Skip to comments.
Gov. Fallin vetoes bill that would make performing an abortion a felony [OK]
KFOR, NBC News Channel 4, Oklahoma City ^
| 3:50 PM, May 20, 2016
| KFOR-TV and K. Querry
Posted on 05/20/2016 3:28:38 PM PDT by Olog-hai
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-23 next last
1
posted on
05/20/2016 3:28:38 PM PDT
by
Olog-hai
To: Olog-hai
Does the legislature have enough to override
2
posted on
05/20/2016 3:34:51 PM PDT
by
Vaquero
( Don't pick a fight with an old guy. If he is too old to fight, he'll just kill you.)
To: Olog-hai
Interesting idea...but it wouldn’t last 5 minutes in the Federal courts.
To: Olog-hai
Fallin is positioning herself to be the “moderate” VP.
4
posted on
05/20/2016 3:41:50 PM PDT
by
sagar
To: Olog-hai
Well there goes my support for her...I was thinking she might be a good VP....scratch her off my list...
5
posted on
05/20/2016 3:48:35 PM PDT
by
HarleyLady27
('THE FORCE AWAKENS!!!' Trump; Trump; Trump; Trump; 100%)
To: Gay State Conservative
6
posted on
05/20/2016 3:58:19 PM PDT
by
griswold3
(Just another unlicensed nonconformist in am dangerous Liberal world.)
To: Olog-hai
What constitutional legal challenge. Roe v Wade was pulled out of Blackmum’s ass.
To: Vaquero
rather than veto, a better course might be to clean up and strengthen the bill
8
posted on
05/20/2016 4:03:26 PM PDT
by
Thibodeaux
(leading from behind is following)
To: Olog-hai
Even a legal dummy knows it will fail in the courts. She did right.
Roe vs Wade has to be overturned.
To: Olog-hai
The bill is so ambiguous and so vague that doctors cannot be certain what medical circumstances would be considered necessary to preserve the life of the mother, Fallin said. The absence of any definition, analysis or medical standard renders this exception vague, indefinite and vulnerable to subjective interpretation and application. I can't believe she used the pro-abort fear mongering 1% exception card.
Over 1,000 signatures:
As experienced practitioners and researchers in obstetrics and gynaecology, we affirm that direct abortion the purposeful destruction of the unborn child is not medically necessary to save the life of a woman.
We uphold that there is a fundamental difference between abortion, and necessary medical treatments that are carried out to save the life of the mother, even if such treatment results in the loss of life of her unborn child.
We confirm that the prohibition of abortion does not affect, in any way, the availability of optimal care to pregnant women.
http://www.dublindeclaration.com/
If a woman's life is truly in danger, she will be in a hospital. Removal of the baby would be life saving treatment and not abortion. She's not going to be in an abortion facility.
Scratch her off the VP list.
10
posted on
05/20/2016 4:11:53 PM PDT
by
Pinkbell
(Liberal tolerance only extends to people they agree with.)
To: Olog-hai
She is pro-life and would like to see Roe vs. Wade reversed.
11
posted on
05/20/2016 4:15:37 PM PDT
by
Salvation
("With God all things are possible." Matthew 19:26)
To: Salvation
Lots of RINOs say they are, in order to get elected. Even mild support of
Medicaid expansion (hence Obamacare, which is by definition pro-abortion) indicates a different real stance.
12
posted on
05/20/2016 4:30:36 PM PDT
by
Olog-hai
To: Sacajaweau
Won’t happen by mere Supreme Court appointments.
13
posted on
05/20/2016 4:31:25 PM PDT
by
Olog-hai
To: Gay State Conservative
Interesting idea...but it wouldnt last 5 minutes in the Federal courts. That's not a problem. It's an opportunity.
To: SamuraiScot
One of u got it right and most of u got it rong. She IS positioning herself for VP. She is smart enough to veto a bill that will not stand up in court-a waste of time. That way she presents herself as a pragmatist.
15
posted on
05/20/2016 4:37:21 PM PDT
by
DIRTYSECRET
(urope. Why do they put up with this.)
To: DIRTYSECRET
Forgot to mention-she’s hot!
16
posted on
05/20/2016 4:37:55 PM PDT
by
DIRTYSECRET
(urope. Why do they put up with this.)
To: Gay State Conservative
Interesting idea...but it wouldnt last 5 minutes in the Federal courts. From the article, "Fallin wrote. In fact, the most direct path to a re-examination of the United States Supreme Courts ruling in Roe v. Wade is the appointment of a conservative, pro-life justice to the United States Supreme Court."
17
posted on
05/20/2016 4:39:10 PM PDT
by
TwelveOfTwenty
(See my home page for some of my answers to the left's talking points.)
To: TwelveOfTwenty
We’ve had those, but no movement on same. It’s been 43 years.
18
posted on
05/20/2016 4:43:22 PM PDT
by
Olog-hai
To: DIRTYSECRET
The left likes to tie up the courts with frivolous cases. So does Islam.
19
posted on
05/20/2016 4:45:00 PM PDT
by
Olog-hai
To: Olog-hai
Good. This would be a huge election year PR disaster, it would be ruled unconstitutional by the courts, accomplishing NOTHING of value except giving Hitlery ammunition for her “war on woman” campaign theme.
The Gov. is on the short list for VP. Near the top, as I’ve predicted elsewhere.
20
posted on
05/20/2016 5:03:08 PM PDT
by
Jack Black
(Dispossession is an obliteration of memory, of place, and of identity)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-23 next last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson