I agree with this former Georgia governor
Never mind whether he’d approve; what would he say about forgiveness? And about, if you will, the relative merits of “judging” and “judging not”? And so on?
I don’t care if you approve. What I’m after is the autonomy to make my own decision about my own body.
If a man rapes an 11 year old girl and gets her pregnant, he’ll serve less prison time than the doctor who performs the illegal abortion to save that child’s life.
This is what American anti-abortion “justice” has boiled down to.
I don’t know what Kavanaugh’s published opinions are wrt a abortion, but to date, he has been a mild surprise in a good way. I’m not delusional: I’m sure he has lingering bitterness toward Senate Dems over his confirmation hearings but I think he might surprise us a little on some of the more outrageous state laws. The problem with Georgia’s law is that it asserts that a fetus is a person. I have no problem believing that an idiot like Clarence Thomas would buy the idea that a fetus is a natural born person, but I think even some of the other arch-conservatives might get limp defending that one. I could be wrong, though.
I suspect that what WILL happen is that the conservative court, which will probably only get more conservative after Ginsburg leaves, will allow a lot of different kinds of state-issued restrictions, which effectively make abortion so complicated that it becomes de facto illegal in anti-abortion states. The states’ rights angle seems to be the safest one.
Having said that, I find it interesting that for as much as we talk about it here, apparently 55% of the American public are totally fine with an abortion ban at six weeks, which I find shocking. But perhaps I shouldn’t really be that shocked considering how authoritarian and anti-science our culture has become.
That is why I have pointed out on more than one occasion, it’s not just a few bad apples acting badly; our culture itself is identifying more and more with authoritarianism. When an overwhelming majority of the people have a positive view of the military and police forces, and a downright rotten view of the press and the people they elect to office, that’s the perfect incubator for authoritarianism. And as we might expect, people are always more willing to regulate the behaviors of other people much more so than they are willing to submit to being regulated. Get used to it, I’m afraid.
And that is completely, utterly fucked up.
I guess a child doesn’t count as an “innocent life” anymore once she’s been raped?
There are no states with a law that would criminalize abortions done to save a mother’s life. Any doctor who did an abortion to save a life would not even be arrested.
Who gets to decide if the abortion is necessary? Do you think an 11 year old child would automatically get a pass under Alabama law?
In Georgia the law says “A physician determines, in reasonable medical judgment, that a medical emergency exists.” I’m not familiar enough with the text of Alabama’s law.
But who judges whether the doctor made a “reasonable medical judgment”?
His peers?
A panel of politicians that oppose abortions?
A panel of doctors appointed by politicians that oppose abortions?
Here is the $64,000 Question: Under the law just created in Georgia, where can one go to get an abortion in Georgia? Same question for Alabama.
AFAICT, the law doesn’t set up a panel of politicians, or a panel of doctors appointed by politicians, to make any such judgement. I suppose, at some level, a prosecutor is going to make a determination. If the prosecutor has reason to believe that the abortion was performed absent a medical emergency, he can charge the doctor with violating the law. If a judge / grand jury doesn’t throw out the charges, then a jury would be selected, they’d hear arguments from the prosecutor, presumably including some expert witnesses (probably doctors themselves), and the doctor’s defense attorney, again presumably including some doctors as expert witnesses, and then they’d deliberate and reach a determination on the doctor’s guilt. So, to answer your question, ultimately it could / would be a jury of his peers. IANAL, so I probably skipped a step or two in there, but I’m pretty sure I got the final answer right.
Your answer started with “I suppose…”, so excuse me if I don’t find it satisfactory. Also, when the new law takes affect, will there still be places open that will actually perform abortions, or will the effect be the same as if all abortions are banned any way? If it happens to be that prosecutors will decide if an abortion is necessary or not, then I can reasonably make the case that this will be intimidation enough for the few abortion providers left to close shop.
shrug I imagine there are a great many things about this situation you don’t find satisfactory. That’s not really relevant to, well … anything.
The Georgia law doesn’t, AFAICT, order any abortion centers to close down. If it makes you feel better, “when the new law takes affect” is probably going to be years from now, after a SCOTUS hearing on the law, if ever.
I don’t know what you mean by “I can reasonably make the case”. Who would you be making the case to? The Georgia Legislature? That ship has sailed. SCOTUS? Posters here at the SDMB? I don’t think it’s a reasonable view of “intimidation”. Lots of people in lots of industries have to abide by the laws governing their industry or they face criminal / civil penalties. That’s not new, or unique to abortion doctors.
I never claimed it did, so maybe you should quote what I actually say from now on instead of responding to things that weren’t even implied.
I’ve been quoting you. Scroll up and you (and everyone else) can see that.
If you can’t see how “when the new law takes affect, will there still be places open that will actually perform abortions” might be read as an attempt to imply that the law is forcing abortion centers to close, I don’t know what else to tell you.
The Atlanta Journal-Constitution just published a story about a lot of the problems and ambiguities with this new law. Apparently it isn’t so much who can’t be charged with murder, but who will be, and all the reassurances in the world aren’t worth shit when prosecutors that are elected by the populace try to curry favor with said populace.
So in other words, the mere act of performing the action would subject the doctor to an expensive, stressful, and time-consuming legal suit.
Oh look, no doctor steps forward to perform the surgery, and the child dies.
The notion that abortion clinics would remain open is a joke. This would cut off supply. Of doctors, that is, not coat hangers.
I once talked to a rah-rah Catholic woman where the mother or a 9 year old child pregnant with twins and the doctor who performed the abortion on this 9 year old child pregnant with twins were excommunicated from the Catholic church (but not the stepfather who got this nine year old child pregnant with twins.) When I said "She would have died if she carried the pregnancy to term, the rah-rah shot back “You don’t know that.”
So how does one determine if an abortion saves the mother’s life?
In the early 70’s, when there were a lot of stupid abortion laws, a woman was encourage to say and sign a paper to the effect that she would be a danger to herself and her unborn child if she did not have an abortion. Thus, tacitly threatening suicide.
I know this first hand as I signed that paper.