majority of Americans now believe that abortion for any reason at all after five months is wrong.

[gusto79]

I hate to start another Fiorina thread, but was trying to figure out if this was true. She made this statement on MTP Sunday. I was surprised because I figured most people would think abortion to save the mothers life at anytime wouldn't be wrong. Can anybody confirm if her statement is accurate?

Here's the full quote:

CHUCK TODD:

In 2010, in your Senate race, you called Roe v. Wade a decided issue. You have since said you would work to overturn it. What changed your mind?

CARLY FIORINA:

Well, you know, here's the thing. We are finding common ground. People's views evolve on all kinds of things. And the American people's views have evolved on this. So let's just take one example. The majority of women, the majority of young people, the majority of Americans now believe that abortion for any reason at all after five months is wrong.

Just as they believe that the butchery of live fetuses for body parts is wrong. So I think we ought to pass the Pain-Capable Unborn Child Protection Act now. It is good politics. It is also good policy. And shame on Democrats who stood and blocked it because the majority of Americans now disagree with where Democrats are. The Democrat policy is it is not a life until it leaves the hospital. The vast majority of Americans oppose that policy.

http://www.nbcnews.com/meet-the-press/meet-press-transcript-september-27-2015-n434466

 

[Lone Clone]

I hate to start another Fiorina thread, but was trying to figure out if this was true. She made this statement on MTP Sunday. I was surprised because I figured most people would think abortion to save the mothers life at anytime wouldn't be wrong. Can anybody confirm if her statement is accurate?

Here's the full quote:

CHUCK TODD:

In 2010, in your Senate race, you called Roe v. Wade a decided issue. You have since said you would work to overturn it. What changed your mind?

CARLY FIORINA:

Well, you know, here's the thing. We are finding common ground. People's views evolve on all kinds of things. And the American people's views have evolved on this. So let's just take one example. The majority of women, the majority of young people, the majority of Americans now believe that abortion for any reason at all after five months is wrong.

Just as they believe that the butchery of live fetuses for body parts is wrong. So I think we ought to pass the Pain-Capable Unborn Child Protection Act now. It is good politics. It is also good policy. And shame on Democrats who stood and blocked it because the majority of Americans now disagree with where Democrats are. The Democrat policy is it is not a life until it leaves the hospital. The vast majority of Americans oppose that policy.

http://www.nbcnews.com/meet-the-press/meet-press-transcript-september-27-2015-n434466

I doubt that's precisely true. I wish reporters would ask similar questions of Hillary.

I did a quick google and the thing that makes her statement wrong is the "for any reason" qualifier. The polls I saw say a majority supports a ban on abortion after 20 weeks, assuming the life of the mother isn't at stake.

 

[CarolinaHawkeye]

In my opinion, it's wrong in any case other than rape, incest, or danger to the mother.

 

[tarheelbybirth]

I doubt that's precisely true. I wish reporters would ask similar questions of Hillary.

I did a quick google and the thing that makes her statement wrong is the "for any reason" qualifier. The polls I saw say a majority supports a ban on abortion after 20 weeks, assuming the life of the mother isn't at stake.

Considering that 98+% of all abortions occur by the 21st week and a large percentage that occur later are for viable medical reasons, I'm not sure what a post 20-week ban is trying to accomplish.

Wait, yes I do.

 

[dgordo]

In my opinion, it's wrong in any case other than rape, incest, or danger to the mother.

What if the pregnancy is at 28 weeks and an ultrasound revels the fetus has no heartbeat or brain function?

 

[Lone Clone]

What if the pregnancy is at 28 weeks and an ultrasound revels the fetus has no heartbeat or brain function?

Then it isn't an abortion.

 

[jscott78]

Why is she calling all of these precious unborn thingies "it" multiple times if she cares so much about them?

 

[Lone Clone]

Considering that 98+% of all abortions occur by the 21st week and a large percentage that occur later are for viable medical reasons, I'm not sure what a post 20-week ban is trying to accomplish.

Wait, yes I do.

Well, enlighten us, then. I assume you don't think that what's being accomplished is implementation of the Roe v Wade guidelines.

But don't even try to define "viable medical reasons," as that dodge has been thoroughly discussed many times in the past.

 

[theiacowtipper]

I hate to start another Fiorina thread, but was trying to figure out if this was true. She made this statement on MTP Sunday. I was surprised because I figured most people would think abortion to save the mothers life at anytime wouldn't be wrong. Can anybody confirm if her statement is accurate?

Here's the full quote:

CHUCK TODD:

In 2010, in your Senate race, you called Roe v. Wade a decided issue. You have since said you would work to overturn it. What changed your mind?

CARLY FIORINA:

Well, you know, here's the thing. We are finding common ground. People's views evolve on all kinds of things. And the American people's views have evolved on this. So let's just take one example. The majority of women, the majority of young people, the majority of Americans now believe that abortion for any reason at all after five months is wrong.

Just as they believe that the butchery of live fetuses for body parts is wrong. So I think we ought to pass the Pain-Capable Unborn Child Protection Act now. It is good politics. It is also good policy. And shame on Democrats who stood and blocked it because the majority of Americans now disagree with where Democrats are. The Democrat policy is it is not a life until it leaves the hospital. The vast majority of Americans oppose that policy.

http://www.nbcnews.com/meet-the-press/meet-press-transcript-september-27-2015-n434466

Would Republicans support a constitutional ban on abortions after 20 weeks, in return for a constitutional protection for abortion prior to that mark. Didn't think so.

 

[dgordo]

Then it isn't an abortion.

i would agree, not everyone would though and in some states this would be prohibited.

 

[HawktimusPrime]

Well, enlighten us, then. I assume you don't think that what's being accomplished is implementation of the Roe v Wade guidelines.

But don't even try to define "viable medical reasons," as that dodge has been thoroughly discussed many times in the past.

The viable medical reasons usually include, whoops, didn't want one yet, whoops again, didn't want that one either,,..and then, whoops, I'm incapable of having kids. Lots of regret follows the decision as well.

 

[22*43*51]

Would Republicans support a constitutional ban on abortions after 20 weeks, in return for a constitutional protection for abortion prior to that mark. Didn't think so.

I would at 14 weeks. I could be compelled to as much as 16 weeks.

 

[hawkifann]

In my opinion, it's wrong in any case other than rape, incest, or danger to the mother.

Honestly, I would even rule out rape or incest since the argument against abortion is about the rights of the fetus to live. However, as much as I don't like abortion, I don't think it's enforceable or really all that productive to ban, so I'm against criminalizing it for the most part. There are very few good reasons for terminating a pregnancy after 20 weeks. There are a few rare legit cases, but not many.

 

[hawkifann]

i would agree, not everyone would though and in some states this would be prohibited.

In what world would a dead baby in the womb be considered an abortion? The abortion is the act of aborting the fetus, not the D&C procedure to remove tissue. A very close friend lost a baby at 35 weeks when the cord got wrapped around the baby's neck in the womb. When they removed the baby, it wasn't called an abortion.

 

[dgordo]

In what world would a dead baby in the womb be considered an abortion? The abortion is the act of aborting the fetus, not the D&C procedure to remove tissue. A very close friend lost a baby at 35 weeks when the cord got wrapped around the baby's neck in the womb. When they removed the baby, it wasn't called an abortion.

Certain states say that if a fetus lacks brain activity but has a heat beat it is alive.

 

[hawkifann]

i would agree, not everyone would though and in some states this would be prohibited.

In what world would a dead baby in the womb be considered an abortion? The abortion is the act of aborting the fetus, not the D&C procedure to remove tissue. A very close friend lost a baby at 35 weeks when the cord got wrapped around the baby's neck in the womb. When they removed the baby, it wasn't called an abortion.

Certain states say that if a fetus lacks brain activity but has a heat beat it is alive.

But dgordo's example specifically said, "What if the pregnancy is at 28 weeks and an ultrasound revels the fetus has no heartbeat or brain function?"

If there's no heartbeat and no brain function how could anyone argue that it's still alive?

 

[aflachawk]

Considering that 98+% of all abortions occur by the 21st week and a large percentage that occur later are for viable medical reasons, I'm not sure what a post 20-week ban is trying to accomplish.

Wait, yes I do.

If that's the case, then a ban after 20 weeks except for life of the mother should be fine, right?

 

[dgordo]

In what world would a dead baby in the womb be considered an abortion? The abortion is the act of aborting the fetus, not the D&C procedure to remove tissue. A very close friend lost a baby at 35 weeks when the cord got wrapped around the baby's neck in the womb. When they removed the baby, it wasn't called an abortion.


But dgordo's example specifically said, "What if the pregnancy is at 28 weeks and an ultrasound revels the fetus has no heartbeat or brain function?"

If there's no heartbeat and no brain function how could anyone argue that it's still alive?

Or meaning one or the other. Obviously without both its not an issue.

 

[slieb85]

If that's the case, then a ban after 20 weeks except for life of the mother should be fine, right?

Rollback all the non-sense like the mandatory waiting periods, the pamphlets, the funding threats, the "mandatory admitting principals", etc.? If we get to where there is actual access to abortions and States cannot limit that right/access, then sure, you can limit it to 20 weeks.

If you're going to continue to let Southern states dick around with women's rights, no, I wouldn't support the 20-week thing.

 

[Lone Clone]

Considering that 98+% of all abortions occur by the 21st week and a large percentage that occur later are for viable medical reasons, I'm not sure what a post 20-week ban is trying to accomplish.

Wait, yes I do.

Well, then, theoretically, how about this: The law stays as it is, with the exception that if a woman wants an abortion after the 21st week, she must get approval from a panel of physicians? I think this is the way some European countries work. As you point out, that would only affect a tiny percentage of the women who want abortions.

To answer your question, a 20-week ban is trying to accomplish the prevention of infanticide.

Incidentally, an interesting factoid: Nowhere in the western world is an abortion as easy to get as in the United States. Not even Sweden or the Netherlands. I think that would come as a surprise to a lot of Americans, both pro-life and pro-choice.

 

[naturalmwa]

The viable medical reasons usually include, whoops, didn't want one yet, whoops again, didn't want that one either,,..and then, whoops, I'm incapable of having kids. Lots of regret follows the decision as well.

How does a libertarian not approve of a whoops clause?

 

[naturalmwa]

If that's the case, then a ban after 20 weeks except for life of the mother should be fine, right?

If we are all accepting Tarheel's analysis, the reverse is also fine right? Why don't we take this opportunity to be real conservative and just remove all government regulation of the vag?

 

[naturalmwa]

Well, then, theoretically, how about this: The law stays as it is, with the exception that if a woman wants an abortion after the 21st week, she must get approval from a panel of physicians? I think this is the way some European countries work. As you point out, that would only affect a tiny percentage of the women who want abortions.

To answer your question, a 20-week ban is trying to accomplish the prevention of infanticide.

Incidentally, an interesting factoid: Nowhere in the western world is an abortion as easy to get as in the United States. Not even Sweden or the Netherlands. I think that would come as a surprise to a lot of Americans, both pro-life and pro-choice.

Abortion panels? Sarah Palin would approve.

 

[Lone Clone]

Abortion panels? Sarah Palin would approve.

That's hardly unique.