Form isn’t even loading for me. I think a lot of folks got the same idea.
Why is it I am asked to stop correcting misinformation, but no one is asking the people to stop who brought up the subject because… I don’t even know why they brought it up. Lashing out at some other hot issue because of their frustration over this issue, I suppose. And it was brought up several times in this thread before the two I replied to.
If those replies get cleaned up, so will my reply.
Maybe don’t contribute to the off-topic tangent. Reply in a new thread.
This is your pet issue, I get it… but you know many of us are scared that our basic rights are now essentially gone.
I split my reply off.
I saw. Thank you. You can also @ the folks you were replying to.
Those replies were not really about existing gun laws, so much as guns as a hot button topic that could have the same rules applied to it. Since it’s clear the politicians in TX value guns, and just about everything else too, more than women.
Guilt doesn’t matter at all here. Just pick anything you don’t like, deputize someone else to deal with it, no recourse available.
Today, they don’t like women. Tomorrow, they’re not going to like something else, probably voters next, then the next exploitable group.
Anything can be wrapped in this context and the Supreme Court just said they cannot deal with it until after harm is done. That’s a lot of harm coming very quickly.
Time to circumvent the entire political / governmental involvement in Women’s right to choice / Women’s Healthcare. Abortion via pill exists, time to make it universally available over the counter for free Nationally to any Woman that wants it.
This will bypass/neuter the incessant bi-yearly/quad yearly ups & downs [Supreme Court appointees] with the who runs the GOV. now and their tuff shit attitude towards American Women.
Make the pill available, now. Remove the Gov’s crusty old religious white folk rat claws from the decision process once and for all.
Texas is about to block that:
Edited for clarity
Why, what happens if they have one’s IP address? Asking for a dynamic- and/or mobile-IP using, overzealous colleague.
I’m no medical expert but I don’t think the pill alone is an adequate substitute for the various forms of abortion procedures an individual woman may need depending on her situation.
For one, that information will be sold, many times, and tracked back to your real identity so that advertisers and even less savory sorts can use it to profile you and try to figure out how to pull your strings. It’s the 2020s, get used to it.
Secondly, should you actually do something silly like run a script that opens thousands of connections per second in an attempt to overload their systems, that can and will be tracked back to the source IP, and your ISP has a legal obligation to know which customer had which IP at all times. It is the same problem with those VPN sites, sure your ISP may not know what you’re doing, but I guarantee your VPN provider does, and is subject to the same laws and financial pressures as your ISP.
Thanks – I don’t think they were that overzealous (nor savvy).
It’s a start, a start to remove GOV out of all Women’s bodies. It could maybe be the one domino to get the rest to fall. Small steps, turn to giant steps. This abortion pill exists now, readily available, there really is no good excuse to deny it to Women and supply it free of charge?
I’m open to any ideas to create complete body autonomy for Women in the World.
Does the new law specify if the defendant and/or plaintiff need to actually be in Texas for the law to apply? Or for the abortion to take place in Texas? Or can anyone, anywhere, sue anyone else who has never even been to Texas? Does the new law require that the woman needs to actually be pregnant at the time the offense occurs? e.g. grandma gives a girl a $1000 graduation gift, and 6 months later in college in a different state, the girl gets pregnant and has an abortion, using the money grandma gave her to pay for it. Can the full weight of the Texas law be brought down on grandma like a ton of bricks because she supplied the money which eventually was used to pay for the abortion?
Can a woman’s employer be brought to justice because that employer paid the woman, who later used that money to pay for an abortion?
It may well be that the dog has finally caught the car. 
The fact that the Fox News Channel is not mentioning what should have been a landmark triumph of its viewers’ ideology suggests Republicans know that ending safe and legal abortion is deeply unpopular. Their base finally, after all these years, got what it wanted. But now the rest of the nation, which had been assured as recently as the confirmation hearings for Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh that Roe v. Wade was settled law that would not be overturned, gets a chance to weigh in.
Source:
interesting story … but you should only sue doctors for the bounty who are being accused of something they probably didn’t do within state of texas after the date of the prior ruling. Nobody has to be pregnant, there need not even be an abortion, or a grandma, or any mention of interstate travel. Just pick a doctor at random who has offered this procedure in the past, pick a court in texas, file the paperwork with as little detail as you can muster. Keep it vague my homies. A clerical ddos is just about sending massive amounts of mail to places expecting to get very little mail. All those forms, filed in triplicate, created from mail merge databases, oh my. Here’s the guy who writes my sample briefs: (hit refresh a few times) Communications From Elsewhere
