We’re talking federal government money here. Buy a building near the hospital, legally make it a consulate, and provide federal troops to protect it.
Fuck these assholes; it’s beyond time to stop treating them with kid gloves.
We’re talking federal government money here. Buy a building near the hospital, legally make it a consulate, and provide federal troops to protect it.
Fuck these assholes; it’s beyond time to stop treating them with kid gloves.
It will be on the generation that gets to grow up watching their mothers die needlessly to fix this most likely. Everyone alive today has already failed us. But it’s a great time to be a child rapist so there is a silver lining I guess.
Where is the “puke” emoji response??
Better not have an ectopic pregnancy! Probably use that to go after Plan B, IUDs, BCPs. The fact that they don’t cause abortions is immaterial, because they think they might, which is good enough in hteir world.
ETA: Holy shit, it’ worse than I thought.
Rep Yarbrough’s measure also states that a pregnant person can be prosecuted if they “intentionally” or “recklessly” placed themselves in a “situation in which it was probable” that they would be “subject to duress”.
“You had a miscarriage? Well, you went to work! That make it your fault!”
And yet they also want to get rid of no-fault divorce.
The number one cause of death to pregnant women in the U.S. is being killed by the men in their lives. That’s a little stressful to live with.
So Alabama’s really going to vote on whether a pregnant person should go to jail for murder if they don’t produce a live birth. https://legislature.state.al.us/pdf/SearchableInstruments/2023RS/HB454-int.pdf… But hey! The pregnant person can’t be prosecuted over miscarriage due to physical or sexual assault from a partner. Generous.
So, there’s that? I guess?
Woah.
Montana supreme court, in a unanimous decision
Article II, Section 10, of the Montana Constitution guarantees a woman a fundamental right of privacy to seek abortion care from a qualified healthcare provider of her choosing, absent a clear demonstration of a medically acknowledged, bona fide health risk.
I’m so very confused.
Why?
It isn’t the usual awfulness that gets posted here. But this thread could use some good news and it’s topical.
Because it’s Montana. Good news obviously, but not what one would expect. I’m not gonna look a gift horse in the mouth, though.
Yeah. It’s pretty damned amazing the court came out with something that explicit. Not what I expected from Montana, but I freely admit I’m not that informed on the state of their supreme court. Part of me thinks it was unanimous because the governor dared to sign a bill restricting the interpretation of the state constitution. That’s some serious overstepping into judicial territory
I mean, driving a car is dangerous. Walking alone on the street, for women, carries way more risk than for men. The list is endless.
Montana is more purple than people give it credit for. Since 1980, there have been more Dem governors than Republicans and the current senate delegation is mixed.
They hurt her as much as they could. Assholes.
As we all knew, the GOP would never stop with overturning Roe in America. We’ve heard they’re coming for interracial marriage next.
You know what else they’re coming for? No-fault divorce. This is a much bigger deal than I realized and the wheels are already turning on it. Rebecca Watson has a great breakdown/explainer: