By Congress, the editorial board of the LA Times means Democrats, and, I say, bring it on (article available at Yahoo News if LAT paywall blocks you)
Editorial: To stop the Texas abortion law, Congress has to act
For nearly half a century, the federal courts could be counted on to protect women and their constitutional right to a safe and legal abortion. The U.S. Supreme Court affirmed in four major rulings — starting with Roe vs. Wade — that women have a right to an abortion up to the point of viability of the fetus at about 24 weeks and could not be hindered by onerous requirements.
Please point where in the Constitution it mentions abortion? The LA Times has, on the flip side, published multiple editorials recently, such as here and here, calling for banning firearms and restricting ownership beyond people, like criminals, who shouldn’t have them. They even want 18 year olds blocked (yet want 16 year olds to be able to vote).
As states came up with a profusion of unconstitutional restrictions, including bans on abortions early in pregnancy, federal district and appellate courts batted them down one after the other. The courts have stopped a dozen state laws that would have banned early abortions.
The relentless onslaught finally paid off for states determined to roll back abortion rights. Last week, the Supreme Court, in a 5-4 decision, refused to block, even temporarily, an abominable Texas law that effectively disallows abortions when cardiac activity can be detected — starting at about six weeks of pregnancy, when most women don’t even know they are pregnant — and empowers citizens to enforce it by suing anyone who helps a woman get an abortion.
Amazingly, women can still travel to other states to get an abortion, which Democrats are pushing as an alternative to birth control for people who have irresponsible sex with people they don’t want to have a child with when they don’t want a child.
It’s time for the U.S. Congress to pass a law codifying the tenets of Roe vs. Wade and stop state lawmakers’ attempts to chip away the right to an abortion.
The identical House and Senate bills — both called the Women’s Health Protection Act — would not just guarantee the right to an abortion but would outlaw the absurd and unnecessary restrictions that states have put on women and abortion providers. The House bill has 205 cosponsors. The Senate bill has 48. Both bills had spent years languishing in their chambers. But House Speaker Nancy Pelosi says the House version will be ready for a vote when Congress returns from recess.
If it’s a Constitutional Right, why is it necessary to pass a law? Further, that WHP Act pretty much stops all restrictions on abortion, allowing unfettered abortions up to birth. As National Review notes
The Women’s Health Protection Act, reintroduced last week in both the House and the Senate, would strike down any abortion law or regulation that isn’t applied to a “medically comparable procedure,†and the legislation leaves it up to abortion doctors to determine what counts as a medically comparable procedure.
That means the federal legislation would strike down popular state laws establishing 24-hour waiting periods before an abortion is performed, informed-consent laws, bans on sex-selective abortions, and many health and safety regulations.
Democrats are even upset with Mississippi’s law, which bans abortions after 15 weeks, which is the timeline that almost every single European nation uses. Back to LA Times
At the moment, the bill stands a better chance of passing in the House than it does in the Senate. But there’s good reason to put it to a vote in Congress: We get to see which of the people’s representatives are willing to support a woman’s constitutional right to seek an abortion — and, perhaps more importantly, which do not.
I agree, they should put it to a vote, and allow debate, because we will get to hear the extremists argue for killing the unborn because of lazy parents, because Democrats have done away with telling people they should use contraception to avoid pregnancy. With the 2022 midterms coming up, it will be an eye opener for the average citizen, including those who aren’t the hardcore Democrats and the usually-lean-Democrat Independents, as to how extreme the Democratic Party is.
The Biblical Penalty for causing an abortion is 2 shekels about 10 dollars
Abortion is legal common and usually paid for by the state of Israel
Why should a state be allowed to force a woman to give birth if she becomes pregnant?
William Teach: Please point where in the Constitution it mentions abortion?
Good point. The Constitution doesn’t appear to give the government power to regulate abortion.
William Teach: Further, that WHP Act pretty much stops all restrictions on abortion, allowing unfettered abortions up to birth.
The WHP says states cannot enact a “prohibition on abortion prior to fetal viability”.
William Teach: Democrats have done away with telling people they should use contraception to avoid pregnancy.
That is false. However, contraception is not 100%, and some women are in abusive relationships. Notably, the Texas law does not include an exception for rape or incest. Indeed, it empowers the abuser to collect “damages”.
Texas has 20% more rapists per 100,000 than the US average. In 2021 there were nearly 15,000 rapists reported in Texas. (We understand that some rapists assault more than one woman, but let’s put the blame on the men who assault, not the victims).
Greg Abbott has been governor since 2015 and was Texas AG for over a decade before that!! So when is he going to stop the rapists in Texas??
Is Teach really suggesting that women regularly take contraception to avoid being impregnated from a rapist??
Is Teach really suggesting that teen girls regularly take contraception to avoid being impregnated by a rapist or incestuous relative??
Would Teach allow a girl to terminate her pregnancy IF she utilized his advocated contraception but was one of the unfortunate girls whose contraception failed??
Yes, Texas has a large number of black and brown people which equates to more violence and sexual assault. Maybe we should begin to target these people and segregate them.
Try again. The percentage of Blacks in Texas is below the national average.
You white supremacists always have the same answer, don’t you? Make America white!! Do you really think if Texas deports Blacks (11.8% of pop) that they will eliminate all the rapists?
The highest rate of rape by far (over 3 times US average!) is in Alaska (only 3.7% Black).
Anyway, at least you offered a plan, which is more than Greg Abbott did. If you were governor would you force a 13 yr old incest victim to deliver her violent brother’s spawn?
J-are these the same white supremacists that were in the room with you before?…
jill,
No dear. These white supremacists are the ones that blame every bad outcome on Blacks and browns, who claim Blacks are stupid and lazy compared to superior whites, and call urban Blacks “niggas”. It was your friend who advocated removing all the Black and brown people from Texas to eliminate rapists.
Do you agree with that final solution?
Or the idea that since white men discovered and created America it should belong to whites?
Do you agree with the frequent commenter who wants to know why we can’t have a white homeland here?
Jeff,
You did not understand the comment. I said that Texas has black and brown people. Does not matter the number.
Doogie,
I understood your comment.
david duke,
You claimed that the reason Texas had such a plethora of rapists compared to the rest of America results from having Black and “brown” people. Note that we showed that Texas has fewer Blacks as a percentage than the average of the entire US. Shouldn’t that mean that Texas should have fewer rapists per capita than America in general.
So even one Black person in Texas would make them have more rapists per capita than California?
“If you were governor would you force a 13 yr old incest victim to deliver her violent brother’s spawn?”
So you determine human value based on who the father is? People are worth less if the father is a rapist? They should be murdered because daddy is a bad guy? How about if the baby has only one arm should she be killed then? Or Downs syndrome? Or is Jewish? Exactly where do you draw your moral line on human value?
[…] LA Times Wants Party of Death to Act to Protect Abortion on Demand […]
We understand you all wanting to distract from the topic. You’re afraid to answer.
Teach, commenters: Do you agree with Texas that a teenage girl who is attacked and impregnated by a rapist should be forced to carry to term?
gitarcarver answered earlier that it’s not the fault of the embryo, so yes, the state should force her to carry the rapist’s spawn.
“Teach, commenters: Do you agree with Texas that a teenage girl who is attacked and impregnated by a rapist should be forced to carry to term?”
Probably not. Like I always say, there are exceptions to everything. We on the right do not try to force everybody into a mold, that’s your policy. Like with vaccines. Now you answer this: do you agree that using abortion as birth control should be illegal everywhere as an abomination?
Or do you believe there is a parody between that Texas teenage rape victim and an innocent baby being murdered for a woman’s convenience?
“gitarcarver answered earlier that it’s not the fault of the embryo, so yes, the state should force her to carry the rapist’s spawn.”
Is there any good reason instead of killing “the spawn” she can’t put it up for adoption? Or is killing “the spawn” going to make things right in some macabre way?
“Or the idea that since white men discovered and created America it should belong to whites?”
So you admit White men discovered and created America but somehow are not entitled to have it as their homeland. Why? Should Koreans have Korea, Chines have China, Kenyans have Kenya and mooslems have Mecca? Why? Are we not entitled to the same birthrights as they?
Why do you want to destroy only White nations? Why do you hate White people?
Abortion on demand isn’t good enough. Make it mandatory. At least for those who insist on having it.