State abortion laws megathread

[Person Man]

This discussion is quickly rushing into sort of a "Right To Work" thing.

[Gass3268]

https://twitter.com/ACLU/status/1138236472006516739

[Gass3268]

https://twitter.com/ReproRights/status/1139629010051313664

[🐒Gods of Prosperity🔱🐲💸]

https://twitter.com/ReproRights/status/1139629010051313664

2 in 5 pregnancies ending in abortion in NYC isn't enough for them, apparently; now they need to subsidize abortion as an export.   absolutely revolting.

[Progressive Pessimist]

https://twitter.com/ReproRights/status/1139629010051313664

2 in 5 pregnancies ending in abortion in NYC isn't enough for them, apparently; now they need to subsidize abortion as an export.   absolutely revolting.

I think you're missing the point here. It's not about the number, it's about safe access and affordability if a woman is going to want one anyway.

[🐒Gods of Prosperity🔱🐲💸]

https://twitter.com/ReproRights/status/1139629010051313664

2 in 5 pregnancies ending in abortion in NYC isn't enough for them, apparently; now they need to subsidize abortion as an export.   absolutely revolting.

I think you're missing the point here. It's not about the number, it's about safe access and affordability if a woman is going to want one anyway.

If you are subsidizing something, it's because you don't think you have enough of it.  Let me know when they vote to give money to any pregnant women from anywhere who wants to give birth and I'll consider that they maybe don't just love abortions.

[fhtagn]

https://twitter.com/ReproRights/status/1139629010051313664

2 in 5 pregnancies ending in abortion in NYC isn't enough for them, apparently; now they need to subsidize abortion as an export.   absolutely revolting.

I think you're missing the point here. It's not about the number, it's about safe access and affordability if a woman is going to want one anyway.

If you are subsidizing something, it's because you don't think you have enough of it.  Let me know when they vote to give money to any pregnant women from anywhere who wants to give birth and I'll consider that they maybe don't just love abortions.

How else is NYC supposed to get rid of those "undesirable" black and Hispanic babies?

[Progressive Pessimist]

https://twitter.com/ReproRights/status/1139629010051313664

2 in 5 pregnancies ending in abortion in NYC isn't enough for them, apparently; now they need to subsidize abortion as an export.   absolutely revolting.

I think you're missing the point here. It's not about the number, it's about safe access and affordability if a woman is going to want one anyway.

If you are subsidizing something, it's because you don't think you have enough of it.  Let me know when they vote to give money to any pregnant women from anywhere who wants to give birth and I'll consider that they maybe don't just love abortions.

You're still missing the point. Access to a safe abortion in New York City may very well not be available enough. It's about access not about any sort of culling or whatever else you want to fear-monger about.

[Person Man]

https://twitter.com/ReproRights/status/1139629010051313664

2 in 5 pregnancies ending in abortion in NYC isn't enough for them, apparently; now they need to subsidize abortion as an export.   absolutely revolting.

I think you're missing the point here. It's not about the number, it's about safe access and affordability if a woman is going to want one anyway.

If you are subsidizing something, it's because you don't think you have enough of it.  Let me know when they vote to give money to any pregnant women from anywhere who wants to give birth and I'll consider that they maybe don't just love abortions.

You're still missing the point. Access to a safe abortion in New York City may very well not be available enough. It's about access not about any sort of culling or whatever else you want to fear-monger about.

It’s projection. Just tune it out.

[fhtagn]

https://twitter.com/ReproRights/status/1139629010051313664

2 in 5 pregnancies ending in abortion in NYC isn't enough for them, apparently; now they need to subsidize abortion as an export.   absolutely revolting.

I think you're missing the point here. It's not about the number, it's about safe access and affordability if a woman is going to want one anyway.

If you are subsidizing something, it's because you don't think you have enough of it.  Let me know when they vote to give money to any pregnant women from anywhere who wants to give birth and I'll consider that they maybe don't just love abortions.

You're still missing the point. Access to a safe abortion in New York City may very well not be available enough. It's about access not about any sort of culling or whatever else you want to fear-monger about.

"Access to a safe abortion in New York City may very well not be available enough."

[🐒Gods of Prosperity🔱🐲💸]

https://twitter.com/ReproRights/status/1139629010051313664

2 in 5 pregnancies ending in abortion in NYC isn't enough for them, apparently; now they need to subsidize abortion as an export.   absolutely revolting.

I think you're missing the point here. It's not about the number, it's about safe access and affordability if a woman is going to want one anyway.

If you are subsidizing something, it's because you don't think you have enough of it.  Let me know when they vote to give money to any pregnant women from anywhere who wants to give birth and I'll consider that they maybe don't just love abortions.

You're still missing the point. Access to a safe abortion in New York City may very well not be available enough. It's about access not about any sort of culling or whatever else you want to fear-monger about.

It’s projection. Just tune it out.

"It's projection" ?  What is this supposed to mean?  Do you even know?

[Person Man]

https://twitter.com/ReproRights/status/1139629010051313664

2 in 5 pregnancies ending in abortion in NYC isn't enough for them, apparently; now they need to subsidize abortion as an export.   absolutely revolting.

I think you're missing the point here. It's not about the number, it's about safe access and affordability if a woman is going to want one anyway.

If you are subsidizing something, it's because you don't think you have enough of it.  Let me know when they vote to give money to any pregnant women from anywhere who wants to give birth and I'll consider that they maybe don't just love abortions.

You're still missing the point. Access to a safe abortion in New York City may very well not be available enough. It's about access not about any sort of culling or whatever else you want to fear-monger about.

It’s projection. Just tune it out.

"It's projection" ?  What is this supposed to mean?  Do you even know?

Do you? Something about about apples, oranges, and priorities I guess...

[🐒Gods of Prosperity🔱🐲💸]

https://twitter.com/ReproRights/status/1139629010051313664

2 in 5 pregnancies ending in abortion in NYC isn't enough for them, apparently; now they need to subsidize abortion as an export.   absolutely revolting.

I think you're missing the point here. It's not about the number, it's about safe access and affordability if a woman is going to want one anyway.

If you are subsidizing something, it's because you don't think you have enough of it.  Let me know when they vote to give money to any pregnant women from anywhere who wants to give birth and I'll consider that they maybe don't just love abortions.

You're still missing the point. Access to a safe abortion in New York City may very well not be available enough. It's about access not about any sort of culling or whatever else you want to fear-monger about.

It’s projection. Just tune it out.

"It's projection" ?  What is this supposed to mean?  Do you even know?

Do you? Something about about apples, oranges, and priorities I guess...

lol I think your predictive text bot needs work.

[Progressive Pessimist]

https://twitter.com/ReproRights/status/1139629010051313664

2 in 5 pregnancies ending in abortion in NYC isn't enough for them, apparently; now they need to subsidize abortion as an export.   absolutely revolting.

I think you're missing the point here. It's not about the number, it's about safe access and affordability if a woman is going to want one anyway.

If you are subsidizing something, it's because you don't think you have enough of it.  Let me know when they vote to give money to any pregnant women from anywhere who wants to give birth and I'll consider that they maybe don't just love abortions.

You're still missing the point. Access to a safe abortion in New York City may very well not be available enough. It's about access not about any sort of culling or whatever else you want to fear-monger about.

"Access to a safe abortion in New York City may very well not be available enough."

Again, I fail to see your point. New York is a huge place and some people still may not be able to afford an abortion that they feel they may need. Just because there are a lot of facilities doesn't mean that the service is still that widely available to those that need it or funded well enough. Also, a lot of those facilities probably don't just exclusively provide abortions.

[Person Man]

https://twitter.com/ReproRights/status/1139629010051313664

2 in 5 pregnancies ending in abortion in NYC isn't enough for them, apparently; now they need to subsidize abortion as an export.   absolutely revolting.

I think you're missing the point here. It's not about the number, it's about safe access and affordability if a woman is going to want one anyway.

If you are subsidizing something, it's because you don't think you have enough of it.  Let me know when they vote to give money to any pregnant women from anywhere who wants to give birth and I'll consider that they maybe don't just love abortions.

You're still missing the point. Access to a safe abortion in New York City may very well not be available enough. It's about access not about any sort of culling or whatever else you want to fear-monger about.

"Access to a safe abortion in New York City may very well not be available enough."

Again, I fail to see your point. New York is a huge place and some people still may not be able to afford an abortion that they feel they may need. Just because there are a lot of facilities doesn't mean that the service is still that widely available to those that need it or funded well enough. Also, a lot of those facilities probably don't just exclusively provide abortions.

Most of them got pretty good ratings. What’s your point?

https://twitter.com/ReproRights/status/1139629010051313664

2 in 5 pregnancies ending in abortion in NYC isn't enough for them, apparently; now they need to subsidize abortion as an export.   absolutely revolting.

I think you're missing the point here. It's not about the number, it's about safe access and affordability if a woman is going to want one anyway.

If you are subsidizing something, it's because you don't think you have enough of it.  Let me know when they vote to give money to any pregnant women from anywhere who wants to give birth and I'll consider that they maybe don't just love abortions.

You're still missing the point. Access to a safe abortion in New York City may very well not be available enough. It's about access not about any sort of culling or whatever else you want to fear-monger about.

It’s projection. Just tune it out.

"It's projection" ?  What is this supposed to mean?  Do you even know?

Do you? Something about about apples, oranges, and priorities I guess...

lol I think your predictive text bot needs work.

Exactly

[fhtagn]

Again, I fail to see your point. New York is a huge place and some people still may not be able to afford an abortion that they feel they may need. Just because there are a lot of facilities doesn't mean that the service is still that widely available to those that need it or funded well enough. Also, a lot of those facilities probably don't just exclusively provide abortions.

"they feel they may need" =/= an actual need

abortions are clearly very accessible in NYC, there's no need to fully fund it for everyone.

[Person Man]

Again, I fail to see your point. New York is a huge place and some people still may not be able to afford an abortion that they feel they may need. Just because there are a lot of facilities doesn't mean that the service is still that widely available to those that need it or funded well enough. Also, a lot of those facilities probably don't just exclusively provide abortions.

"they feel they may need" =/= an actual need

abortions are clearly very accessible in NYC, there's no need to fully fund it for everyone.

No one in this debate really needs anything in this debate with that logic.

[Gass3268]

https://twitter.com/DrLeanaWen/status/1141521323379843072

[Gass3268]

The horde was beaten back in Wisconsin.

https://twitter.com/GovEvers/status/1142160992610258944

[Dr. Arch]

The horde was beaten back in Wisconsin.

https://twitter.com/GovEvers/status/1142160992610258944

Tony turned out to be much more of a fighter than I gave him credit for. Kudos!

[Person Man]

https://twitter.com/DrLeanaWen/status/1141521323379843072

The race is definitely on.

[MarkD]

Here's what I would like to see happen.

1) Overturn Roe v. Wade and Planned Parenthood v. Casey; there were not valid, accurate interpretations of the Constitution.

2) Every state hold a referendum for an amendment to the state constitution on the subject of whether the state is predominantly pro-life or predominantly pro-choice. I believe Nevada has already done this 29 years ago and they're pro-choice.

Who's with me?

[Dr Oz Lost Party!]

Here's what I would like to see happen.

1) Overturn Roe v. Wade and Planned Parenthood v. Casey; there were not valid, accurate interpretations of the Constitution.

2) Every state hold a referendum for an amendment to the state constitution on the subject of whether the state is predominantly pro-life or predominantly pro-choice. I believe Nevada has already done this 29 years ago and they're pro-choice.

Who's with me?

No.

Putting a woman's right to choose to a vote is a terrible idea. Letting conservative men and religious fanatics decide if a woman has a right to her own body is gross.

[Gass3268]

Here's what I would like to see happen.

1) Overturn Roe v. Wade and Planned Parenthood v. Casey; there were not valid, accurate interpretations of the Constitution.

2) Every state hold a referendum for an amendment to the state constitution on the subject of whether the state is predominantly pro-life or predominantly pro-choice. I believe Nevada has already done this 29 years ago and they're pro-choice.

Who's with me?

No, part one is clearly wrong.

[Person Man]

Here's what I would like to see happen.

1) Overturn Roe v. Wade and Planned Parenthood v. Casey; there were not valid, accurate interpretations of the Constitution.

2) Every state hold a referendum for an amendment to the state constitution on the subject of whether the state is predominantly pro-life or predominantly pro-choice. I believe Nevada has already done this 29 years ago and they're pro-choice.

Who's with me?

No, part one is clearly wrong.

Maybe society wasn’t ready for Roe but the fact still remains that the only alternative was to say that the state has police powers to enforce laws which could only be effectively enforced by getting evidence before getting a warrant. The only way that this might be permissible would be that if a fetus had a fundamental right to not be aborted and the constitution explicitly provided no room for that  interpretation.