When Americans become part of Canada it lowers the average IQ of both countries.
When Americans become part of Canada it lowers the average IQ of both countries.
That’s not an accurate take. There are some pro-lifers who are like that but most are in favour of exceptions when it’s to save the mother’s life, or the fetus has a fatal deformity.
They just don’t (want to) understand that the intentionally vague wording of anti-abortion laws makes it basically impossible for doctors to perform medically indicated abortions until it’s too late to save the patient.
If you claim to be “pro-life” the least you can do is advocate for clear definitions of the medical circumstances where abortive medical procedures are permitted.
A scout’s job is to gather facts and information, and report back so that an army can make informed decisions.
Can’t imagine why a right-wing extremist would be afraid of an organization that teaches those skills to kids.
Did you read the article? The difference between the two transcripts was:
“The only garbage I see floating out there is his supporters”
vs
“The only garbage I see floating out there is his supporter’s”
And stenographers use a special keyboard that records phonics, not words. It doesn’t have punctuation. That gets added later.
I can see you’re clearly not interested in understanding the situation the physician was in or discussing solutions that would have saved this patient’s life.
I’m not going to debate you further.
Do you hear yourself?
It was an emergency because she died?
She died days after it was too late for an abortion to save her.
If they performed the abortion when it would have saved her life, she wouldn’t have died, by your own logic it would’n’ve been an emergency.
And you’d be here arguing that the doctor should lose his license for performing an abortion when it wasn’t an emergency.
Yes.
That’s the problem with this law.
It takes the decision away from the medical experts, and puts in the hands of lawyers and judges who may or may not have a different agenda.
Any doctor that performs an abortion in Texas is risking a minimum $100,000 fine and permanently losing there license to practice medicine if lawyers, who are not medical professionals, decide it was medically necessary yet.
As a result, doctors in TX have been advised by their lawyers not to perform abortions unless the mother is literally minutes away from death, because otherwise you can’t prove that it was medically necessary.
In the case, the patient died of sepsis. Doctors couldn’t perform the abortion when she needed it because they couldn’t prove that it was medically necessary yet.
They knew that not performing the abortion would put mom at a much high risk of dying later. But they couldn’t legally prove that risk exists because all pregnancies involve some degree of risk.
If you want doctors to perform medical procedures when it’s medically necessary, you need doctors making that decision, not lawyers, not the state. If that’s what Texas had before this law went into effect.
It’s literally created a trolly problem, it’s now better for the doctors to let some women die so they can save more lives later.
Not all of them.
The Dobbs decision that overturned Roe v. Wade, was later.
But this was just days after Texas SB 8, 87th Regular Session went into effect. Which added two major laws related to abortion: the prohibition of abortion after a fetal heartbeat is detected and the ability to file a civil lawsuit against anyone who provides or facilitates an abortion.
Doctors were warned by their lawyers that if they provided an ‘abortion’ after a fetal heartbeat was detected (the case here) that they would be sued and likely lose their license if they lost.
Free contraceptives is also a more effective way of preventing abortions than banning abortions.
It’s not quite as crazy as it seems. The older/larger floppy disk formats were more reliable due to their lower track density.
There was more surface area per byte of data. The old floppy disks could be written once and read for years in harsher environments. New floppy disks we more prone to failure after a few years.
More than anything else I’ve heard, this Trump action scares me the most.
Military generals recognize the president as commander in chief. They’re generally going to follow the chain of command in situations where the US is attacking a strategic target, regardless of the ‘ethics’ of the situation.
If Trump wants to level the Gaza Strip or the West Bank or even parts of the Ukraine. They’ll likely follow orders because there’s a strategic value in those targets militarily. They might not agree with the strategy, but they’re primarily loyal to the office of the president regardless of who’s sitting in it.
But when generals would push back, is any scenario where following orders was a risk to the country with no strategic gain. Like attacking US citizens, using nuclear weapons, attacking strategic allies or starting World War III for no other reason than because Trump wanted to flex his ego.
The scenarios where these roles needed to be replaced by a Trump loyalist willing to do anything are… nightmarish.