Mandatory waiting period for abortions rejected by Iowa Supreme Court

[sportage]

http://www.kcci.com/article/iowa-supreme-court-rejects-72-hour-abortion-waiting-period/22000132

The Iowa Supreme Court sided with Planned Parenthood of the Heartland and the American Civil Liberties Union of Iowa in a 5-2 vote.
The two dissenting judges were Justices Thomas Waterman & Edward Mansfield.
Mansfield wrote the dissent and is reportedly on President Donald Trump's short list to replace U.S. Supreme Court Justice Kennedy.
Chief Justice Mark Cady wrote that the statute requiring a 72-hour waiting period violates the due process and equal protection clauses of the Iowa Constitution.
"Today's decision was a powerful recognition that women and men are protected equally under our state constitution,” said Rita Bettis Austen, with the ACLU of Iowa.
Anti-abortion advocates, including Chuck Hurley with Family Leader, said most justices are missing one crucial component.
"Anybody, any eighth-grade, you know, social studies student or anyone can read the Iowa Constitution and see that the right to life is the very first right mentioned,” Hurley said.

Be assured, we are going to hear A LOT of news concerning abortion in the coming months.
Many state and local governments have passed or have tried to pass strict anti abortion law.
Some laws have passed. Other attempts, as in IOwa, were shot down.
The hope for pro lifers is that the issue of abortion can now make its way to the highest court in the land.
That being, after Trump gets his justice installed on the bench.

Concerning IOwa, I found THIS statement from their governor Kim Reynolds interesting:

Gov. Kim Reynolds issued a statement on the Iowa Supreme Court’s decision, saying, "I am disappointed in this morning's ruling. Often, women are in crisis when facing this decision, and it's a decision that can impact them for the rest of their lives.
“I don't think it is unreasonable to require 72 hours for someone to weigh their options and the important decision they are about to make."

Actually, that statement is a slap in the face of all women.
I mean ......really?
She thinks that a woman wakes up one morning, has her cup of coffee, then says to herself,
"Gee. I think I'll have an abortion today".

I have no doubt that any woman considering an abortion has already done her 72 hours of soul searching.
And undoubtedly many many hours more than the assumed 72 hours.
Creating a "law" that basically assumes a woman has not weighed all her options and weighed the consequences before hand is pure idiocy at its best.
Or, passing a law that implies women cannot think 72 hours ahead of themselves without the need for some LAW..

"Gee, should I grab a Big Mac, or get an abortion?"
"Big Mac, or abortion."
"Decisions decisions....."

But we know what this is really about.
And why states try pulling this crap all the time.
They want to chip away piece by piece at Roe vs Wade.
To see what their legislators can get away with.
Even if that means insulting woman as stupid, impulsive, incapable of thinking.

I myself am pro-life BUT....
I'm a man and I think this is really up to the women. ENTIRELY!
I wouldn't want the women deciding what men should do with their balls.
Or, for any US Supreme Court to decide.
And I bet Donald Trump fully agrees with THAT.

The abortion thing isn't what concerns me about all of this, what gets me is where the courts feel it should be their place to dictate to women their reproductive rights.
There is no such animal as pro-abortion or pro-life. Not really.
Abortion is when a woman or the family find themselves in a bad situation.
The health of the woman is in danger. Maybe that woman is obese or has other issues of concern.
Or maybe the teen made a terrible mistake. Found herself knocked up by the boy next door.
And he said he'd pull out in time. Yeah right....
Knocked up by that kid next door who's parents are religious fundelmentimst, yet unwilling to accept any responsibility what so ever.
God forbid their church should find out. Or, the noisy neighborhood.

Maybe it boiled down to simple economics.
Maybe that woman has no financial means for raising a kid.
The father split the scene. He's gone.
The woman is single, and alone.
We all know only too well how egger the federal and state governments are to assist with finances.
Hell.... governments are all hell bent on "cutting" safety nets, not expanding them.

Not only are republicans that control state and local governments extremely hypocritical, their concern for the unborn child begins and ends at the moment that child takes its first breath.
Then, its good luck lady.
Don't look to us for help.
We're too busy cutting your food stamps.

Iowa governor Kim Reynolds believes this only some simple waiting period issue.
Well, Kim replaced Terry Branstad when Trump send Terry off to Japan.
Sayonara chump.
So, Kim will become history come the November midterms.
But we'll still have Donald Trump and his stacked US Supreme Court to deal with.

 

[Cozarkian]

I feel like a waiting period would increase abortions. People would sign up because they know they still have a couple of days to think about it and back out, but once they signed up it will be easier to go through with it.

 

[Phenzyn]

You pretty much said it all, nice novel

But the sexism.... Wow

It absolutely blows my mind that women can support Trump. Like that one black guy, you have to hate your own I guess.

 

[Sunburn74]

Taxpayer dollars being wasted as they continue to assault women's rights. Shame on them.

 

[Incorruptible]

Definitely not good news. It doesn't hurt to wait a few days and abortion needs to be more restricted.

 

[MomentsofSanity]

Definitely not good news. It doesn't hurt to wait a few days and abortion needs to be more restricted.

What you think they just wake up one morning and think "Hey, I think I should get an abortion today"? They have already thought about it. There's no reason to force them to wait longer.

 

[Incorruptible]

What you think they just wake up one morning and think "Hey, I think I should get an abortion today"? They have already thought about it. There's no reason to force them to wait longer.

They are killing the baby, this is wrong. Why is wrong for a 3 day wait yet it's perfectly acceptable to apply that to gun owners?

 

[MomentsofSanity]

They are killing the baby, this is wrong. Why is wrong for a 3 day wait yet it's perfectly acceptable to apply that to gun owners?

Someone getting an abortion has already thought about it. Probably a lot. Anguished over it for days or maybe even weeks. The waiting period for a gun purchase is to prevent a heat of the moment decision to go get a gun and shoot someone. Those are not the same. They are not analogous.

I predict insults in your next post.

 

[fskimospy]

This paternalism towards women is pretty standard among anti abortion conservatives.

 

[HomerJS]

Definitely not good news. It doesn't hurt to wait a few days and abortion needs to be more restricted.

The next time you go to get one wait a few days.

Problem solved.

 

[HomerJS]

They are killing the baby, this is wrong. Why is wrong for a 3 day wait yet it's perfectly acceptable to apply that to gun owners?

Because there is no need for a background check.

Besides why should you be the arbiter of when the combination of egg/sperm becomes a human being?

 

[imported_tajmahal]

I support this ruling, i'm opposed to all waiting periods on Constitutional Rights, especially waiting periods on gun purchases.

 

[dphantom]

Besides why should you be the arbiter of when the combination of egg/sperm becomes a human being?

Why should you?

 

[Paratus]

Definitely not good news. It doesn't hurt to wait a few days and abortion needs to be more restricted.

Yet it does hurt to wait a few days.

As an example I read a story about a woman who’s IUD failed and she became pregnant. She did not want the pregnancy. The IUD was still in place and interfering with pregnancy causing her pain and bleeding.

The state required a waiting period so the
clinic sent her home to wait it out. While waiting her bleeding became serious and her pain became worse.

So she went to the hospital. The hospital could perform an abortion but only if her life was in danger. So they kept her for awhile to measure how much blood she was losing to see if her life was in immediate danger.

So Incorruptible why should this woman be kept in pain waiting on medical care, waiting for her life to be in danger to end a pregnancy that couldn’t continue in the first place?

How does her pain and risk to her life constitute “not hurting”?

 

[Paratus]

Why should you?

That’s why it should be left up to the woman, her doctor and any family she wishes to include.

It should not be left up to the government.

Besides women and men who use birth control, even if they have an abortion tend to kill fewer fetuses than those who try to have children. If you were concerned about the unborn dying.

 

[Fenixgoon]

That’s why it should be left up to the woman, her doctor and any family she wishes to include.

It should not be left up to the government.

Besides women and men who use birth control, even if they have an abortion tend to kill fewer fetuses than those who try to have children. If you were concerned about the unborn dying.

QFMFT. provide cheap and ready access to birth control for men and women, along with real sex ed, and watch the abortion rates plummet. everyone wins.

of course, that makes too much sense to actually do.

 

[Zorba]

QFMFT. provide cheap and ready access to birth control for men and women, along with real sex ed, and watch the abortion rates plummet. everyone wins.

of course, that makes too much sense to actually do.

Because it has NOTHING to do with the babies. It is about punishing women for having sex. Just look are all the right wingers on here that a pissed the women get free birth control with Obamacare.

 

[ch33zw1z]

Because it has NOTHING to do with the babies. It is about punishing women for having sex. Just look are all the right wingers on here that a pissed the women get free birth control with Obamacare.

The old farts are scarfing down Viagra simultaneously.

 

[HomerJS]

Why should you?

I agree. That's why I would never foist my opinion on others.

Why not leave that question up to science? Commission a panel of scientists/doctors to answer that question. When does a combination of sperm/egg become a human being? Let's go with a plurality of the panel.

That decision should not be left up to politicians, lawyers, religious leaders and uninformed layman. The last time we let politicians play doctor we got Terry Schivo.

 

[Sunburn74]

They are killing the baby, this is wrong. Why is wrong for a 3 day wait yet it's perfectly acceptable to apply that to gun owners?

1. Not a baby.
2. State/juries/judges kill actual people without a mandatory waiting time to rethink it...it's just whatever time it takes to get it done. They also don't make the jury watch gruesome vids or get vaginal exams prior to deciding someone needs to die or require the local execution chamber staff have admitting privileges at local hospitals as a backup.
3.its her body and she has to carry all the risk associated with pregnancy. It's easy to say what you say but she is the one actually risking her life here.

 

[JSt0rm]

if women want control over their bodies they should vote better.

 

[sportage]

Like I said, I am pro life as they call it.
But still, I seen this not as an pro or anti issue.
I seen it for what it truly was, a huge insult to all women.
Maybe they should impost a law requiring the MEN to wait 72 before having sex?
That way, the guy would have 72 hours to make sure he has "protection", the protection is functional, the protection has not expired, and 72 hours to really really really think it thru that he really wants to be with this woman.
That "love of his life" he only met 30 minutes ago at some local bar.
Heck! Everyone should wait 72 hours before even thinking of having sex.
And just try telling THAT to the typical 16 year old....

 

[darkswordsman17]

QFMFT. provide cheap and ready access to birth control for men and women, along with real sex ed, and watch the abortion rates plummet. everyone wins.

of course, that makes too much sense to actually do.

Many of those people view birth control as murdering babies since it prevents conception, and the only reason to be having sex is for conception. They see it as the same as morning after pill or actual abortion procedures, because all of it is about stopping conception). Talking to them, it quickly becomes very clear it is not actually about preserving the sanctity of life at all, but rather trying to force their beliefs about sexuality on others. They also justify it by claiming that the rest of society is forcing its sexual beliefs onto people (via porn or even just shows of affection, LGBTQ support, etc), so they think they're actually unshackling people from it. Its just more blatant hypocrisy and ignorance, and those people belief they are the absolute authority on it, or rather acting on the absolute authority. Doctors, government, any Earthly entity doesn't matter, this is coming from a higher power. Nevermind their whole spiel about God/Jesus being the only one that can judge.

 

[HomerJS]

QFMFT. provide cheap and ready access to birth control for men and women, along with real sex ed, and watch the abortion rates plummet. everyone wins.

of course, that makes too much sense to actually do.

Dems need to get behind this including a bigger support structure for adoptions of American children

 

[zinfamous]

They are killing the baby, this is wrong. Why is wrong for a 3 day wait yet it's perfectly acceptable to apply that to gun owners?

no baby is being killed by an abortion.