Posted on 05/21/2019 10:21:06 AM PDT by Morgana
Rep. Jackie Speier, D-Calif., has defended women having the right to choose and attacked government officials trying to force decisions on women, detailing her own experience with having an abortion in the process.
"The government has no right in my uterus, has no right in my vagina, and it’s time for us to be very clear and straightforward about that," she told CNN's Alisyn Camerota.
Speier's appearance came after she tweeted about her own abortion on Thursday. "It was the best choice for my health & my family. While it was an immensely hard decision, I don't regret it," she said.
Speier, speaking to Camerota, described her abortion as "a painful process" and said that the fetus wouldn't have survived outside of the womb.
“It was a second-trimester abortion, the fetus had dropped through the cervix and into the vagina,” she said. She expressed frustration over the allegedly cavalier way that her male colleagues discussed the issue, suggesting that women had abortions "without any thought."
(Excerpt) Read more at foxnews.com ...
What was her use by date? 1992?
“An AMA Committee on Criminal Abortion was appointed in May 1857. It presented its report, 12 Trans. of the Am. Med. Assn. 73-78 (1859), to the Twelfth Annual Meeting. That report observed that the Committee had been appointed to investigate criminal abortion ‘with a view to its general suppression.’ It deplored abortion and its frequency and it listed three causes of ‘this general demoralization’:
“The first of these causes is a wide-spread popular ignorance of the true character of the crime — a belief, even among mothers themselves, that the foetus is not alive till after the period of quickening.
“The second of the agents alluded to is the fact that the profession themselves are frequently supposed careless of foetal life . . . .
“The third reason of the frightful extent of this crime is found in the grave defects of our laws, both common and statute, as regards the independent and actual existence of the child before birth, as a living being. These errors, which are sufficient in most instances to prevent conviction, are based, and only based, upon mistaken and exploded medical dogmas. With strange inconsistency, the law fully acknowledges the foetus in utero and its inherent rights, for civil purposes; while personally and as criminally affected, it fails to recognize it, and to its life as yet denies all protection.” Id., at 75-76. The Committee then offered, and the Association adopted, resolutions protesting ‘against such unwarrantable destruction of human life,’ calling upon state legislatures to revise their abortion laws, and requesting the cooperation of state medical societies ‘in pressing the subject.’ Id., at 28, 78.
“In 1871 a long and vivid report was submitted by the Committee on Criminal Abortion. It ended with the observation, ‘We had to deal with human life. In a matter of less importance we could entertain no compromise. An honest judge on the bench would call things by their proper names. We could do no less.’ 22 Trans. of the Am. Med. Assn. 258 (1871). It proffered resolutions, adopted by the Association, id., at 38-39, recommending, among other things, that it ‘be unlawful and unprofessional for any physician to induce abortion or premature labor, without the concurrent opinion of at least one respectable consulting physician, and then always with a view to the safety of the child — if that be possible,’ and calling ‘the attention of the clergy of all denominations to the perverted views of morality entertained by a large class of females — aye, and men also, on this important question.’”
Roe v Wade
Do note the terms “inherent rights” and “personally” with respect to a fetus expressed in writing as of 1859, prior to Amendment XIV.
More fallacy than argument. Governments dont have rights. They aquire power either by either the conssent or force. The powers are supposed to limited by basic human rights such as the right to life. And they are suppposed to protect the innocent against those that would do them harm.
But it does have a right to tell you what health care you must have.
We (the Government) is not trying to get into her uterus. She is having enough problems with that issue herself.
We (the Government) is not trying to get into her uterus. She is having enough problems with that issue herself.
and you have no right to take an innocent life. Adopt, don’t abort
“It is undisputed that at common law, abortion performed before ‘quickening’ — the first recognizable movement of the fetus in utero, appearing usually from the 16th to the 18th week of pregnancy — was not an indictable offense. The absence of a common-law crime for pre-quickening abortion appears to have developed from a confluence of earlier philosophical, theological, and civil and canon law concepts of when life begins. These disciplines variously approached the question in terms of the point at which the embryo or fetus became ‘formed’ or recognizably human, or in terms of when a ‘person’ came into being, that is, infused with a ‘soul’ or ‘animated.’ A loose consensus evolved in early English law that these events occurred at some point between conception and live birth. This was ‘mediate animation.’ Although Christian theology and the canon law came to fix the point of animation at 40 days for a male and 80 days for a female, a view that persisted until the 19th century, there was otherwise little agreement about the precise time of formation or animation. There was agreement, however, that prior to this point the fetus was to be regarded as part of the mother, and its destruction, therefore, was not homicide. Due to continued uncertainty about the precise time when animation occurred, to the lack of any empirical basis for the 40-80-day view, and perhaps to Aquinas’ definition of movement as one of the two first principles of life, Bracton focused upon quickening as the critical point. The significance of quickening was echoed by later common-law scholars and found its way into the received common law in this country.”
Roe v Wade, majority opinion
Note the use of the term “person” and “animation” in the majority opinion.
Forty days is about how long it takes for a heartbeat to develop in a fetus.
I will add that doctors in olden times could not detect a fetal heartbeat of a baby in a womb.
A more appropriate analogy would be running over a sapling tree with a lawnmower because you don’t want to be punished with a lifetime of raking leaves.
Ask the author if it is acceptable to drown a litter of puppies in a lake? Every pup a wanted dog, right?
The Party of Death!!
So why must my taxes pay for what you do with it?
They why does she want government paying for her birth control and abortions? Make up your minds or uterus’ ladies!
No, but government has a duty to protect the life of another human: a baby which is NOT you, biytch, but another individual entrusted to your care.
Let's see, the US Government has no right to your uterous
but the government (a.k.a. the US taxpayers) can be forced
to pay for abortion or any other type of health care.
But the taxpayer has no say in how a women uses her
vagina or uterus. Amazing.
But she wants the taxpayer to pay for her birth control
Interesting...Ms. Speier began her career as an aide to Congressman Leo Ryan, who was ambushed and killed at Jonestown. Speier was with him on the trip and was shot five times. Wonder if the married Ryan was the father of her aborted child?
Neither did a penis apparently. Woof!
And your uterus and your vagina have no right to pick the pockets of working people to subsidize your slutty lifestyle.
If you want to whore around, fine; do so on your own time and your own nickel.
Leave the taxpayers out of it.
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.