542
Tennessee woman denied abortion after fetus’ ‘brain not attached’ slams ban
(www.independent.co.uk)
I guess Republicans want vigilantism?
this post was submitted on 14 May 2024
542 points (99.1% liked)
politics
19107 readers
3590 users here now
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
the people responsible for putting someone through that shit should be put to death
Can we post who they voted for in the last election for stories like this? I want to know if I should feel sad and mad or just mad.
Ms. Cecil said that she wanted to make clear to the legislators that "abortion is not black and white," explaining that every abortion is different. >
Maybe I'm reading into it, but this paragraph stood out to me.
Yea seems like the only moral abortion is my abortion bullshit.
It's just a weird detail for the author to include. It's a "while I've still got you here..." sentence. It's entirely unnecessary except to make absolutely sure that everyone knows that she is not speaking in favor of those abortions.
They 'slammed' it? Did they also space jam it?
I know this is preaching to the choir here, but this is so gross across the board.
My wife and I struggled to have our kid. That process is brutal. A lot of women miscarry. A lot of women have unviable pregnancies--like this. An obvious-to-everyone-but-conservatives outcome to banning abortions is that women will lose their ability to have children(like this) or worse they'll die.
My wife has a very high likelihood of miscarriage. Miscarriages can cause all sorts of issues and sometimes doctors need to go in and clear stuff out (this is considered an abortion). If that doesn't happen, my wife could 1. Die 2. Lose her ovaries/uterus/fallopian tube 3. Never have a chance at more kids again.
Abortions mean people have have happy healthy families. Abortions mean women can bring children into this world.
We were lucky we didn't have to go down that path, but it's a serious risk if we try to have another kid.
People act like women go get abortions for shits and giggles. Fuck anyone voting against women.
She's going to be charged for murdering the baby when it's born not alive isn't she?
Doctors need to start standing up.
This may be a bad take but since hospitals seem to make bank I think it would be in the country's best interest if they just "continued to do their work unhindered" and get the hospital in trouble later. Once the government starts asking questions, give them the usual run-around everyone else gets.
They are, standing up and leaving those states in droves.
Of course they wouldn’t allow an abortion, that was a future republican.
Was that headline written by AI? It’s like someone just had to work the word “slams” in there and it reads like a fetus with no brain stem did the slamming.
SLAMS!
They wanted so badly to use the word that it fucked up the whole headline
And welcome to the jam
BRUTAL politician TAKEDOWN RKOs opponent out of NOWHERE
Oh my gosh! Oh no! Is anyone alive, JR?!
I'm so tired of that word replacing "strongly criticizes", "rebukes", "condemns", "denounces", or "repremands". Why do articles have to use such a stupid, lazy word? Does it actually draw more clicks?
Its shorter, so it fits better in headlines that need to be short.
It's not like it needs to go into a news paper. It's a website headline. "condemns" is only three letters longer than "slams" and doesn't sound lick clickbait.
That one is a newspaper headline though, its from The Independent.
The last printed edition was published on Saturday 26 March 2016, leaving only the online edition.
A fair point, I hadn't realized they'd stopped printing physical copies. They still seem to think of themselves as a newspaper though, and I suppose old conventions die hard.
"State lawmakers ‘don’t see the mourning and the grieving that these moms’ experience"
If they did, they wouldn't care. "It's God's will."
Christofascists don't care about women. They care about power first & their stupid book full of Bronze Age fairy tales is a distant second, except for the parts they don't like, of course.
Ohh, they see it. And it gives them a massive throbbing hard-on.
No, if their wife had this issue they'd suddenly care... and consequently be muscled out of the GOP as a non-believer.
One important thing to remember is that the average GOPer is essentially unable to empathize outside of themselves: https://joycearthur.com/abortion/the-only-moral-abortion-is-my-abortion/
But, of course, when it actually reaches them they're extremely quick to change their tune.
No true Republican
Not so fun fact: They aren't even paying attention to their book. The Bible mentions abortion exactly once in its pages. Numbers 5: 11-21 tells you how to perform a questionable and dangerous abortion. Their stupid book is technically pro choice on this issue.
Not so much "pro-choice" as much as forced abortion russian-roulette. After all in most of the bible most women have little to no agency.
True, but as the two positions there are (laughably) "pro-life," or "pro-choice," I was lumping it in with the latter.
Both abolitionists and slavers cited the bible to justify their views. IMO they don't care about the book, its just a tool to enforce their feelings on others. Its a tool many are well versed in but I think its 100% about power and feelings
view more: next ›