Discussion: Federal Judge Knocks Down Arkansas' Stringent New Abortion Restrictions


Federal Judge Knocks Down Arkansas’ Stringent New Abortion Restrictions

One might say that these restrictions, themselves, have been aborted.


These attempts to turn women into property again make me SO angry. So so so so so…


I recently learned that in medieval times, the understanding of procreation was that men provided the seed (visible ejactulate) and women provided the ferile field (womb) for the men to plow. The woman contributed little to the developing child other than nourishment. The child then belonged to the man. So now we women can legitimately claim that some men are “going medieval on us”. Editrd for phone spellink.un


Women live in these states, and support the politicians who write these laws. I guess if they ever feel their rights are being abridged someday they might consider voting for a Democrat.



“For these reasons, the Court is not convinced that importing the (disposal law’s) complex requirements for authorization advances a public health goal,” Baker wrote.

“Public health benefits” have little or nothing to do with these laws; they are simply an attempt to make women second-class citizens under the control of the men who impregnate them and their pseudo-religious allies. Bravo to Judge Baker for making this quite clear.


For sometime I’ve held the opinion that the most rabid male anti-choicers are in a high state of fear that their girl friends/wives will abort “Their” sacred child all the while ignoring the health of the woman.

Deep seated Darwinian compulsion to spread the man’s super quality genes.

…or they’re just morans.


You’re correct about the first part. They thought the sperm contained a complete homunculus, or little tiny human, which then resided in the “oven” of the uterus until it was fully baked. I’d have to look up the thinking on who “owned” the child after its birth, though (medieval historian here). Medieval thought was pretty patriarchal, though not always as black and white as we might think.


I think some of you are looking way too deeply for reasons here. This is Arkansas, where guys go to family reunions to pick up dates and many family trees look like sticks.


This was also the ancient Greek understanding of procreation. I assume that is where the Medieval belief originated.

1 Like

Also in medieval times, the church allowed abortion until “quickening”. Back then, the church was way ahead of the times.

1 Like

So the bottom-line issue is a “public health goal” vs. a zygote-vs-human rights goal.

Please. EVERY human has the transparently obvious, God-given right to determine his-or-her future. That’s so American that it isn’t even debatable.

You want to deny… what? That a woman doesn’t have a right to control the body she owns? Anyone who believes that is stuck in the 1800s.

Forget the “evangelical right,” forget political expediency, and just look at the facts. Abortion is safe, still legal by Federal law - and unnecessary if the woman in question has access to contraception, which is perfectly legal everywhere (except, possibly Arkansas, where the legislature has made even that debatable).

Women aren’t baby-makers unless they choose to be. That’s so transparently obvious that it doesn’t even deserve discussion. Yet here we are, fighting the fight even now.


And, yet, how would they react to the possibility that the child isn’t theirs, I wonder.

1 Like

Judge Baker appears to be both thoughtful and wise. Congratulations ACLU!

Poorly, very poorly.