Discussion: Arizona Doctors Won't Be Required To Tell Women Abortion Can Be Reversed

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 aren’t told Jesus rode a dinosaur!!! Grrrr…

2 Likes

Hmmm, I guess the recent fatal floods in Houston tell us the sort of Godless heathens inhabiting that city.

3 Likes

That’s good since it’s NOT TRUE!

3 Likes

I want laws barring men’s 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 don’t 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 they’re 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) ā€œbefore it’s too lateā€ thing where you take a chemical inducement and then - if you find Jesus before it’s 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 ā€œbefore it’s too lateā€ type ā€œantidoteā€ 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

Don’t give them any ideas…

If you thought ā€œForced Birthā€ was bad, wait until ā€œForced Re-Implantation of Aborted Fetusā€ is made Law in the Red States, because ā€œJebus 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 woman’s pregnancy — 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.
ā€œAt 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 ā€œscant 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.
ā€œIn 30 percent to 50 percent of women who take mifepristone alone,ā€ the fact sheet says, ā€œthe 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.
ā€œExtreme 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 Union’s Reproductive Freedom Project, said in a statement.

3 Likes

Thank you Steviedee111.