Discussion for article #237545
The next law the Arizona legislature will pass will require science teachers to tell their students that the Earth is only 6000 years old, that droughts and dust storms are caused by gay people, and that global climate change is a myth because God would never hurt or injure the righteous Jesus-loving people on this planet.
Oral arguments on a suit challenging that law would also be prohibited by the law, itself, because: God wanted that law.
3 Likes
Oh Gawd, what next, schoolchildren arenāt told Jesus rode a dinosaur!!! Grrrrā¦
2 Likes
Hmmm, I guess the recent fatal floods in Houston tell us the sort of Godless heathens inhabiting that city.
3 Likes
Thatās good since itās NOT TRUE!
3 Likes
I want laws barring menās health care from being funded by the state.
Additionally, as someone who opposes militarization and war, I want my taxpayer dollars to never ever go to buying weapons unless war was actually declared after a direct assault on American soil.
4 Likes
I donāt understand. What do the legislators hope to accomplish by telling women their abortions can be reversed? Do they mean to imply that the courts could force them to be reversed? I know theyāre all anti-abortion, but how does this further their cause?
3 Likes
Reverse a drug-induced abortion? WTF?
2 Likes
Quite the opposite.
"Texas was in a long period of drought until Governor Perry signed the fetal pain bill,ā state Assemblywoman Shannon Grove (R-Bakersfield) said
Just a big wet sloppy kiss from god.
1 Like
Somewhere out there, I assume, are two teams furiously competing to see which one can plant the most ridiculous idea on the internet and see it turned into state law in one of the 50 states.
They are good. Damn good.
3 Likes
My reaction exactly. I can tell that the words are English words, but there is no sensible interpretation of them. If an abortion has occurred, then the zygote/blastocyst/embryo/fetus has been ejected or removed from the uterus. How can this possibly be reversed, whether it was performed chemically or surgically?
They gotta be talking about some type of (bullshit, not medically known) ābefore itās too lateā thing where you take a chemical inducement and then - if you find Jesus before itās too late! - you take some type of antidote?
1 Like
Yep. I pretty much flummoxed by trying to have that string of words make sense as well. And your hypothesis that maybe they are referring to some sort of ābefore itās too lateā type āantidoteā is about as far as I could assemble a cogent thought on it, and even then it makes almost no sense at all.
1 Like
Donāt give them any ideasā¦
If you thought āForced Birthā was bad, wait until āForced Re-Implantation of Aborted Fetusā is made Law in the Red States, because āJebus says SO!ā.
1 Like
You know, the more I think about it, the more it seems this is some weird attempt at legislative gaslighting.
1 Like
The pharmaceutical abortions targeted in Arkansas and Arizona occur much earlier in a womanās pregnancy ā typically in the first trimester. In the United States, such abortions typically occur in two steps.
First, the woman is given mifepristone, once known as RU-486, which can terminate very early pregnancies and dilate the cervix. A few days later, the second drug, misoprostol, induces contractions to expel the embryo.
In an op-ed in the National Review, Mailee R. Smith, staff counsel for Americans United for Life, argues that a heavy dose of progesterone can block the effects of the first drug, permitting the pregnancy to continue normally.
āAt this point, it has been reported that 80 babies have been born following the abortion-reversal process, with another 60 or so on the way (still in utero),ā Smith wrote.
ACOG, however, says āscant evidenceā supports the claim that progesterone can halt an abortion, and that a woman who changes her mind mid-abortion is better off simply not taking the second drug.
āIn 30 percent to 50 percent of women who take mifepristone alone,ā the fact sheet says, āthe pregnancy will continue.ā
The group has joined abortion-rights advocates in criticizing legislation that requires doctors to convey medical advice to their patients, particularly when that advice is unproven.
āExtreme legislators are so focused on preventing a woman from getting an abortion that they are willing to ignore the medical experts and hide behind junk science,ā Jennifer Dalven, director of the American Civil Liberties Unionās Reproductive Freedom Project, said in a statement.
3 Likes
Thank you Steviedee111.