Arizona is using a 121-year-old law — written more than a decade before it achieved statehood — to enforce a near-total abortion ban

[Scott]

 

An Arizona judge on Friday ruled in favor of a 1901 law that would ban abortions in the state at nearly all stages of pregnancy.

 

Pima County Superior Court Judge Kellie Johnson granted a request by Republican Attorney General Mark Brnovich to lift a court injunction that had been in place since the Supreme Court's decision in the Roe v. Wade case, according to CNN.

 

"The court finds that because the legal basis for the judgment entered in 1973 has now been overruled, it must vacate the judgment in its entirety," Johnson wrote in the ruling, per CNN.

 

https://www.businessinsider.com/arizona-uses-121-year-old-law-near-total-abortion-ban-2022-9

[placeholder]

From what I've read, the judge made the correct, if repugnant, decision.

It's also great news for the Democrats in Arizona.

[Eric Loh]

Republican insisted on the near total abortion ban and now have nowhere to hide. They chose extremism to rule on the most personal part of people's lives. Less than 2 months to mid-term and the Dems are salivating turning AZ blue. Thanks MAGA. 

[Chomper Higgot]

The Republicans are showing the nation who they are.

 

 

[Hanaguma]

It would help a lot if BOTH sides would be clear on what their positions were.  The President's spokeswoman studiously avoided answering the question when put to her by Fox News' Peter Doocy.  Same as most Democratic politicians when asked- they refuse to give direct answers. Instead, they either fall back on the tired bromide of supporting "a woman's right to choose" or deflecting the queston by instead talking about what some GOP candidate wants to do. 

 

In Arizona, the law signed by the governor would ban most abortions after 15 weeks.  This is a reasonable position that would probably satisfy most Americans if polling data is to be believed. 

 

 

[placeholder]

2 hours ago, Hanaguma said:

It would help a lot if BOTH sides would be clear on what their positions were.  The President's spokeswoman studiously avoided answering the question when put to her by Fox News' Peter Doocy.  Same as most Democratic politicians when asked- they refuse to give direct answers. Instead, they either fall back on the tired bromide of supporting "a woman's right to choose" or deflecting the queston by instead talking about what some GOP candidate wants to do. 

 

In Arizona, the law signed by the governor would ban most abortions after 15 weeks.  This is a reasonable position that would probably satisfy most Americans if polling data is to be believed. 

First off, the problem with this position is that it doesn't let physicians decide when an abortion is medically necessary. States with strong anti-abortion laws make nods in the direction of specifying they're allowed in the case of saving the life of the mother or protecting her from serious harm, but they aren't specific enough. And they can't be specific enough since there are so many eventualities that can arise. Ob/gyn practicioners can't do their job properly if they're worrying that they might go to prison if the government disagrees with what they've done.

And now that the Dobbs decision has focused attention on what abortion bans mean in respect to how they can affect the health of the mother, opposition has increased to bans

Support for Legalized Abortion Grows Since Dobbs Ruling, WSJ Poll Shows

More than half of voters said the issue made them more likely to cast ballots in the midterm elections; majorities oppose 6-week and 15-week abortion bans

https://www.wsj.com/articles/support-for-legalized-abortion-grows-since-dobbs-ruling-wsj-poll-shows-11662210020

 

[Hanaguma]

2 hours ago, placeholder said:

First off, the problem with this position is that it doesn't let physicians decide when an abortion is medically necessary. States with strong anti-abortion laws make nods in the direction of specifying they're allowed in the case of saving the life of the mother or protecting her from serious harm, but they aren't specific enough. And they can't be specific enough since there are so many eventualities that can arise. Ob/gyn practicioners can't do their job properly if they're worrying that they might go to prison if the government disagrees with what they've done.

And now that the Dobbs decision has focused attention on what abortion bans mean in respect to how they can affect the health of the mother, opposition has increased to bans

Support for Legalized Abortion Grows Since Dobbs Ruling, WSJ Poll Shows

More than half of voters said the issue made them more likely to cast ballots in the midterm elections; majorities oppose 6-week and 15-week abortion bans

https://www.wsj.com/articles/support-for-legalized-abortion-grows-since-dobbs-ruling-wsj-poll-shows-11662210020

 

Article is behind a paywall and I am too cheap to breach it...

 

Given what you wrote, then what IS a realistic compromise position?  I see some states going too restrictive, others going too permissive, and the middle ground being ignored. Very few politicians are willing to commit to any specific ideas, especially the left.  Many secretly favour abortion on demand, at any time, for any (or no) reason.  That is a position that very few Americans actually support. 

 

Gallup finds that a majority of Americans support abortion in the first trimester at 67%. That falls to 35% in the second trimester and only 20% in the third.  Makes the current law in Arizona seem quite mainstream. 

[placeholder]

17 minutes ago, Hanaguma said:

Article is behind a paywall and I am too cheap to breach it...

 

Given what you wrote, then what IS a realistic compromise position?  I see some states going too restrictive, others going too permissive, and the middle ground being ignored. Very few politicians are willing to commit to any specific ideas, especially the left.  Many secretly favour abortion on demand, at any time, for any (or no) reason.  That is a position that very few Americans actually support. 

 

Gallup finds that a majority of Americans support abortion in the first trimester at 67%. That falls to 35% in the second trimester and only 20% in the third.  Makes the current law in Arizona seem quite mainstream. 

Can you give me a link to that gallup poll? Was it taken after the Supreme Court decision was officially released?

A realistic compromise decision is to leave it up to the woman and her doctor. All this handwringing about late term abortions that will be very rare is just a way of restricting abortions. As long as ob/gyns fear possible loss of license and even imprisonment, the system will continue to harm women.

[Chomper Higgot]

21 minutes ago, Hanaguma said:

Article is behind a paywall and I am too cheap to breach it...

 

Given what you wrote, then what IS a realistic compromise position?  I see some states going too restrictive, others going too permissive, and the middle ground being ignored. Very few politicians are willing to commit to any specific ideas, especially the left.  Many secretly favour abortion on demand, at any time, for any (or no) reason.  That is a position that very few Americans actually support. 

 

Gallup finds that a majority of Americans support abortion in the first trimester at 67%. That falls to 35% in the second trimester and only 20% in the third.  Makes the current law in Arizona seem quite mainstream. 

I’m rather keen on the idea of what I do with my body being a private matter between me and the health professionals I consult with for medical advice, and not being determined by ‘public opinion’.

 

So leave it between the individual and the medical professionals they consult with.

 

[placeholder]

20 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

I’m rather keen on the idea of what I do with my body being a private matter between me and the health professionals I consult with for medical advice, and not being determined by ‘public opinion’.

 

So leave it between the individual and the medical professionals they consult with.

 

And it's not just affecting pregnant woman. Misoprostol has other medical uses besides inducing abortion. People who need it for those reasons are being turned down thanks to anti-abortion laws.

Edited September 26, 2022 by placeholder

[Hanaguma]

25 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

I’m rather keen on the idea of what I do with my body being a private matter between me and the health professionals I consult with for medical advice, and not being determined by ‘public opinion’.

 

So leave it between the individual and the medical professionals they consult with.

 

Again, a rather radical position according to most polling.  And also very rare in other parts of the world. Most of Europe has bans after the first trimester, for example.

[Hanaguma]

28 minutes ago, placeholder said:

Can you give me a link to that gallup poll? Was it taken after the Supreme Court decision was officially released?

A realistic compromise decision is to leave it up to the woman and her doctor. All this handwringing about late term abortions that will be very rare is just a way of restricting abortions. As long as ob/gyns fear possible loss of license and even imprisonment, the system will continue to harm women.

Sure, sorry for forgetting;

 

https://news.gallup.com/poll/1576/abortion.aspx

 

If, as you say, late term abortions are rare (and I agree that they are), then what is the harm in allowing states to restrict them? I see it as the same as the rape/incest argument- also rare, so there is no harm in allowing abortion in those cases. 

[Chomper Higgot]

4 minutes ago, Hanaguma said:

Again, a rather radical position according to most polling.  And also very rare in other parts of the world. Most of Europe has bans after the first trimester, for example.

There is nothing radical about holding dominion over ones own body.

 

 

[Chomper Higgot]

3 minutes ago, Hanaguma said:

Sure, sorry for forgetting;

 

https://news.gallup.com/poll/1576/abortion.aspx

 

If, as you say, late term abortions are rare (and I agree that they are), then what is the harm in allowing states to restrict them? I see it as the same as the rape/incest argument- also rare, so there is no harm in allowing abortion in those cases. 

Are you sure rape/incest related pregnancies are rare?

 

Do you live in the real world?

 

 

Edited September 26, 2022 by Chomper Higgot

[Hanaguma]

1 minute ago, Chomper Higgot said:

There is nothing radical about holding dominion over ones own body.

 

 

The American public disagrees, as do most Europeans.

[Hanaguma]

3 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

Are you sure rape/incest related pregnancies are rare?

 

Do you live in the real world?

 

 

According to this article, they account in total for 1.5% of abortions.

 

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2019/05/24/rape-and-incest-account-few-abortions-so-why-all-attention/1211175001/

 

I would call that "rare".   

[placeholder]

7 minutes ago, Hanaguma said:

Sure, sorry for forgetting;

 

https://news.gallup.com/poll/1576/abortion.aspx

 

If, as you say, late term abortions are rare (and I agree that they are), then what is the harm in allowing states to restrict them? I see it as the same as the rape/incest argument- also rare, so there is no harm in allowing abortion in those cases. 

The harm is that sometimes pregnancies go bad in the third trimeter and then a doctor may have to abort a fetus. One thing a doctor shouldn't have to consider is whether or not he will be stripped of his license and even imprisoned for that.

And your gallup poll is dated from may. A lot has changed in the public attitude since then especially as regards the effect of abortion restrictions on medical practice.

[Chomper Higgot]

3 minutes ago, Hanaguma said:

According to this article, they account in total for 1.5% of abortions.

 

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2019/05/24/rape-and-incest-account-few-abortions-so-why-all-attention/1211175001/

 

I would call that "rare".   

Put a number on that, not a percentage.

 

 

[Chomper Higgot]

9 minutes ago, Hanaguma said:

The American public disagrees, as do most Europeans.

I doubt you can find a survey from anywhere on the planet that says a majority believe individuals should not hold dominion over their own bodies

[placeholder]

5 minutes ago, Hanaguma said:

According to this article, they account in total for 1.5% of abortions.

 

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2019/05/24/rape-and-incest-account-few-abortions-so-why-all-attention/1211175001/

 

I would call that "rare".   

If it was a fact that  15% of all mined metal is nickel, would you say nickel is rare? Most people would not say 15% qualifies as a rare percentage.

[placeholder]

11 minutes ago, Hanaguma said:

The American public disagrees, as do most Europeans.

Not anymore.

[Chomper Higgot]

Over 32,000 rape related pregnancies per year is not rare.

 

 

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/8765248/

[Credo]

Because something is rare is not the point.  People in a 'rare' situation should have the same rights as everyone else.   

 

The choice over our body is ours.  The decision to have a late term abortion also involves the doctor and many if not most, would not induce an abortion unless it was deemed necessary.   

 

 

[Chomper Higgot]

The party that claims to stand for freedom and liberty makes every effort to take control of women’s bodies.

 

[STALINGRAD]

I miss Barry Goldwater 

[Hanaguma]

31 minutes ago, placeholder said:

If it was a fact that  15% of all mined metal is nickel, would you say nickel is rare? Most people would not say 15% qualifies as a rare percentage.

Not fifteen percent, ONE POINT FIVE percent. 

[Hanaguma]

32 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

I doubt you can find a survey from anywhere on the planet that says a majority believe individuals should not hold dominion over their own bodies

If you ask a direct question, you will get a direct answer. If you ask deliberately vague questions, you will get inaccurate answers.

[placeholder]

Just now, Hanaguma said:

Not fifteen percent, ONE POINT FIVE percent. 

My mistake.

But if you think that's rare, what about 3rd trimester abortions?

"The majority of abortions in 2019 took place early in gestation: 92.7% of abortions were performed at ≤13 weeks’ gestation; a smaller number of abortions (6.2%) were performed at 14–20 weeks’ gestation, and even fewer (<1.0%) were performed at ≥21 weeks’ gestation.

https://www.cdc.gov/reproductivehealth/data_stats/abortion.htm

And that figure of less than 1% is for pregnancies terminated after 21 weeks. That still leaves another 5 weeks for a second trimester abortion. So the figure is a lot lower than those for rape and incest.

 

[AsianAtHeart]

Thank you for this article, and for the update on the American legal situation.

 

Eventually, every principle of the American constitution will be repudiated.  I believe it will largely happen just one step at a time.  The public would rise up in anger if all were taken down at once.  By taking out one thing here, one thing there, and at each stage having a mixed reaction from the public, the dirty work is accomplished.  War is being waged on multiple fronts: against gun ownership (the right to bear arms), against abortion (the right of conscience on one's own health and body), the freedom of speech, the right of lawful assembly, the principle of innocent until proven guilty, and so many more.

 

Folks, if we don't stand up for our rights, we will watch them get revoked, one at a time.  This time the abortion issue, next time ???

 

Don't get me wrong: I am not an abortion supporter.  Elective abortion is a great evil--though there are times when a medical abortion is a necessary life-saving measure.  But the issue here is not really about abortion per se.  It is ultimately about liberty.  We've lost a lot of our liberties in just these past two years.  And more is coming.

[Hanaguma]

2 minutes ago, placeholder said:

My mistake.

But if you think that's rare, what about 3rd trimester abortions?

"The majority of abortions in 2019 took place early in gestation: 92.7% of abortions were performed at ≤13 weeks’ gestation; a smaller number of abortions (6.2%) were performed at 14–20 weeks’ gestation, and even fewer (<1.0%) were performed at ≥21 weeks’ gestation.

https://www.cdc.gov/reproductivehealth/data_stats/abortion.htm

And that figure of less than 1% is for pregnancies terminated after 21 weeks. That still leaves another 5 weeks for a second trimester abortion. So the figure is a lot lower than those for rape and incest.

 

Not sure what your point is. I agreed that late term abortions are rare.  So I see a reasonable compromise that would probably make both sides equally unhappy.  No abortions after 15 weeks, but exceptions at any stage for rape/incest victims, or if the mother's life is in danger.  This excludes the vast majority of abortions, as your stats indicate.  

 

So what are we really fighting about?