That would basically outlaw abortions after 20 weeks except in the case of rape or incest.

I would support that but it's anticipated that Democrats in the Senate will shoot it down. Pisses me off.

I'm curious if other people who consider themselves mostly pro-choice feel the same?

Five months is pretty far along. All of the bad things come to light before that, right, issues with the baby or the mother?

ETA - I feel the same, yup.

Why do they want to lower it to 20 weeks? What's the reason and justification they are giving for wanting to change it?

(06-15-2013, 12:16 PM)Cynical Ninja Wrote: Why do they want to lower it to 20 weeks? What's the reason and justification they are giving for wanting to change it?

I'm not sure of the reason being given. However, I think RAP's twins were born somewhere around the 23 week mark? I might be wrong but I believe these days 20 weeks is approaching viability.

I strongly dislike the procedure associated with late term abortions too.

(06-15-2013, 12:15 PM)Duchess Wrote:

Five months is pretty far along. All of the bad things come to light before that, right, issues with the baby or the mother?

ETA - I feel the same, yup.

Yeah, I think most testing is done by the 16 week mark.

There is an exclusion in there too if the mother's life is in jeopardy.

I'm pro-choice and would support that. The only good reason I can see to have an abortion after 20 weeks is if the mother's life is in jeopardy. Even in cases of rape 20 weeks is plenty of time to get an abortion. All testing for abnormalities are done by 16 weeks so if something is wrong with the baby 20 weeks is also plenty of time.

Once in a while you here about those fat weirdo women that don't even realize they're pregnant until they're 9 months along, but most women know between 8-12 weeks and 20 weeks gives them plenty of time to get an abortion.

As long as incest, rape and the mothers life being in danger are exceptions I don't really have a problem with reducing it to 20 weeks either.

The mothers life being in jeopardy is a smoke screen too, but they have to include it for the bill to pass. It's extremely rare that a baby over 20 weeks would need to be aborted because the mother's life was in jeopardy, I don't even think it's ever happened. If anything they'd deliver the baby at the ER because the mother was deathly ill and then try to keep the baby alive, not make an appointment at the abortion clinic and snip it's spinal cord with scissors.

I don't buy the rape either, but again they have to include it. What, just because you were raped you get a longer time period to decide if you want to keep it or not.

I agree, Sally.

I don't know why this bill wouldn't pass the Senate. I'm sure there are many people that consider themselves pro choice who would support it. Out of touch assholes.

20 weeks is too far along in my opinion.

I'm pro-choice to a certain point and I think 20 weeks is fair enough. It gives the woman more than enough time to find out she's pregnant and make a decision (even in cases of rape) and it's enough time to test for abnormalities. As far as a woman's life being in jeopardy after 20 weeks and needing to abort, that's never happened anyway. The hospital would deliver the baby C-section and may not bother to resuscitate the baby if it was under 21 weeks, but they wouldn't perform an abortion.

(06-15-2013, 06:20 PM)ramseycat Wrote: 20 weeks is too far along in my opinion.

They do testing for severe abnormalities like trisomy 18, downs syndrome and spina bifida at 16 weeks, if the test comes out positive than an amniocentesis is done to confirm it. It takes a week to get the test results and gives the parents 3 weeks to make a decision if something is seriously wrong. I think that is fair.

(06-15-2013, 06:20 PM)ramseycat Wrote: 20 weeks is too far along in my opinion.

I liked it better before you edited. I thought it made perfect sense!

I think a week to make a decision would be sufficient but this would be a good step. I don't know why the hell supposedly educated politicians would be opposed to this. It usually comes down to money but I can't see some large constituency opposing the bill. The ACLU? Maybe but I don't think they'd get much support for it from their members.

There will always be staunch pro-choice advocates who believe that a woman has a right to control her own body 100%, including choosing whether or not to carry a pregnancy to term.

To support this bill goes against the fundamentalist pro-choice philosophy and says that beyond 20 weeks, the woman no longer has that right. Kinda like you're pro-choice til 20 weeks and pro-life after 20 weeks. That's how I see it anyway.

I find late term abortions unseemly and generally believe that thoughtful responsible women wouldn't wait so long.

But, I understand why some Democrats would oppose this bill for personal, philosophical, and/or political reasons.

A some point a fetus has a brain and as such is human. Five months seems a little late. I'd go more for 18 weeks but a line should be drawn in the sand to stop the casual abortions.

No matter its not a vote. Opinions do not matter. In the case of rape there is the morning after pill and could see no reason why a woman would want the rapists baby. 20 weeks is a long time and a fetus looks human by then. As far as Spina bifida is concerned I can see an abortion as the childs life would be hell and so would everyone elses. Some abnormities are better left undone.

20 weeks is way long for a woman to make a decision but if going out to dinner is any indication I guess farting around for 20 min just to make a decision on what shoes to wear, well, they can be a bit fucked up. Some women will sit in a chair back biting and giving their opinion about everything going on, but put them in front of whoever they are bitching about and well.......they just clam up, and re-direct the conversation. Because they have no balls.

Some women are definitely that way, Maggot.

Some men too.

Betchya there are some indecisive cowardly hermaphrodites as well.

The thing is it's too hard to keep tabs on who is having an abortion due to genetic defects and who is having an abortion just for the hell of it. Since 16 weeks is the earliest an amniocentesis can be done to confirm severe abnormalities, I think 20 weeks is an acceptable cut off date. You could cut it back a couple of weeks, but it's not going to make much of a difference as far as the development of the baby and it's just going to affect the likeliness of the bill being passed at all.

(06-15-2013, 09:37 PM)Maggot Wrote: 20 weeks is way long for a woman to make a decision but if going out to dinner is any indication I guess farting around for 20 min just to make a decision on what shoes to wear, well, they can be a bit fucked up. Some women will sit in a chair back biting and giving their opinion about everything going on, but put them in front of whoever they are bitching about and well.......they just clam up, and re-direct the conversation. Because they have no balls.

Your stereotypical misogyny is duly noted you sexist prick.

“Raped women have the morning after pill” yeah get over yourself you stoopid raped bitch take the morning after pill the first thing on your mind after you have been sexually abused is whether or not you are pregnant you whore.