"It really is a day of victory for all people in Indiana," said Dr. Katie McHugh, an OB-GYN and abortion provider in Indiana. After a special judge granted the ACLU's request for a preliminary injunction on Indiana's new abortion ban law, the ruling Thursday will allow elective abortions to resume legally in the Hoosier state.
Planned Parenthood, which operates multiple clinics across the state, says they're prepared to resume abortions as early as Sept. 22. They sent this statement following the ruling: In recent months, Indiana has become an important regional hub to provide abortion care to patients in Ohio, Kentucky, Tennessee, and beyond. As so many nearby states have banned abortion, we have seen an influx in out of state patients coming to Indiana for care. This makes today’s preliminary injunction even more important – every day that we can provide abortion care, is a day that the people of Indiana have control over their bodies and their future. This is a win for the entire state. Others will resume operations more gradually, getting everything back up and running over the next few days. Already, schedules are filling up fast with appointments.
"In recent months, Indiana has become an important regional hub to provide abortion care to patients in Ohio, Kentucky, Tennessee, and beyond."
That's an interesting, marketing-speak way to put it, considering the phrasing strongly implies that the arguments made behind closed doors were economic rather than moral or political. It's not hard to see why profiteering against parenthood would be happy about the ruling, but calling that a "win for the entire state" seems like a bit of a stretch when about 70% of the state is religious Christian plus a small Jewish and Muslim population (proportionately well above national average), and the law in question doesn't restrict abortions in cases of rape, incest, fatal fetal abnormality, or "when the pregnant woman faces risk of death or certain severe health risks," it actually at face value looks like a magnet case of corruption on the judge's part. Unless there's something buried in the Indiana state constitution that prevents the state government from doing it, the US Supreme Court ruling sets state governments as the highest legal authority on the subject (unless the state itself has stripped itself of that authority for whatever reason), and a judge does not have the power to make up or get rid of laws based on personal feelings or perceived popular opinion.
Now in the (sort of backhanded) defense of the judge, they only temporarily delayed the law's implementation rather than throwing it out (which also makes calling this a "victory" a stretch from the opposing point of view as well). This means it could have nothing to do with backdoor dealing or activism, but actually because of, for example, not having the ability to adequately enforce the law (yet), or maybe the judge simply doesn't want their name attached to the law in any way and is just kicking it down the road for the next person. It sounds petty and stupid, but it's a sort of thing that happens all the time, especially when a subject is considered controversial. The judge probably wants it delayed until after the elections to see if it'll just get thrown out by voter reaction instead.
So each understands how debases the mind 🧠 of an Abortionist State/Country is: Samaria shall bear her guilt, because she has rebelled against her God; they shall fall by the sword; their little ones shall be dashed into pieces, and their pregnant women ripped open.
The punishment is the aborting of the babies and ripping open of woman
Oookkkkay... why the fuck is the resume of abortion anything to be celebrated? do women in Indiana not know how to take their birth control or use protection during sex? is nymphomania that common in Indiana? that abortion must be mandatory for women there to have sex without reproducing?
@leighbee I'm sorry for your experience. but unfortunately statistic say that only 0.01% of the women who get abortions actually get abortion to abort a child that was a product of rape
also rape itself does not happen as much as you women fantasize about it and you telling me the full story is not gonna make any difference if you think about
@Twalli the only rape that doesn't get reported is when a man gets raped because according to our society we men can't get raped and if we reported we get laughed at.
a woman in the other hand can call you a rapist just for looking at her funny and people will actually believe her
@Twalli whatever, whether you are right or wrong this still does not justify abortions for the fact that only 0.01 of the women who get abortions get it because they conceived their unborn child via rape
I just hate when women flaunt it around like a celebration or a way to flex it as a decision for a possible lack of accountability or poor decision on their end as a birth control method if it impedes their lifestyle. It just comes off in poor taste.
I am not saying men don't hold weight in this matter of pregnancy and responsibility because it does take two to tango, but you can't deny there are women that are careless and use that as an option.
That is what bothers me, if that makes sense. No level of remorse or anything. Just comes across as disturbing
@leighbee It certainly is. The pro-life assholes on this thread don't have the ability to think logically and analytically about this issue. I'm pro-choice because I can understand all the different scenarios that lead women to get abortions and the possible consequences that can occur if they don't have access to them. They're most likely brainwashed by pro-life propaganda. Pro-choice people are more sane, logical, and rational than pro-life people. Pro-lifers also tend not to be very bright.
@Juxtapose Right. Because you don’t want to say it because then you have to admit what you’re advocating. At least have balls enough to admit you’re advocating for killing an unborn human child.
@Juxtapose Is cancer going to grow into a human being? Is your jizz? You pro abortion people are so intellectually dishonest. It’s disgusting. You don’t even have the balls to admit what you’re doing, so you make up these stupid analogies that never work.
I judge the value of life based on consciousness, not these arbitrary distinctions about potential life. For every woman you don't forcibly impregnate and force her to carry out the pregnancy, you are denying a potential life.
"Argument from incredulity, also known as argument from personal incredulity, appeal to common sense, or the divine fallacy, is a fallacy in informal logic. It asserts that a proposition must be false because it contradicts one's personal expectations or beliefs, or is difficult to imagine."
@Juxtapose Throughout history every atrocity committed against another human being starts with dehumanizing them. Jews were called parasites by the nazis, Indians were called savages by the settlers. You’re doing the same thing to unborn humans. It’s morally bankrupt thinking.
@Juxtapose you’re not in charge of what has value. Again, you don’t even have the balls to admit you are fine with killing unborn babies. So you bullshit and dance around it. It’s 100% transparent.
@leighbee by that logic so is my mom since she's perscribed medicine that would cause an abortion due to the fact it constricts abdominal muscles. It would be for increased digestion, but it can also cause an abortion if used in such an instance.
@Twalli That's completely irrelevant and you know that.
But since you brought it up: Yes; that is happening. There is gross medical malpractice happening all the time, and the doctors and nurses are getting away with it.
If you belive in any religion, I know that the God I belived in forgave me. I could not let my child suffer in this world. Plus I am ill with an eating disorder so I could probably not carry to term. There are loads of reasons why people get abortions @Jamie05rhs
@leighbee Did you ask for forgiveness? If not, then he probably hasn't forgiven you. You need to humble yourself and fall down on your knees and cry out for mercy.
It's funny how some laws directly cause conflict with each other and when you bring it up the people start to yell. They can't choose what they want. There is a law which says every human has a right to live, but somehow women have the right to override that law to live and murder their baby? Doesn't make sense to me.
@RiseofArtemis When a few laws cause direct conflict with each other the lawyer has to decide which law has higher power. Most lawyers agree that right to live has higher power than right to privacy.
That's why this decision is strictly ideological, and doesn't follow the rules of proper extensive interpretation.
that seems to be a huge kink of hers. not too long ago in one of my recent questions she claimed that Mike Pence is the worst VP in US history because he banned birth control in her state when he was governor
He didn’t ban birth control. He helped in the shut down of the Planned Parenthood in my city. There were several other reasons he wasn’t liked in Indiana.
@leighbee what planet do you live in? there's a reason why cancer patients get medical marijuana in many states.
also my point was that not everything that sounds healthy does not mean is good. Planned Parenthood whether is healthcare or not is not doing anything out of the goodness of their heart
