism has to be born. I'm pretty sure you're referring to a fetus.

But in any event, that's the wrong question. The right question is at what point, if ever, does a woman lose the right to decide that her body cannot be conscripted against her will to support another organism. --Bob
When will you fools learn that you MUST clear your questions with Bobbo the Wonder Lawyer before posting?
I've noticed that you have a habit of mocking questions, usually in in personam terms, when you don't have an answer. I guess that's the professional politician in you -- when you don't want to answer a question, try to change the subject.

When do you think a woman loses the right to decide that her body cannot be conscripted against her will to support another organism? --Bob
It's pretty clear I think ending an innocent human life is wrong. The VAST majority of abortions are for pregnancies resulting from consensual sex - not exactly conscription. I generally save my mocking for deserving fools. And there is a difference between not having and answer and not being interested in trying to enlighten the willfully stupid.
To argue with a person who has renounced the use of reason is like administering medicine to the dead. -Thomas Paine

User avatar
Bob78164
Bored Moderator
Posts: 20026
Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 12:02 pm
Location: By the phone

Re: New Texas Abortion Law

#36 Post by Bob78164 » Thu Sep 02, 2021 2:25 pm

tlynn78 wrote:
Thu Sep 02, 2021 2:17 pm
Bob78164 wrote:
Thu Sep 02, 2021 2:14 pm
tlynn78 wrote:
Thu Sep 02, 2021 1:02 pm
When will you fools learn that you MUST clear your questions with Bobbo the Wonder Lawyer before posting?
I've noticed that you have a habit of mocking questions, usually in in personam terms, when you don't have an answer. I guess that's the professional politician in you -- when you don't want to answer a question, try to change the subject.

When do you think a woman loses the right to decide that her body cannot be conscripted against her will to support another organism? --Bob
It's pretty clear I think ending an innocent human life is wrong. The VAST majority of abortions are for pregnancies resulting from consensual sex - not exactly conscription. I generally save my mocking for deserving fools. And there is a difference between not having and answer and not being interested in trying to enlighten the willfully stupid.
So you think that as soon as a woman has consensual sex (no matter what form of birth control she's using that may have failed), she gives up the right to decide that her body cannot be conscripted against her will to support another organism. Got it.

Edited to add: It does lead me to wonder, though, why you're okay with what you consider to be "ending an innocent human life" if the sex was not consensual. Or are you also opposed to an exception for rape or incest? --Bob
"Question with boldness even the existence of a God; because, if there be one, he must more approve of the homage of reason than that of blindfolded fear." Thomas Jefferson

User avatar
tlynn78
Posts: 7262
Joined: Tue Oct 09, 2007 9:31 am
Location: Montana

Re: New Texas Abortion Law

#37 Post by tlynn78 » Thu Sep 02, 2021 2:29 pm

Bob78164 wrote:
Thu Sep 02, 2021 2:25 pm
tlynn78 wrote:
Thu Sep 02, 2021 2:17 pm
Bob78164 wrote:
Thu Sep 02, 2021 2:14 pm
I've noticed that you have a habit of mocking questions, usually in in personam terms, when you don't have an answer. I guess that's the professional politician in you -- when you don't want to answer a question, try to change the subject.

When do you think a woman loses the right to decide that her body cannot be conscripted against her will to support another organism? --Bob
It's pretty clear I think ending an innocent human life is wrong. The VAST majority of abortions are for pregnancies resulting from consensual sex - not exactly conscription. I generally save my mocking for deserving fools. And there is a difference between not having and answer and not being interested in trying to enlighten the willfully stupid.
So you think that as soon as a woman has consensual sex (no matter what form of birth control she's using that may have failed), she gives up the right to decide that her body cannot be conscripted against her will to support another organism. Got it. --Bob
Good!
To argue with a person who has renounced the use of reason is like administering medicine to the dead. -Thomas Paine

User avatar
Beebs52
Queen of Wack
Posts: 11869
Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 11:38 am
Location: Location.Location.Location

Re: New Texas Abortion Law

#38 Post by Beebs52 » Thu Sep 02, 2021 2:39 pm

I find "conscripted...another organism" sorta creepy. Consensual isn't conscription.
Well, then

User avatar
Bob78164
Bored Moderator
Posts: 20026
Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 12:02 pm
Location: By the phone

Re: New Texas Abortion Law

#39 Post by Bob78164 » Thu Sep 02, 2021 2:40 pm

Beebs52 wrote:
Thu Sep 02, 2021 2:39 pm
I find "conscripted...another organism" sorta creepy. Consensual isn't conscription.
If the woman doesn't want to be pregnant, her body's being conscripted. If she does want to be pregnant, she's not looking for an abortion (unless her life or health are endangered).

Or are you saying that women don't have the right to change their mind after getting pregnant? --Bob
"Question with boldness even the existence of a God; because, if there be one, he must more approve of the homage of reason than that of blindfolded fear." Thomas Jefferson

User avatar
Beebs52
Queen of Wack
Posts: 11869
Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 11:38 am
Location: Location.Location.Location

Re: New Texas Abortion Law

#40 Post by Beebs52 » Thu Sep 02, 2021 3:08 pm

Bob78164 wrote:
Thu Sep 02, 2021 2:40 pm
Beebs52 wrote:
Thu Sep 02, 2021 2:39 pm
I find "conscripted...another organism" sorta creepy. Consensual isn't conscription.
If the woman doesn't want to be pregnant, her body's being conscripted. If she does want to be pregnant, she's not looking for an abortion (unless her life or health are endangered).

Or are you saying that women don't have the right to change their mind after getting pregnant? --Bob
I think life/health are legitimate discussions. Convenience, no.
Well, then

User avatar
tlynn78
Posts: 7262
Joined: Tue Oct 09, 2007 9:31 am
Location: Montana

Re: New Texas Abortion Law

#41 Post by tlynn78 » Thu Sep 02, 2021 3:09 pm

Bob78164 wrote:
Thu Sep 02, 2021 2:40 pm
Beebs52 wrote:
Thu Sep 02, 2021 2:39 pm
I find "conscripted...another organism" sorta creepy. Consensual isn't conscription.
If the woman doesn't want to be pregnant, her body's being conscripted. If she does want to be pregnant, she's not looking for an abortion (unless her life or health are endangered).

Or are you saying that women don't have the right to change their mind after getting pregnant? --Bob
Sadly, they do have the legal right to change their mind and end an innocent human life
To argue with a person who has renounced the use of reason is like administering medicine to the dead. -Thomas Paine

User avatar
Bob Juch
Posts: 24203
Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 11:58 am
Location: Oro Valley, Arizona
Contact:

Re: New Texas Abortion Law

#42 Post by Bob Juch » Thu Sep 02, 2021 3:27 pm

tlynn78 wrote:
Thu Sep 02, 2021 3:09 pm
Bob78164 wrote:
Thu Sep 02, 2021 2:40 pm
Beebs52 wrote:
Thu Sep 02, 2021 2:39 pm
I find "conscripted...another organism" sorta creepy. Consensual isn't conscription.
If the woman doesn't want to be pregnant, her body's being conscripted. If she does want to be pregnant, she's not looking for an abortion (unless her life or health are endangered).

Or are you saying that women don't have the right to change their mind after getting pregnant? --Bob
Sadly, they do have the legal right to change their mind and end an innocent human life
The vast majority of abortions are not because of convenience. They're because of rape, failure of birth control, or abnormalities.
I may not have gone where I intended to go, but I think I have ended up where I needed to be.
- Douglas Adams (1952 - 2001)

Si fractum non sit, noli id reficere.

Teach a child to be polite and courteous in the home and, when he grows up, he'll never be able to drive in New Jersey.

User avatar
tlynn78
Posts: 7262
Joined: Tue Oct 09, 2007 9:31 am
Location: Montana

Re: New Texas Abortion Law

#43 Post by tlynn78 » Thu Sep 02, 2021 3:31 pm

Bob Juch wrote:
Thu Sep 02, 2021 3:27 pm
tlynn78 wrote:
Thu Sep 02, 2021 3:09 pm
Bob78164 wrote:
Thu Sep 02, 2021 2:40 pm
If the woman doesn't want to be pregnant, her body's being conscripted. If she does want to be pregnant, she's not looking for an abortion (unless her life or health are endangered).

Or are you saying that women don't have the right to change their mind after getting pregnant? --Bob
Sadly, they do have the legal right to change their mind and end an innocent human life
The vast majority of abortions are not because of convenience. They're because of rape, failure of birth control, or abnormalities.

You could not be more wrong.
To argue with a person who has renounced the use of reason is like administering medicine to the dead. -Thomas Paine

User avatar
Beebs52
Queen of Wack
Posts: 11869
Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 11:38 am
Location: Location.Location.Location

Re: New Texas Abortion Law

#44 Post by Beebs52 » Thu Sep 02, 2021 3:32 pm

Bob Juch wrote:
Thu Sep 02, 2021 3:27 pm
tlynn78 wrote:
Thu Sep 02, 2021 3:09 pm
Bob78164 wrote:
Thu Sep 02, 2021 2:40 pm
If the woman doesn't want to be pregnant, her body's being conscripted. If she does want to be pregnant, she's not looking for an abortion (unless her life or health are endangered).

Or are you saying that women don't have the right to change their mind after getting pregnant? --Bob
Sadly, they do have the legal right to change their mind and end an innocent human life
The vast majority of abortions are not because of convenience. They're because of rape, failure of birth control, or abnormalities.
Not true. Check Guttmacher inst Failure of birth control is elective.
Well, then

User avatar
Bob78164
Bored Moderator
Posts: 20026
Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 12:02 pm
Location: By the phone

Re: New Texas Abortion Law

#45 Post by Bob78164 » Thu Sep 02, 2021 3:42 pm

Bob Juch wrote:
Thu Sep 02, 2021 3:27 pm
tlynn78 wrote:
Thu Sep 02, 2021 3:09 pm
Bob78164 wrote:
Thu Sep 02, 2021 2:40 pm
If the woman doesn't want to be pregnant, her body's being conscripted. If she does want to be pregnant, she's not looking for an abortion (unless her life or health are endangered).

Or are you saying that women don't have the right to change their mind after getting pregnant? --Bob
Sadly, they do have the legal right to change their mind and end an innocent human life
The vast majority of abortions are not because of convenience. They're because of rape, failure of birth control, or abnormalities.
As far as they're concerned, an abortion due to a failure of birth control is "because of convenience." Which means that as far as they're concerned, any time a woman decides to have sex, she's risking losing control of her body for the next nine months.

I suppose that's a philosophically defensible position, though it's not a position that's consistent with our Constitution. I just don't think it's one that's shared by most Americans. Probably not even by most Texans. --Bob
"Question with boldness even the existence of a God; because, if there be one, he must more approve of the homage of reason than that of blindfolded fear." Thomas Jefferson

User avatar
Beebs52
Queen of Wack
Posts: 11869
Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 11:38 am
Location: Location.Location.Location

Re: New Texas Abortion Law

#46 Post by Beebs52 » Thu Sep 02, 2021 3:57 pm

Bob78164 wrote:
Thu Sep 02, 2021 3:42 pm
Bob Juch wrote:
Thu Sep 02, 2021 3:27 pm
tlynn78 wrote:
Thu Sep 02, 2021 3:09 pm
Sadly, they do have the legal right to change their mind and end an innocent human life
The vast majority of abortions are not because of convenience. They're because of rape, failure of birth control, or abnormalities.
As far as they're concerned, an abortion due to a failure of birth control is "because of convenience." Which means that as far as they're concerned, any time a woman decides to have sex, she's risking losing control of her body for the next nine months.

I suppose that's a philosophically defensible position, though it's not a position that's consistent with our Constitution. I just don't think it's one that's shared by most Americans. Probably not even by most Texans. --Bob
Fairly liberal org
https://www.guttmacher.org/about
Well, then

User avatar
BackInTex
Posts: 11322
Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 12:43 pm
Location: In Texas of course!

Re: New Texas Abortion Law

#47 Post by BackInTex » Thu Sep 02, 2021 4:45 pm

tlynn78 wrote:
Thu Sep 02, 2021 3:31 pm

You could not be more wrong.
Oh, I don't know. He's been close if not more on many many occasions.
..what country can preserve it’s liberties if their rulers are not warned from time to time that their people preserve the spirit of resistance? let them take arms.
~~ Thomas Jefferson

User avatar
BackInTex
Posts: 11322
Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 12:43 pm
Location: In Texas of course!

Re: New Texas Abortion Law

#48 Post by BackInTex » Thu Sep 02, 2021 4:48 pm

I wonder how different Bob's relationship was with his gestation center, what with him conscripting the use of of the womb and most of the nutritional intake, than I had with my mother.
..what country can preserve it’s liberties if their rulers are not warned from time to time that their people preserve the spirit of resistance? let them take arms.
~~ Thomas Jefferson

User avatar
Bob78164
Bored Moderator
Posts: 20026
Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 12:02 pm
Location: By the phone

Re: New Texas Abortion Law

#49 Post by Bob78164 » Thu Sep 02, 2021 4:51 pm

BackInTex wrote:
Thu Sep 02, 2021 4:48 pm
I wonder how different Bob's relationship was with his gestation center, what with him conscripting the use of of the womb and most of the nutritional intake, than I had with my mother.
I wonder if you've ever supported a woman who was forced to carry to term a pregnancy she did not want. --Bob
"Question with boldness even the existence of a God; because, if there be one, he must more approve of the homage of reason than that of blindfolded fear." Thomas Jefferson

User avatar
Beebs52
Queen of Wack
Posts: 11869
Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 11:38 am
Location: Location.Location.Location

Re: New Texas Abortion Law

#50 Post by Beebs52 » Thu Sep 02, 2021 5:03 pm

Bob78164 wrote:
Thu Sep 02, 2021 4:51 pm
BackInTex wrote:
Thu Sep 02, 2021 4:48 pm
I wonder how different Bob's relationship was with his gestation center, what with him conscripting the use of of the womb and most of the nutritional intake, than I had with my mother.
I wonder if you've ever supported a woman who was forced to carry to term a pregnancy she did not want. --Bob
Have you?
Well, then

Post Reply