Arkansas now has most restrictive abortion laws in the country

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

nehalem256

Lifer
Apr 13, 2012
15,669
8
0
I was just gonna say, it is only a matter of time when people will make legal challenges to these laws, in fact some will say this is a round a bout way of making abortion legal by setting up so many obstacles, hurdles that a woman can't get abortion services.

Because clearly 10 weeks isn't enough time to get an abortion :rolleyes:
 

CycloWizard

Lifer
Sep 10, 2001
12,348
1
81
Of course you assumed.. you assumed I was making (or intending to make) an argument in the OP, when it was really nothing more than an editorial comment.
The only assumption I made is that you were trying to make a point with your OP. Apparently I was mistaken and you could be replaced by any search engine which harvests articles complete with unrelated comments from the peanut gallery. Sorry I gave you so much credit with my assumption.
 

zsdersw

Lifer
Oct 29, 2003
10,560
2
0
The only assumption I made is that you were trying to make a point with your OP. Apparently I was mistaken and you could be replaced by any search engine which harvests articles complete with unrelated comments from the peanut gallery. Sorry I gave you so much credit with my assumption.

:rolleyes: Fuck you. You just like to see your typed remarks appear on the Internet, apparently.
 

CycloWizard

Lifer
Sep 10, 2001
12,348
1
81
:rolleyes: Fuck you. You just like to see your typed remarks appear on the Internet, apparently.
You, who admitted you had nothing of substance to add to your own OP yet felt the need to create a thread, are now calling me an attention whore? As long as we're clear...
 

HumblePie

Lifer
Oct 30, 2000
14,667
440
126
Scope creep is just getting annoying. Abortions are legal. It's a civil rights issue for women and has been granted as legal by the SC. I do however at this point feel that the federal government should lay a few laws out. That states should not try to play additional emotion burdens on women looking to have an abortion. That an abortion is legal up until week number X. That X should never be fucked with again.

Pretty much that's what the laws should lay out. How abortions are funded, how they are done, and if states want to present alternative to information to an abortion should be left up to the states. I will caveat that presenting alternative information is just that and should not be forced.
 

nehalem256

Lifer
Apr 13, 2012
15,669
8
0
Scope creep is just getting annoying. Abortions are legal. It's a civil rights issue for women and has been granted as legal by the SC. I do however at this point feel that the federal government should lay a few laws out. That states should not try to play additional emotion burdens on women looking to have an abortion. That an abortion is legal up until week number X. That X should never be fucked with again.

Unless X=40 you are violating a woman's right to make choices about her body, or you are conceding that Arkansas has a point. Take your pick.
 

actuarial

Platinum Member
Jan 22, 2009
2,814
0
71
Unless X=40 you are violating a woman's right to make choices about her body, or you are conceding that Arkansas has a point. Take your pick.

No you are not. You can easily say prior to viability an abortion is legal, afterwards a woman is free to birth the fetus but not abort.

You are still allowing the mother the choice as to whether she is a host.
 

nehalem256

Lifer
Apr 13, 2012
15,669
8
0
No you are not. You can easily say prior to viability an abortion is legal, afterwards a woman is free to birth the fetus but not abort.

You are still allowing the mother the choice as to whether she is a host.

But you are forcing her to give birth.

Not to mention the medical costs, chance of death, and other medical conditions you are then forcing on the baby.

Basically if the fetus is a human life and hence protected, saying that the women can just pop it out at say 6 months gestation amounts to clear child abuse.
 

TerryMathews

Lifer
Oct 9, 1999
11,473
2
0
Unless X=40 you are violating a woman's right to make choices about her body, or you are conceding that Arkansas has a point. Take your pick.

This. The fundamental crux of the argument is whether the fetus is a life or not.

If it is a life, no justification is valid.

If it is not, no justification is required.
 

shira

Diamond Member
Jan 12, 2005
9,567
6
81
If you think abortion should be legal because its a woman's body and you don't support abortion up til 8.9 months for any reason you are either a hypocrite or a liar.

You've overlooked the obvious. Example:

Are you for free speech? Yes or no.

Do you think that slander and libel, falsely yelling "Fire!" in a crowded theater, inciting a mob to riot, and making verbal threats that cause a reasonable person to fear for their life - do you think that all of these forms of speech should be 100% protected and legal?​

Well, it's completely reasonable and rational and NOT hypocritical to say "Yes" to the first question and "No" to the second, because rights under the Constitution aren't absolute. For the very simple reason that rights often conflict with other rights, and it's been up to the courts to decide where the limits of various rights lie.

Abortion is no exception. The rights of the woman to control her own body conflict with the rights of a viable human fetus to live. And it's up to the courts to decide where the balance of those conflicting rights lies So it's completely NON hypocritical to believe that a woman's right to control her own body is not an absolute right.
 

nehalem256

Lifer
Apr 13, 2012
15,669
8
0
You've overlooked the obvious. Example:

Are you for free speech? Yes or no.

Do you think that slander and libel, falsely yelling "Fire!" in a crowded theater, inciting a mob to riot, and making verbal threats that cause a reasonable person to fear for their life - do you think that all of these forms of speech should be 100% protected and legal?​

Well, it's completely reasonable and rational and NOT hypocritical to say "Yes" to the first question and "No" to the second, because rights under the Constitution aren't absolute. For the very simple reason that rights often conflict with other rights, and it's been up to the courts to decide where the limits of various rights lie.

Abortion is no exception. The rights of the woman to control her own body conflict with the rights of a viable human fetus to live. And it's up to the courts to decide where the balance of those conflicting rights lies So it's completely NON hypocritical to believe that a woman's right to control her own body is not an absolute right.

So in other words there is no fundamental difference between pro-life and pro-choice people. They both agree a woman does not have an absolute right to control her body :p

In fact there would appear to be no real difference between saying the rights of a viable human fetus to live, and the rights of a fetus with a heart beat to live. Unless you are going to let a woman choose to pop a 6 month fetus out. Of course that would seem tantamount to child abuse as you are saying that a 6 month fetus is a person, and a fetus born at such time will be at a high risk for death and future medical problems.

And the purpose of freedom of speech is so you can voice your political opinion. You do have an absolute right to speak your political opinion no matter how unpopular or stupid.
 

Agent11

Diamond Member
Jan 22, 2006
3,535
1
0
You have to draw the line somewhere, I think almost everyone could agree that a third trimester abortion is disturbing, whereas aborting a zygote very few would find disturbing. Setting the line at heartbeat does not sound like an unreasonable thing.
 

sportage

Lifer
Feb 1, 2008
11,493
3,160
136
As a scum sucking Obama loving liberal (lol), I'm all for this ban, law, whatever...
Would like to see this nation wide.
But then again I'm a male and my opinion is second to the women's opinion.
Women should have the final say.
If the majority of women want this, so be it. Men be damned.
That's my opinion.
But no doubt the higher courts will strike this law down. Regrettably.
 

zsdersw

Lifer
Oct 29, 2003
10,560
2
0
You, who admitted you had nothing of substance to add to your own OP yet felt the need to create a thread, are now calling me an attention whore? As long as we're clear...

I've always expanded my thoughts further on in the threads I create rather than make a long-winded OP. Clearly you're 100% ignorant of the threads I make.

And, rather than discuss abortion law, you chose to be a troll.

Clear? Your idiocy couldn't be more crystal clear.
 

nehalem256

Lifer
Apr 13, 2012
15,669
8
0
You have to draw the line somewhere, I think almost everyone could agree that a third trimester abortion is disturbing, whereas aborting a zygote very few would find disturbing. Setting the line at heartbeat does not sound like an unreasonable thing.

It certainly doesn't sound anymore unreasonable than setting it at when a fetus has a small chance to survive using millions of dollars in medical equipment.