Pasayten's Methow Valley Bulletin Board

Medival. This now involves the freedom of speech which last time I checked is in the Constitution.

"The memo further warned employees that they could not speak in support of abortion and should “proceed cautiously at any time that a discussion moves in the direction of reproductive health”, reported the Hill." (I still can't do this highlighted quote thing)

What country or countries does this remind you of?

Also, it will be interesting to see if the birth rate goes done. I think it is being found that women are becoming concerned about getting pregnant because they may not get the health care they need. Like, there are instances where she is being made to carry the fetus to term, if it is dead.
Or if in a miscarrage all of the tissue does not come out and has to be scraped out.
Be glad we are in Wa. state, but I feel for my sisters elsewhere.

And now;

Staff and Faculty at the U of Idaho are cautioned about providing condoms to students, except ‘to prevent sexually transmitted infections’.

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/202 ... th-control

“The memo laid out the university’s reproductive policies following the enactment of Idaho’s abortion law, which bans the procedure in nearly all cases.

The memo further warned employees that they could not speak in support of abortion and should “proceed cautiously at any time that a discussion moves in the direction of reproductive health”, reported the Hill.

The advice on birth control was included because of the law’s lack of clarity on “prevention of conception”, the university said, according to the Idaho Capital Sun.

Staff have been prohibited from recommending or referring abortion to a student. Employees have also been told not to issue emergency contraception – the so-called morning after pill, also known as Plan B – except in cases of rape.”

So, PREVENTING pregnancy is the same as abortion? What is next? Some ‘masturbation = murder’ scenario?

The OP is making the faulty assumption that the difference in treatment for a miscarriage and an abortion is generally distinguishable after the fact.

Jingles, so you're now including the day after pill in your litany? What would you have said to the woman in the article I posted?

mister_coffee wrote: ↑Tue Sep 27, 2022 8:04 am

Jingles wrote: ↑Tue Sep 27, 2022 5:13 am First off there is a major difference between miscarriages, ( spontaneous miscarriage) and chemically or surgically induced abortions and lumping both into a single classification is like classififying apples and tomatoes the same because they are both red.

Okay.

You are proposing murder charges against people involved in an abortion. Presumably you want there to be evidence of a murder before such charges are brought, and presumably you want those charges proven beyond a reasonable doubt.

Okay. 24 hours after a miscarriage or abortion, how exactly does an investigator tell the difference between the two? Keep in mind that miscarriages are traumatic and unpleasant experiences for women and they aren't likely to voluntarily submit to a medical examination to search for evidence of a crime in their own body. Keep in mind also that doctors can lose their license and be sued into the ground if they give up patient medical records to a third party. Even if that party is law enforcement investigating a potential murder.

Very simple that even simple minded folks can understand
Chemical and surgical abortions be made criminal and prohibited except in the case of rape, incest or imminent threat to a morhers health.

Jingles wrote: ↑Tue Sep 27, 2022 5:13 am First off there is a major difference between miscarriages, ( spontaneous miscarriage) and chemically or surgically induced abortions and lumping both into a single classification is like classififying apples and tomatoes the same because they are both red.

Okay.

You are proposing murder charges against people involved in an abortion. Presumably you want there to be evidence of a murder before such charges are brought, and presumably you want those charges proven beyond a reasonable doubt.

Okay. 24 hours after a miscarriage or abortion, how exactly does an investigator tell the difference between the two? Keep in mind that miscarriages are traumatic and unpleasant experiences for women and they aren't likely to voluntarily submit to a medical examination to search for evidence of a crime in their own body. Keep in mind also that doctors can lose their license and be sued into the ground if they give up patient medical records to a third party. Even if that party is law enforcement investigating a potential murder.

But not all apples are red and not all tomatoes are red. The point is being made that the anti-abortion people are the ones lumping it all together.
Each individual woman may have medical problems and again, it is no one else's business.

just-jim wrote: ↑Mon Sep 26, 2022 11:50 pm It does look like women are being treated like farm animals - allowed only those medicines and procedures deemed worthy by a bunch of religious, myopic, misanthropic, old white men.

Yes... I have seen those views on this BB... by old and younger men...

First off there is a major difference between miscarriages, ( spontaneous miscarriage) and chemically or surgically induced abortions and lumping both into a single classification is like classififying apples and tomatoes the same because they are both red.

Yes, indeed. The law of un-intended consequences……

Now in Ariz and elsewhere, women of children bearing age are being denied access to other, essential Rx drugs. Drugs like methotrexate - commonly used in treating arthritis and other conditions - which ‘might be‘ used in an abortion
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2022/ ... edications

It does look like women are being treated like farm animals - allowed only those medicines and procedures deemed worthy by a bunch of religious, myopic, misanthropic, old white men.

Yes, it was Arizona with the Draconian law. Not a question of Federalism and what I agree with. It's the state of Wa. that won't enforce or prosecute.
Ken=non-sensical spewing. Damn fool.
Look to Iran to see what is happening. Women are rising up, dying but they do not want to take repression anymore. Could it be the powers that be are scared? They should be.

A woman's story facing the new Arizona abortion bans

https://www.cnn.com/2022/09/26/us/arizo ... index.html

I'm going to get specific.

There are approximately 4.4 million pregnancies every year in the United States. Somewhere between 900,000 and 1 million end in a miscarriage (it is argued that a great many more miscarriages occur early in pregnancy when most women are not yet aware they are pregnant, but we'll leave those out for now).

So I have some specific questions for the forced birth people:

• Are you seriously proposing that we investigate one million miscarriages every year?

• If not, which ones are you going to investigate and on what criteria?

• How much is this going to cost?

• How will you tell the difference between emergency medical treatment for a miscarriage and an abortion?

• How does an investigation work with doctor-patient confidentiality? Will an investigator have to go to court and get a court order before they can speak to the doctor or doctors?

Ken, it occurs to me that you never seem to finish a sentence, much less turn a page. To help you out, here's a link to discuss Federalism

https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/federal ... %20concern.

So Federalism is only when you agree with it? Such hypocrites! mister coffee are you trans? Damn fool

Great points David. If there is a federal ban, Wa. state will not enforce it.

Methinks that people who don't own and operate a uterus should be very careful when engaging in discussions on this topic. They run the risk of looking like damned fools.

So, your proposition is that doctors and pregnant women who terminate their pregnancies should be prosecuted for murder?

Let us imagine that a women is pregnant and does not yet know it. She goes mountain biking and gets in a modestly serious crash which causes a miscarriage. She rightly seeks emergency medical treatment for that miscarriage.

Did she commit a crime? Did the doctors that treated her condition commit a crime? If she committed a crime, what crime was that exactly? Who is going to investigate it? I'm going to make this complicated and point out that proper medical treatment for a miscarriage is going to look a heck of a lot like an abortion.

To go further, twenty to thirty percent of pregnancies end in a miscarriage. Are you going to criminally investigate all of them? Who exactly is going to do that investigating and who is going to pay for it? And how, in general, are you going to tell the difference between proper medical treatment for a miscarriage and an abortion? Because from where I sit and what I read you can't.

Also, a note to Republicans: arguing that half of your voters have the rights of barnyard animals isn't likely to be a winning strategy at the ballot box. Let me know how that works out for you.

And one state, is it our neighboring Idaho? wants no abortions no matter what, unless the mother's life is in danger. No abortion for rape or incest. Those people that don't want to allow that are sicko and twisted. How can they think a woman would want to bear her rapists or her father or brothers baby? No, it's about repression and control
It is no ones business what goes on between a woman and her provider. People scream about too much government interference and I sure have to agree with that when it comes to abortion. Majority will speak, you'll see.
We think nothing of incarcerating children and separating them from their parents at the border, 2,3,4,5 year olds and then not being able to link them up with their parents. These children are traumatized for a long time. And people will argue that the parents shouldn't have brought them along and yes, it would be the ideal, leaving them behind to face being killed. But the point here is, no one gives a f about these children except Human Services and they were not ready for the Zero Tolerance program. I am reading about this mess in the Atlantic Monthly.
So I digress. But all I am saying to those who value children so much, you better look into this.

Jingles, read this thread to get your answers.
Also, there is a term for femals who are not allowed to control their own bodies, 'Livestock'.

Question for the pro abortionists with a little history thrown in. It seems as though people forget that not to long ago if a person killed a pregnant woman the killer would be charged with 2 murders 1 count for the pregnant woman and 1 count for the unborn baby regardless of gestation period.
Would the pro abortionist be willing to compromise and agree that if a woman has an abortion after a heartbeat is detected she and the abortion provider should be charged with murder? Or is that outside the realm of possibility that for other than rape, incest, or imminent health threat to the mother abortions be prohibited? Also that simply having an abortion because the woman had sex got pregnant and wants an abortion because she does not want to have a child is wtong

Yes. I am from Kansas and I was so hoping the MAJORITY of Kansas women would do the right thing to keep their reproductive rights and they spoke loud and strong.

Sure looks like a pretty strong majority of folks in Kansas think that obnoxious big government should butt out of women's health care. Kudos for them.

Generally, the last thing on a rapist's mind is birth control.
Read the article and comment on its contents rather than just repeat your off topic opinions.

Maybe DoD should focus more on killing any bad guys! And if soldiers can’t figure out where babies come from and how to prevent them (if unwanted) we can explain that too! These arguments are so specious, it pre-disposes that people aren’t smart enough to change their behavior if something is no longer allowed in society. It’s interesting how we changed peoples’ behavior and attitudes about smoking by shaming and frowning on that choice and now it’s really not acceptable maybe attitudes on abortion will be changed over time.

Good article on the impact of the Dobbs decision in the DoD

https://www.csis.org/analysis/overturn- ... nt-defense