Personhood Amendments

The friendliest place on the web for anyone that follows U2.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
yeah, i'd heard it before. online, that is. i'm not in the 4th district* (thank god) but it's still ridiculous. and it doesn't surprise me at all. this is the same state that allowed people to bring guns into places that serve alcohol. "i feel so unsafe in this bar, if only i'd been able to bring my gun in instead of leaving it in the car!" said no drunk person ever.

the only good things in recent history i can think of that have been done that are good is not raising the sales tax to 9.75% (yes, as in almost TEN percent) although that was local rather than state, and banning smoking in restaurants. a lot of my eh is probably aimed at memphis rather than tennessee, but tennessee is still shitty.



*i actually have no idea what district i live in. if i were to go to house.gov and plug in my zip+4 it tells me one district (which corresponds with the maps on wikipedia), yet any time i've gone to vote i vote on the district that represents memphis proper. but i like the guy who represents memphis better, and he actually does stuff so i like him better.
 
yeah, i'd heard it before. online, that is. i'm not in the 4th district* (thank god) but it's still ridiculous. and it doesn't surprise me at all. this is the same state that allowed people to bring guns into places that serve alcohol. "i feel so unsafe in this bar, if only i'd been able to bring my gun in instead of leaving it in the car!" said no drunk person ever.

Ha. Yeah, what moron came up with that idea? I've been hearing about all these places that people are allowed to bring guns into now, and nobody's been able to really explain WHY exactly one would need a gun in most of these places. Kind of frightening.

You came to mind when I was sharing this story, 'cause I remember you live in the state-was wondering if you'd heard any more beyond what's been reported in the national news or if you've just heard the same things everyone else had.

the only good things in recent history i can think of that have been done that are good is not raising the sales tax to 9.75% (yes, as in almost TEN percent) although that was local rather than state, and banning smoking in restaurants. a lot of my eh is probably aimed at memphis rather than tennessee, but tennessee is still shitty.



*i actually have no idea what district i live in. if i were to go to house.gov and plug in my zip+4 it tells me one district (which corresponds with the maps on wikipedia), yet any time i've gone to vote i vote on the district that represents memphis proper. but i like the guy who represents memphis better, and he actually does stuff so i like him better.

Well, hey, it's a start, right? Sorry that you've got to put up with so much crap like this, though. I have a shitty person representing my district-he hasn't shown THAT level of insanity (yet), but he's still pretty horrible and stupid. So the citizens who don't approve of that guy in Tennessee have my sympathy.

That's really weird about your district issues. But your reasoning sounds good to me, I'd stick with someone like that, too.
 
Ha. Yeah, what moron came up with that idea? I've been hearing about all these places that people are allowed to bring guns into now, and nobody's been able to really explain WHY exactly one would need a gun in most of these places. Kind of frightening.
yeah, even when it was first proposed and everything (i'm 99% sure we didn't get to vote on it, it was just voted on by legislators. oh, and fun fact? the sponsor of said bill was arrested for a dui (and refusing to take a breathalyser) and had a loaded gun in the front seat of his car. this was just one year after the law was passed.

You came to mind when I was sharing this story, 'cause I remember you live in the state-was wondering if you'd heard any more beyond what's been reported in the national news or if you've just heard the same things everyone else had.
thanks, i think. :wink: the only person i know who lives in nashville (district 4 is in the southern suburbs) isn't really into politics but if it wasn't covered there i'd be shocked.

Well, hey, it's a start, right? Sorry that you've got to put up with so much crap like this, though. I have a shitty person representing my district-he hasn't shown THAT level of insanity (yet), but he's still pretty horrible and stupid. So the citizens who don't approve of that guy in Tennessee have my sympathy.

That's really weird about your district issues. But your reasoning sounds good to me, I'd stick with someone like that, too.
oh definitely. maybe since where i live has been annexed we're in some weird situation where we look like we're in one district but we're really in another. all i know is i heard he sometimes uses interns through my school and i'm going to bust my hump trying to see if i can work for him.

and that sucks that you have a shitty person representing your district. i wouldn't try to rank one type of politician over the other in terms of importance (representative, mayor, senator, etc.) but it sucks when on a local level you feel you're not represented the way you want to be.
 
Paul Ryan Wants Personhood for "One-Celled Human Embryos" | RH Reality Check

Are you ready to stand up for the rights of the "one-celled human embryos?" Well, Congressman Paul Ryan (R-WI) is, and he's got a bill to prove it.

Now that Congress is in session again, anti-choice bills are popping up left and right (but just in the House, of course, because that's the only place they can get votes). The latest? He's co-sponsoring a federal "personhood" amendment, because if the trouncing of anti-choice politicians across the country taught the House Republicans anything, it's that Americans simply love debating abortion.

Fresh off his invite to headline the anti-choice, anti-woman Susan B. Anthony List's annual gala, Ryan is paying more attention to his second favorite Americans—the single celled ones—with the assistance of bill sponsor Congressman Paul Broun (R-GA).

Via Huffington Post:

The personhood bill, first introduced in 2011 by Rep. Paul Broun (R-Ga.) and reintroduced by Broun last week, specifies that a "one-celled human embryo," even before it implants in the uterus to create a pregnancy, should be granted "all the legal and constitutional attributes and privileges of personhood." Similar legislation has been rejected by voters in multiple states, including the socially conservative Mississippi, because legal experts have pointed out that it could outlaw some forms of birth control and in vitro fertilization as well as criminalize abortion at all stages.

Broun said in a statement that a zygote's right to life should be "defended vigorously and at all costs."

"As a physician, I know that human life begins with fertilization, and I remain committed to ending abortion in all stages of pregnancy," he said. "I will continue to fight this atrocity on behalf of the unborn, and I hope my colleagues will support me in doing so."

Ryan did not immediately respond to HuffPost's request for comment about his support for the bill, which has 17 co-sponsors.

Let's just be clear that there is no such thing as a "one-celled" embryo, because the embryonic stage follows first on the zygote or fertilized egg, which develops into a blastocyst, which then develops into an embryo... and is not "one-celled." But, you know... Republicans, science... pffft.

Sometimes I wish I was a single-celled human so I could get a little love from the congressional GOP, too.
 
I'm so glad they're willing to spend so much time, energy and money on shit like this. That will never pass. Instead of actually doing shit that is useful. Nah, let's just pander to the extremes of our bases instead.
 
Under the new law, proposed by state Sen. Jason Rapert (R-Conway), doctors who perform abortions on a woman who is more than 12 weeks pregnant will lose their medical licenses unless the woman is a victim of rape or incest, her life is in danger or the fetus has a highly lethal abnormality. Republican supporters of the bill argue that abortion should be banned that early in a pregnancy because the fetal heartbeat can be detected at that point.


Arkansas 12-Week Abortion Ban Becomes Law

I suppose these lawmakers forgot or never heard about the woman in Ireland who died after being denied an abortion - because the fetus' heartbeat was still going.
 
Would be interested in knowing how the courts are going to establish rape or incest in cases where the victim did not report it. Put her on trial and investigate! Seems reasonable.

Incredibly stupid law for that reason alone.
 

N.D. governor signs nation's strictest abortion laws

North Dakota Gov. Jack Dalrymple signed bills Tuesday making the state's abortion laws the nation's most restrictive and setting the stage for what he called a U.S. Supreme Court challenge of "the boundaries of Roe v. Wade."

The bills bar abortions if a fetal heartbeat is heard, which can be six weeks into a pregnancy; ban abortions prompted by genetic defects; and require abortion doctors to have hospital admitting privileges. They become law Aug. 1 unless a court blocks them.

A fetus has a heart? That beats? Who knew?
It looks as though America is headed for a dystopia. What's going on here? (rhetorical question)

Yes, image a dystopia where a heartbeat might lead one to believe an object is alive and thus due a modicum of moral consideration. An insane world where the neonatal science of 2013 trumps that of 1973. What is going on here?
 
The bills bar abortions if a fetal heartbeat is heard


my dog has much better hearing than me, but I doubt if she could hear a fetal heart.
i suppose if one got up cozy they would have a better shot at it.
 
A fetus has a heart? That beats? Who knew?


Yes, image a dystopia where a heartbeat might lead one to believe an object is alive and thus due a modicum of moral consideration. An insane world where the neonatal science of 2013 trumps that of 1973. What is going on here?

A heartbeat? How completely arbitrary. Perhaps you'd like to explain to the class what the significance of a heartbeat is? And also explain to us how the development of a heart beat is any different than the development of eyeballs. Please leave any appeals to emotion out of your answer
 
A heartbeat? How completely arbitrary. Perhaps you'd like to explain to the class what the significance of a heartbeat is? And also explain to us how the development of a heart beat is any different than the development of eyeballs. Please leave any appeals to emotion out of your answer

U2 - Two Hearts Beat As One - YouTube

pwnd
 
dammit, Dalton, I didn't think anyone would solve my riddle so quickly. Rumpelstiltskin and his life partner have to give the child back to the straight couple
 
A fetus has a heart? That beats? Who knew?


Yes, image a dystopia where a heartbeat might lead one to believe an object is alive and thus due a modicum of moral consideration. An insane world where the neonatal science of 2013 trumps that of 1973. What is going on here?


If you go back a few pages in this thread, you would see we discussed the woman in Ireland who died after a failing pregnancy, in which the fetus' heartbeat was still going. If she had a life-saving abortion, she would've lived. A heartbeat does not mean all is well.
 
A heartbeat does not mean all is well.

I don't think this is what Indy was alluding to with his post. Rather, he's talking about the warm and fuzzy feeling we're supposed to get when we realize (because it hadn't occurred to us before) that at fetus is a living thing with a heartbeat. We all know that a heartbeat signifies life and love and we should reconsider our stance on the issue in light of this very insightful information. It's not at all the reasoning of a simpleton
 
ban abortions prompted by genetic defects;

Really good to know that women will be forced to carry anencephalitic babies (ie babies born without a brain and essentially without the top of their head who die within hours of being born) to term. Nine months of horror and as an added bonus, if they have children, the whole family gets to be traumatized. Such decisions are best made by the government, not by families in private.

Great to have conservatives around. We wouldn't want the guvmint making personal decisions for anyone.
 
I don't think this is what Indy was alluding to with his post. Rather, he's talking about the warm and fuzzy feeling we're supposed to get when we realize (because it hadn't occurred to us before) that at fetus is a living thing with a heartbeat. We all know that a heartbeat signifies life and love and we should reconsider our stance on the issue in light of this very insightful information. It's not at all the reasoning of a simpleton

You're right, JT. I guess I'm too cold to understand how delightful it is to know that a heartbeat means abortion will not be used to save a dying woman. :heart:
 
On March 14, 2009, 31 weeks into her pregnancy, Nina Buckhalter gave birth to a stillborn baby girl. She named the child Hayley Jade. Two months later, a grand jury in Lamar County, Mississippi, indicted Buckhalter for manslaughter, claiming that the then-29-year-old woman "did willfully, unlawfully, feloniously, kill Hayley Jade Buckhalter, a human being, by culpable negligence."

The district attorney argued that methamphetamine detected in Buckhalter's system caused Hayley Jade's death. The state Supreme Court, which heard oral arguments on the case on April 2, is expected to rule soon on whether the prosecution can move forward.

If prosecutors prevail in this case, the state would be setting a "dangerous precedent" that "unintentional pregnancy loss can be treated as a form of homicide," says Farah Diaz-Tello, a staff attorney with National Advocates for Pregnant Women, a nonprofit legal organization that has joined with Robert McDuff, a Mississippi civil rights lawyer, to defend Buckhalter. If Buckhalter's case goes forward, NAPW fears it could spur a wave of similar prosecutions in Mississippi and other states.


Mississippi Could Soon Jail Women for Stillbirths, Miscarriages | Mother Jones

I'm not sure what to think of this. On one hand, I am appalled that a woman can be charged with manslaughter over the stillbirth or miscarriage of a baby. But if that happened because the woman drank or used drugs right up to the loss of the baby, well then this issue wanders into a gray area. However, if the idea of a woman can be locked up for negligence while pregnant, where does the line get drawn?
 
Mississippi Could Soon Jail Women for Stillbirths, Miscarriages | Mother Jones

I'm not sure what to think of this. On one hand, I am appalled that a woman can be charged with manslaughter over the stillbirth or miscarriage of a baby. But if that happened because the woman drank or used drugs right up to the loss of the baby, well then this issue wanders into a gray area. However, if the idea of a woman can be locked up for negligence while pregnant, where does the line get drawn?

And that's exactly why it's so baffling to hear conservatives rail against big government / involvement. They are the ones that are so paranoid, yet isn't this a prime example of not being able to trust government to make the right decision??
 
I can see some conservative demanding a woman who miscarried to be charged because she flew on an airplane, did too much walking, worked 40 hours a week, etc.
 
Where does it end?

Should ever sexually active woman of childbearing age give up alcohol on the day she ovulates and stay sober until the day of her next period? Cigarettes? Prescription medications that could be harmful? What if she doesn't know when she's ovulating?
 
My gf saw that at Hotdocs this year. Said she was underwhelmed considering the subject matter. But worth a look if you've got any preconceptions about what kind of people seek out late term abortions
 
As terrible as the last few years have been for reproductive rights in the United States, growing extremism among antiabortion politicians has resulted in unprecedented awareness of these issues and a groundswell of public support for abortion rights. Wendy Davis’ marathon filibuster, bolstered by her Democratic colleagues and the thousands of Texans who showed up at the Capitol day after day, turned the state’s sweeping new abortion law and Gov. Rick Perry into national symbols for the right’s fixation on policing women’s bodies. The same could be said of Mississippi, Arkansas, North Dakota and elsewhere in the country. As a result of these battles, we now know the names, faces and strategies behind the American antiabortion movement, and that knowledge is a powerful thing.
But there is another threat to women’s access to abortion happening right now, and it is largely missing from how we talk about the war on reproductive rights: The number of doctors who perform abortions in this country has been steadily declining for decades, and medical schools aren’t training enough students to replace them.
“There are a lot of reasons why reproductive healthcare is not well covered in medical school curricula,” Lois Backus, executive director of Medical Students for Choice, tells Salon. “But among the most serious causes is the fact that reproductive health topics are still a source of controversy. Even though abortion is the second most common procedure experienced by women of childbearing age, it is routinely ignored in medical education.”

According to data from the National Abortion Federation, nearly 70 percent of medical students in the United States have received less than 30 minutes of class training about abortion by the time they finish medical school. This disregard for reproductive health education is an experience Dr. Nancy Stanwood, associate professor and section chief of Family Planning at the Yale School of Medicine and board chair of Physicians for Reproductive Health, remembers well. “We spent literally an hour and a half learning about birth control in two years of lectures,” she says. “We spent more time on cochlear implants — an important, but far less common, procedure.”

The problem with this kind of uneven training is that a lack of early exposure to reproductive health issues not only hurts a student’s ability to become, as Stanwood notes, “informed physician citizens,” it also shapes their career choices. It’s far less likely for students to choose a specialization in reproductive health care if it’s not something they’re hearing about during their training.
Social stigma around abortion may drive the marginalization of this training in medical school curricula, but the scarcity of students being trained to perform the procedure is also directly connected to the proliferation of GOP-backed state-level restrictions — on funding, on clinics and on physicians themselves.
New regulations mandated under Texas’ omnibus antiabortion law threaten to shutter all but five of the remaining abortion service providers in the second most populous state in the country. Mississippi is still engaged in a legal battle to keep its last remaining abortion clinic open; the same goes for North Dakota. Nationwide, close to 90 percent of American counties lack an abortion provider, leaving millions of women without meaningful access to reproductive healthcare.
But for a medical student, the absence of providers can also mean the absence of teachers
In Ohio earlier this year, the University of Toledo Medical Center, bowing to pressure from state Republicans and Ohio Right to Life, refused to renew its transfer agreement with two area clinics, the Center for Choice and Capital Care Network. Both clinics closed only months later, leaving women like Carolyn Payne, a medical student at the University of Toledo, and 15 of her colleagues, without anyone to teach them how to perform abortions. As Payne told the Chronicle of Higher Education, she now has to travel an hour outside the city to learn this basic medical procedure.
In Kansas, after a measure attempting to ban public hospitals from providing any and all abortion training failed, the Republican-controlled Legislature passed a slightly modified, though similarly restrictive, version of the bill requiring public hospitals to use private dollars to fund medical residents’ abortion training. Gov. Sam Brownback signed it, along with dozens of other sweeping abortion restrictions, in April. These kinds of barriers leave training available in the most limited of terms, but make it far from accessible.
It’s a national trend with long-term consequences. After all, what does the right to an abortion mean if there are increasingly fewer doctors left to perform the procedure?
But, faced with growing barriers to comprehensive training, medical students across the country have started to fight back. “Students are hungry for this training,” Stanwood says. “We’re witnessing a really important generational shift. More and more medical students want to be equipped to meet these needs, and reform is beginning to happen because students are demanding it. Change is coming from the bottom up rather than the top down.”
Progress has been particularly strong at the residency level. Training opportunities have proliferated in obstetrics-gynecology residency programs and family practice residency programs in large part because of funding from organizations like the Kenneth J. Ryan Residency Program, the continued advocacy of groups Medical Students for Choice and medical students themselves.
But there is still a long way to go. And the stakes couldn’t be higher. “This is a very long-term fight that we’re in,” Backus says. “The medical world is very conservative and resistant to change.” She estimates that with the proliferation of antiabortion legislation, this could be as much as a 50-year fight. “But,” she adds, “we plan to stay in there.”

GOP’s secret anti-choice plot: The shady crackdown on training abortion doctors - Salon.com
 
Back
Top Bottom