TX abortion ban causes more women to nearly bleed to death during miscarriage

They will not be sued and if they are hesitant then they need to get out of the medical field. The Law is clear and a doctor can perform an abortion if the mothers life is at risk. You cannot cite anything that shows otherwise.

 

Yeah, sure...bc 10 million years of evolution wrt our species alone (NM hundreds of millions of years across the animal kingdom) has nothing to do with anything... just a style for living groovy...

LOL!

Y'all just never cease to entertain with your abject absurdity...

 

Nature.

 

Homosexuality has been around that long too and evolution hasnt wiped it away in humans or animals, so seems like perfectly natural behavior if that is your angle

 

So have murder, rape, theft, battery, raping children, bullying, on and on....

...we do not encourage unproductive behaviors.

Putting non-productive homosexual jolly unions on par with actual, legit marriage, that has for time immemorial, held a place of honor in civilization, as a sort of incentive for making more ppl, and doing so within the institution most favored and suited for developing the best ppl we can, and what's best environment for kids, kinda cheapens the whole deal...

...which of course, is what y'all's polluted ideology, actually seeks.

 

Kate Cox. The doctors in Texas refused to perform an abortion because the State Supreme Court ruled, according to the new law, she did not meet the definition of having her life in imminent danger. So instead of waiting until full on sepsis and her life in imminent danger, she received a legal abortion in New Mexico and avoided any potential complications.

Josseli Barnica. Had to wait 40 hours in Texas before she met the Texas law definition of being in enough danger to save her life. Her husband was told Josseli had to wait because the fetus still had a heartbeat, and her life wasn't in imminent danger. But because she had to wait, doctors could not save her life. Had she been in New Mexico or had the ability to travel to NM like Ms. Cox, Josseli could have received a legal abortion and would still be alive today.

How about Kristen Anaya. Also had to wait at the hospital because the fetus had a heartbeat and the medical staff said they could not act until she was fully in sepsis.

"So it would have been avoidable -- me going into sepsis -- if they were able to induce labor. The quicker they could get Tylee delivered, the better chance they had at me not going into sepsis. However, Tylee still had a heartbeat," Anaya said.

"My husband and I are being told that 'not only did we lose Tylee, but now you're gonna go into sepsis and there's nothing we can do about it other than watch you because of the abortion laws in Texas,'" Anaya said doctors told them."My husband and I are being told that 'not only did we lose Tylee, but now you're gonna go into sepsis and there's nothing we can do about it other than watch you because of the abortion laws in Texas,'" Anaya said doctors told them.
According to her medical records, Anaya's physician "initiated contact with the termination committee" -- a committee of physicians who must approve any abortion care at the hospital -- upon her admission to the hospital, a step which is not required of physicians in states where abortion is legal, according to Dr. Aileen Gariepy, an OB/GYN and assistant professor at Weill Cornell Medical College. Gariepy was not involved in treating Anaya.

According to her medical records, Anaya's physician "initiated contact with the termination committee" -- a committee of physicians who must approve any abortion care at the hospital -- upon her admission to the hospital, a step which is not required of physicians in states where abortion is legal, according to Dr. Aileen Gariepy, an OB/GYN and assistant professor at Weill Cornell Medical College. Gariepy was not involved in treating Anaya.

If Anaya was a patient in New York, she would have been able to get abortion care immediately. The fever and chills were an indication of an infection and left untreated, sepsis is fatal, Gariepy told ABC News.​

Want more stories similar to these? Here are 18 more women who have their own Texas horror stories.

All of this after the law change in Texas...which isn't to blame because....?

 

I want to make sure I am understanding your argument. Slavery could be moral in a society with a culture that views slavery as a moral good, but slavery would only become wrong in that culture once the culture’s moral values change. Is that your argument?

It seems like that argument would also apply to racism as well…if you hold to cultural relativism then racism is only wrong in the cultures that condemn it and it is not wrong in the cultures that do not condemn it. Am I understanding your argument correctly?

I think you see the problem here. You lose the ability to condemn evil in other cultures when you assert cultural relativism. There is only one worldview here that allows one of us to condemn evil in another culture, and it is not your worldview.

 

Those aren’t facts. They seem more like statements that are read in a “repeat after me” fashion off of a political catechism to make good little loyal orthodox Democrats who know their party’s dogma by heart.

 

You're missing the point. All morals are relative. Even those supposedly grounded in religion. Slavery is supported in the Bible. The Bible was also quoted to support racism and religion was not always against abortion. What changed? Why were these not evil under Christianity in the past, but at considered evil now?

 

And the doctors clearly did not believe her life was in danger or they failed her. The law is clear. This is the type of stories I am talking about. I get you think it should be legal to kill the most innocent for convenience. But the law is clear. Either the doctors failed their patient. Or they did not do their job. But the law was not the reason for this story.

 

21 women linked in the stories. Many of whom multiple doctors have said that if they were in a different state, the law would have allowed for action earlier and negative outcomes averted. But it's all the doctors' fault in each and every one of these cases, and not the law's fault?

Again, remove all your biases and look at the facts. Before the law change, Texas has maternal mortality rates around the same as the rest of the first world. After the law change, it jumped exponentially in Texas, but not anywhere else around the world. What would be the first thing you would think that would cause the change in Texas?

 

The doctors are either lying or failed their patients. As the Texas Law is clear. There is a reason you will not cite it. Because you know 171.205 is clear and that doctors can perform an abortion is the mothers life is at risk regardless of heartbeat.

I have no biases here. The Texas Law is a good one that protects the most innocent and the Mother’s Life. And it is clear. Which is why you can’t cite anything showing otherwise.

You on the other hand are the one with biases as you are upset that Texas will not allow babies to be killed for convenience.

 

Before the law, Texas had maternal mortality rates as low as any state. After the law, maternal mortality rates skyrocket. As do stories about women who die or suffer because the law made doctors wait until treatment. How is the law not at fault?

 

Because you seek your bias? Nothing in the Law prevents a woman from receive an abortion if their life is at risk. And you know it. It is why you won’t cite the Law but instead what other people say about the law.

Cite where a doctor cannot perform an abortion if the mother’s life is at risk. You can’t.

Instead you lied about the heartbeat. Because that is what people with the bias of wanting to be able to legally kill a child for convenience via abortion do….

Lie!

 

You probably shouldn’t take everything I post with such seriousness. I don’t think you’re an Al-Qaeda sleeper cell, for example. It was a joke. Guess I gotta know my audience better.

 

Some of you act like you’ve never seen The Campaign.

 

I think it is telling you will not straight up answer my question, but I will answer yours. Truth is not relative. It is objective. Moral truth exists objectively in written form. Human beings are fallible and corrupt, and any corruption or error in their interpretation and application of that objective moral truth in written form stems from the imperfection and the internal corruption of human beings and not from the source itself.

Yes, the source was written by human hands, but through the miracle of divine inspiration, God has produced His revealed Word, which objectively expresses His divinely revealed will for mankind.

In the Old Testament it is clearly stated that man stealing is wrong, and that a man stealer should be put to death. The Egyptians were guilty of this sin with respect to the Israelites, and God drowned them in the Red Sea and sent plagues of judgment against them for the sin of man stealing. They were severely judged for this sin, including the death of their first born sons and many of their own lives were claimed when they were drowned by God in the Red Sea.

The Old Testament recognizes debtor’s slavery, which is different than man stealing. A person is required to pay their debts, sometimes by many years of physical labor. Our modern day society has a capitalist version of this where the fruits of a debtor’s labor are owed to the lender in much the same way that a person in debtor’s slavery owed the fruits of their labor to a lender until a debt was paid off in full. The borrower is a slave to the lender according to the book of Proverbs. So you could say slavery still exists on a large scale today in our society in some form since debt and lending exist on such a massive scale today. We simply have a capitalist version of debtors slavery, which very few people find morally objectionable.

Yes, slavery existed in the Roman world as well. Jesus did not come to establish a physical kingdom and overthrow the Roman Empire and all of its laws. Rather, Jesus called people to live for a spiritual kingdom in the midst of the corrupt physical kingdoms of this world, and the New Testament gives guidelines for people who lived in a social institution of the dominant physical kingdom of this world at the time the New Testament was written. That is not the wholesale endorsement of slavery you make it out to be. It is simply directions given to people who find themselves in such a societal institution.

There is no support for racism in the Bible. That is completely unfounded. People may have tried to defend it, but the problem there is the corruption of the people defending it, not the Bible itself.

The Bible does not support abortion in any way. It is forbidden in the Didache, one of the earliest post-biblical Christian documents we have. People claiming to be Christians and defending abortion is another example of man’s corruption twisting the Word of God, which is quite clear on matters like this.

Now that I’ve answered your question, it is your turn to answer my questions in post #128.

 

The op article mentions a 54% increase in miscarriage related blood transfusions in the state of TX (meaning the woman almost bled out).

If it wasn’t the law which caused this spike, then what did it? Seems like if you keep repeating “the law is clear the law is clear” you should at least be able to explain how the numbers spiked. What is the alternate explanation if NOT a result of doctor’s confusion w/ TX law?

 

I honestly think I cannot answer your question. Because it requires a belief in a divinely inspired universal truth and morality. I don't believe that exists.

I believe all laws and morality are written by humans, with no divine spark. And it's why what one day something is acceptable in society, years later, it's considered evil. What you claim is human misinterpreting the divine, I consider natural evolution of society.

 

What happened at the same time the law was implemented?

I will say it if you want me to. At the same time you know.

But the OP defines the consequence of pushing something out do to fear and propaganda if you ask me. The OP issue was not just a Texas issue…