Posted on 06/26/2024 11:14:24 AM PDT by Morgana
And then “voluntary euthanasia” of us old coots, then they will move to implement Bill Ayres plan.
It’s not a SCOTUS ruling. It’s the text of a Brief for the Petitioner.
Didn’t SCOTUS recently decide that abortion was a state issue?
2 years ago yes something is going on
“It’s not a SCOTUS ruling. It’s the text of a Brief for the Petitioner.”
That sure not what the documents posted by Bloomberg look like.
https://assets.bwbx.io/documents/users/iqjWHBFdfxIU/rJo5436tVr08/v0
This is real. I very reputable legal site, SCOTUSblog, also reported it.
I am glad I am leaving the US next year. I don’t recognize my country anymore and at 62, I just want to be left alone from all the BS.
This is not the main reason why I am leaving, but one of them. Financially, I will be better off in the Philippines.
I don’t believe there is any way that ERs or ER docs could ever be forced to do this. I would venture to say that the number of emergency physicians in the US who are trained to perform abortions is near zero. Trying to have ERs replace abortion clinics is one of the more asinine proposals I have ever heard in my life. The logistics alone would cripple ERs and entire hospitals.
Contrary to the fiction that is TV medicine, all doctors are not trained in all procedures (sorry, House). The ER doc is not going to swoop in and remove an appendix or perform a cardiac cath, let alone an abortion, which is never an emergency. Delivering a baby sometimes is, but the baby doesn’t ever have to be killed first.
This ‘leak’ I think, is meant to stoke up the pro-death cult to act like they did after Dobbs, or worse, if things don’t go their way, thereby trying to intimidate SCOTUS by threat of violence.
Just my $0.02
Love,
O2
Nor do I.
What I posted was linked to this thread (whose title may be misleading). You could post the Bloomberg article to FR, but it has a firewall, and its title “...Poised to allow Emergency Abortions” sounds like an opinion rather than a fact.
This is a "Life of the Mother" versus "Life of the Baby" issue.
Since actual medical conditions like that are rare, a ruling in favor of the Mother's life is not unreasonable.
However, the next step by the Democrats would be relentless legal and medical pressure to expand - infinitely - the meaning of "Life" of the Mother.
Followed by arguments allowing abortions for the freedom of the mother, which some states will adopt.
I thought it had to do with the life of the mother. I have no problem with that. It’s the only exception I feel comfortable with.
The trouble is that the left is likely to pretend that a 1 in a million chance of death of the mother is the same as certain death of the mother.
That is Texas only exception is the life of the mother. I am only ok with that.
Now why do they strike down Roe and then vote to allow this??
I heard that one of his clerks was the one that leaked the Dobbs decision which is why nothing was ever done about it.
And Sotomayor may even have been involved in the never solved case of the leaked abortion rights Dodds decision.
We don’t know since this is somehow unsolved all this time later.
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.