Abortion news and discussion

Alefroth · Post by **Alefroth** » Wed Apr 19, 2023 6:59 pm

WA has bought up a lot too. Won't it be illegal to prescribe though, regardless of how much is on hand?

Kurth · Post by **Kurth** » Wed Apr 19, 2023 11:21 pm

Alefroth wrote: Wed Apr 19, 2023 6:59 pm WA has bought up a lot too. Won't it be illegal to prescribe though, regardless of how much is on hand?

I don’t think so. Even if the FDA approval is revoked/suspended, the FDA has discretion in enforcement.

Alefroth · Post by **Alefroth** » Wed Apr 19, 2023 11:33 pm

Interesting. I wonder if the FDA could issue an EUA and re-approve it.

Kurth · Post by **Kurth** » Wed Apr 19, 2023 11:37 pm

Alefroth wrote: Wed Apr 19, 2023 11:33 pm Interesting. I wonder if the FDA could issue an EUA and re-approve it.

Yeah, I’m no expert in this area, but from what I’ve read, the FDA has a host of tricks up its sleeve if it needs to rely on them to keep mifepristone available where it’s legal.

Of course, that’s this FDA under Biden. With another FDA under a GOP administration, all bets are off. It’s not a solution to this legal shit show, but it is a temporary band aid.

Octavious · Post by **Octavious** » Fri Apr 21, 2023 11:33 am

So we should know at some point today if they are all in on crazy. I'm imagining they will be. I look forward to the twisted logic they will present.

Octavious · Post by **Octavious** » Fri Apr 21, 2023 12:09 pm

Ah I thought the order said AM not PM. So I'd expect they will say they can ban it at like 11:50 PM. Because America!

Pyperkub · Post by **Pyperkub** » Fri Apr 21, 2023 12:56 pm

Octavious wrote: Fri Apr 21, 2023 12:09 pm Ah I thought the order said AM not PM. So I'd expect they will say they can ban it at like 11:50 PM. Because America!

More like newscycle - drop the controversial stuff as late as possible on a Friday, when nobody is paying attention.

Octavious · Post by **Octavious** » Fri Apr 21, 2023 4:24 pm

I'd say it's a lock that it will be the ruling we are expecting as they still haven't said anything. Guess randomly blocking drugs is going to be a thing now. That's cool.

malchior · Post by **malchior** » Fri Apr 21, 2023 5:07 pm

I don't know how this will turn out but irrespective of outcome there is no way to portray this as normal or good. I'll say it again we're in the midst of a crisis we can't see the edges of. We're deep in it.

Smoove_B · Post by **Smoove_B** » Fri Apr 21, 2023 5:14 pm

Is it strange I'm trying to guess the outcome by trying to find out if barricades have been installed in front of the Supreme Court? I guess by doing it after business hours on a Friday they can side-step that requirement until sometime over the weekend?

Octavious · Post by **Octavious** » Fri Apr 21, 2023 6:29 pm

People will whine online for a few minutes and then nothing will happen.

Smoove_B · Post by **Smoove_B** » Fri Apr 21, 2023 6:35 pm

I mean, they put up barricades last May when the draft Roe decision leaked so I'd kinda expect them to prepare in the same way if they're going to rule in the same shitty way that they did before.

malchior · Post by **malchior** » Fri Apr 21, 2023 6:47 pm

Supreme Court stays the original order pending appeals. So not the worst case but still horrible. Thomas and Alito wrote dissents which I'm sure are just them raging about how they can't just flex their tyranny.

Edit: Nope - it is only a page of Alito whining about the shadow docket. He also argues the case has been fast tracked at the 5th so it won't harm anyone in the meantime to keep the 5th's narrowed restrictions. You know except for the women he has said must birth their rapists babies if they don't find out early enough.

Smoove_B · Post by **Smoove_B** » Fri Apr 21, 2023 6:53 pm

Temporary good news is still good news...I suppose. I'm sure there were back-channel discussions on how to time it better.

News link for those inclined to read non-Twitter.

malchior · Post by **malchior** » Fri Apr 21, 2023 6:57 pm

FWIW I still think while they would love to break abortion in blue states, there isn't much appetite to do it by throwing the whole medical system into disarray. Which is nice I suppose. They are somewhat considerate tyrants at the least.

Octavious · Post by **Octavious** » Fri Apr 21, 2023 7:01 pm

Well that certainly is better than expected.

Zarathud · Post by **Zarathud** » Fri Apr 21, 2023 7:32 pm

Except for Justice Alioto, who explained he doesn't care about a little chaos while the courts play out.

Justice Thomas said nothing. Which made clear to anyone that his vote was political and bought years ago.

waitingtoconnect · Post by **waitingtoconnect** » Sat Apr 22, 2023 3:44 am

malchior wrote: Fri Apr 21, 2023 6:57 pm FWIW I still think while they would love to break abortion in blue states, there isn't much appetite to do it by throwing the whole medical system into disarray. Which is nice I suppose. They are somewhat considerate tyrants at the least.

There’s-appetite but the other conservatives want a republican in the White House first. Also they still pretend to follow that they are examining the law and not the third chamber of Congress,

malchior · Post by **malchior** » Sun Apr 23, 2023 11:22 am

waitingtoconnect wrote: Sat Apr 22, 2023 3:44 am
malchior wrote: Fri Apr 21, 2023 6:57 pm FWIW I still think while they would love to break abortion in blue states, there isn't much appetite to do it by throwing the whole medical system into disarray. Which is nice I suppose. They are somewhat considerate tyrants at the least.
There’s-appetite but the other conservatives want a republican in the White House first. Also they still pretend to follow that they are examining the law and not the third chamber of Congress,

There's definitely appetite. I mostly don't think though that 5 or 6 want to take *this shot* because of all the collateral damage. They want something less disruptive and less totally out of control from a judicial temperament standpoint. Though perhaps they would if there was a Republican safely at the helm to aid and abet in their tyranny.

Smoove_B · Post by **Smoove_B** » Sun Apr 23, 2023 4:39 pm

Mike Pence, pharmaceutical chemist.

Pence: I’d like to see this medication off the market.. but I also have deep concerns about the way the FDA went about approving Mifepristone 20 years ago.

I feel like I have a list - like Arya Stark - of politically powerful people that are genuinely diminishing our society.

Alefroth · Post by **Alefroth** » Sun Apr 23, 2023 4:46 pm

I really don't think 'but' is the correct word there.

hepcat · Post by **hepcat** » Sun Apr 23, 2023 7:35 pm

Effing evil bastard. The worst part is, he thinks he’s the hero.

Unagi · Post by **Unagi** » Sun Apr 23, 2023 7:50 pm

Smoove_B wrote: Sun Apr 23, 2023 4:39 pm I feel like I have a list - like Arya Stark - of politically powerful people that are genuinely diminishing our society.

I do.

Unagi · Post by **Unagi** » Sun Apr 23, 2023 7:53 pm

Alefroth wrote: Sun Apr 23, 2023 4:46 pm I really don't think 'but' is the correct word there.

Unless subconsciously he was revealing the fact that he thinks they went about approving it just fine... And so that information undermines his desire to see the medication off the market.

Holman · Post by **Holman** » Sun Apr 23, 2023 8:10 pm

malchior wrote: Sun Apr 23, 2023 11:22 am
waitingtoconnect wrote: Sat Apr 22, 2023 3:44 am
malchior wrote: Fri Apr 21, 2023 6:57 pm FWIW I still think while they would love to break abortion in blue states, there isn't much appetite to do it by throwing the whole medical system into disarray. Which is nice I suppose. They are somewhat considerate tyrants at the least.
There’s-appetite but the other conservatives want a republican in the White House first. Also they still pretend to follow that they are examining the law and not the third chamber of Congress,
There's definitely appetite. I mostly don't think though that 5 or 6 want to take *this shot* because of all the collateral damage. They want something less disruptive and less totally out of control from a judicial temperament standpoint. Though perhaps they would if there was a Republican safely at the helm to aid and abet in their tyranny.

Yep. They want the radicalism to come from congress and a president, at which point they can certify it on back-worked premises.

waitingtoconnect · Post by **waitingtoconnect** » Sun Apr 23, 2023 8:50 pm

The Comstock act is where the battle will be fought. That if enabled would ban everything from contraception to abortion pills to anything rated over PG being sent by mail, the internet or on television. Its the one way ticket to Gideon!

coopasonic · Post by **coopasonic** » Sun Apr 23, 2023 9:25 pm

waitingtoconnect wrote: Sun Apr 23, 2023 8:50 pm Its the one way ticket to Gideon!

Gilead, perhaps?

hepcat · Post by **hepcat** » Sun Apr 23, 2023 10:45 pm

Copyright issues.

waitingtoconnect · Post by **waitingtoconnect** » Sun Apr 23, 2023 11:32 pm

coopasonic wrote: Sun Apr 23, 2023 9:25 pm
waitingtoconnect wrote: Sun Apr 23, 2023 8:50 pm Its the one way ticket to Gideon!
Gilead, perhaps?

Mandatory stays in cheap motel rooms with 30 year old King James bibles for all!!

Spoiler:

Kraken · Post by **Kraken** » Mon Apr 24, 2023 2:02 am

waitingtoconnect wrote: Sun Apr 23, 2023 11:32 pm
Mandatory stays in cheap motel rooms with 30 year old King James bibles for all!!

Sign me up.

hepcat · Post by **hepcat** » Mon Apr 24, 2023 10:33 am

Jesus, the GOP just does not give a shit about the truth. Lindsey Graham is out there still spewing the lie that dems want to make abortion legal up until delivery.

What the Democratic Party proposes on abortion is barbaric. Abortion up to the moment of birth, taxpayer-funded.”

stessier · Post by **stessier** » Mon Apr 24, 2023 10:56 am

hepcat wrote: Mon Apr 24, 2023 10:33 am Jesus, the GOP just does not give a shit about the truth. Lindsey Graham is out there still spewing the lie that dems want to make abortion legal up until delivery.

What the Democratic Party proposes on abortion is barbaric. Abortion up to the moment of birth, taxpayer-funded.”

It's a little tricky, though. As much as we criticize the Republicans for ideas held by the fringes, we should recognize that is a fringe on the left as well. And I might be part of it. I'm still in the camp that it's a decision for the woman and her doctor and I'm not sure of if or when there should be a line past which it's not permitted.

hepcat · Post by **hepcat** » Mon Apr 24, 2023 11:28 am

stessier wrote: Mon Apr 24, 2023 10:56 am
It's a little tricky, though. As much as we criticize the Republicans for ideas held by the fringes, we should recognize that is a fringe on the left as well. And I might be part of it. I'm still in the camp that it's a decision for the woman and her doctor and I'm not sure of if or when there should be a line past which it's not permitted.

No, it's not "a little tricky". It's an outright lie. No dems are proposing that we allow abortion right up until the birth. There are provisions in H.R. 8296 allowing for such, but only in extreme cases where the mother's life is in danger. But zero dems are proposing that we allow abortion up until delivery as a standard procedure. Zero.

stessier · Post by **stessier** » Mon Apr 24, 2023 11:42 am

hepcat wrote: Mon Apr 24, 2023 11:28 am
stessier wrote: Mon Apr 24, 2023 10:56 am
It's a little tricky, though. As much as we criticize the Republicans for ideas held by the fringes, we should recognize that is a fringe on the left as well. And I might be part of it. I'm still in the camp that it's a decision for the woman and her doctor and I'm not sure of if or when there should be a line past which it's not permitted.
No, it's not "a little tricky". It's an outright lie. No dems are proposing that we allow abortion right up until the birth. There are provisions in H.R. 8296 allowing for such, but only in extreme cases where the mother's life is in danger. But zero dems are proposing that we allow abortion up until delivery as a standard procedure. Zero.

I did not watch the clip - he is my senator and I need no further reasons to want to punch him in the face - so I just went off the quote. I didn't realize it was talking about a specific bill. The bill is a nice first step. I still say a better bill is to allow up to delivery if a doctor agrees. I also believe in single payer healthcare - meaning the government should be footing the bill.

hepcat · Post by **hepcat** » Mon Apr 24, 2023 11:47 am

I think we're talking at cross purposes. What I'm railing about is the attempt by republicans to portray pro-abortion proponents as wanting abortion legal right up to the moment of birth (and in some even more outrageous claims by Trump and a few other idiots, even after). They're trying to paint this portrait of baby killing murderers hungry for the blood of infants or something.

No bill is proposing that we allow abortion right up until delivery (except for extreme cases where the mother's life is in danger, as I mentioned earlier).

stessier · Post by **stessier** » Mon Apr 24, 2023 1:08 pm

hepcat wrote: Mon Apr 24, 2023 11:47 am I think we're talking at cross purposes. What I'm railing about is the attempt by republicans to portray pro-abortion proponents as wanting abortion legal right up to the moment of birth (and in some even more outrageous claims by Trump and a few other idiots, even after). They're trying to paint this portrait of baby killing murderers hungry for the blood of infants or something.

No bill is proposing that we allow abortion right up until delivery (except for extreme cases where the mother's life is in danger, as I mentioned earlier).

In my last post I understood you meant no bill was proposed allowing up to delivery. I also understand the attempt to portray pro choice people.

Now I'm also saying I think we probably should allow up to delivery - as long as the woman and doctor agree. In looking at the numbers, the later in the pregnancy, the more rare a termination and the reasons are generally pretty heart breaking. Putting an earlier limit might be the right thing to get the law passed, but I'm not sure it's the best thing for healthcare.

hepcat · Post by **hepcat** » Mon Apr 24, 2023 1:25 pm

Republicans want to conflate the rare case of late term abortions that happen only when the mother's life is in danger (which we already had) into the standard setting. Why in god's name would we want to put a blank check out there stating that you can get an abortion up until the day of delivery for any reason? That's the kind of thing conservatives with an agenda have wet dreams about.

stessier · Post by **stessier** » Mon Apr 24, 2023 1:52 pm

hepcat wrote: Mon Apr 24, 2023 1:25 pm Republicans want to conflate the rare case of late term abortions that happen only when the mother's life is in danger (which we already had) into the standard setting. Why in god's name would we want to put a blank check out there stating that you can get an abortion up until the day of delivery for any reason? That's the kind of thing conservatives with an agenda have wet dreams about.

We'd do it because it supports the best and most humane healthcare outcomes? As I said, it's not the best stance for passing a bill. But a rational conversation on the topic would definitely include that possibility.

hepcat · Post by **hepcat** » Mon Apr 24, 2023 2:04 pm

stessier wrote: Mon Apr 24, 2023 1:52 pm
hepcat wrote: Mon Apr 24, 2023 1:25 pm Republicans want to conflate the rare case of late term abortions that happen only when the mother's life is in danger (which we already had) into the standard setting. Why in god's name would we want to put a blank check out there stating that you can get an abortion up until the day of delivery for any reason? That's the kind of thing conservatives with an agenda have wet dreams about.
We'd do it because it supports the best and most humane healthcare outcomes? As I said, it's not the best stance for passing a bill. But a rational conversation on the topic would definitely include that possibility.

I think the part you keep missing is that they already had caveats for those very rare cases where the mother's life was in danger.

stessier · Post by **stessier** » Mon Apr 24, 2023 2:24 pm

hepcat wrote: Mon Apr 24, 2023 2:04 pm
stessier wrote: Mon Apr 24, 2023 1:52 pm
hepcat wrote: Mon Apr 24, 2023 1:25 pm Republicans want to conflate the rare case of late term abortions that happen only when the mother's life is in danger (which we already had) into the standard setting. Why in god's name would we want to put a blank check out there stating that you can get an abortion up until the day of delivery for any reason? That's the kind of thing conservatives with an agenda have wet dreams about.
We'd do it because it supports the best and most humane healthcare outcomes? As I said, it's not the best stance for passing a bill. But a rational conversation on the topic would definitely include that possibility.
I think the part you keep missing is that they already had caveats for those very rare cases where the mother's life was in danger.

There are instances where the mother's life is not in danger but a termination is still a preferred option.