Ohio governor signs ban on abortion after 1st heartbeat

Quote:COLUMBUS, Ohio (AP) — A bill imposing one of the most stringent abortion restrictions in the nation was signed into law in Ohio on Thursday, banning abortions after a detectable heartbeat in a long-sought victory for abortion opponents that drew an immediate constitutional challenge.

In signing the heartbeat bill, Republican Gov. Mike DeWine broke with his predecessor, Republican John Kasich, who had vetoed the measure twice on grounds that it was clearly unconstitutional.

But DeWine defended Ohio Republicans' decision to push the boundaries of the law, because "it is the right thing to do."

"Taking this action really is a kind of a time-honored tradition, the constitutional tradition of making a good faith argument for modification or reversal of existing legal precedents," he said. "So that is what this is."

He said it's the government's job to protect the vulnerable.

Isn't that last line the mantra of the Left? Wanna bet they actually don't want to protect all vulnerable people?

(04-11-2019 11:15 PM)GoodOwl Wrote:  Ohio governor signs ban on abortion after 1st heartbeat

Quote:COLUMBUS, Ohio (AP) — A bill imposing one of the most stringent abortion restrictions in the nation was signed into law in Ohio on Thursday, banning abortions after a detectable heartbeat in a long-sought victory for abortion opponents that drew an immediate constitutional challenge.

In signing the heartbeat bill, Republican Gov. Mike DeWine broke with his predecessor, Republican John Kasich, who had vetoed the measure twice on grounds that it was clearly unconstitutional.

But DeWine defended Ohio Republicans' decision to push the boundaries of the law, because "it is the right thing to do."

"Taking this action really is a kind of a time-honored tradition, the constitutional tradition of making a good faith argument for modification or reversal of existing legal precedents," he said. "So that is what this is."

He said it's the government's job to protect the vulnerable.

Isn't that last line the mantra of the Left? Wanna bet they actually don't want to protect all vulnerable people?

THIS is going to SCOTUS, bet on it.

Ruling will be one of those watershed moments.

Quote:DeWine's action came a day after the latest version of the bill, which outlaws abortions once a fetal heartbeat is detected, cleared the Republican-controlled Legislature. Doctors say a fetal heartbeat can be detected using transvaginal ultrasound technology as early as five weeks into pregnancy, before many women know they are pregnant.

The embryo at 5-weeks is the size of an apple seed. IMO, a 5 week old embryo the size of an apple seed is not a person.

(04-12-2019 08:53 AM)BobcatEngineer Wrote:  

Quote:DeWine's action came a day after the latest version of the bill, which outlaws abortions once a fetal heartbeat is detected, cleared the Republican-controlled Legislature. Doctors say a fetal heartbeat can be detected using transvaginal ultrasound technology as early as five weeks into pregnancy, before many women know they are pregnant.

The embryo at 5-weeks is the size of an apple seed. IMO, a 5 week old embryo the size of an apple seed is not a person.

The struggle I have is understanding how at some seemingly arbitrary point of development, it suddenly becomes a person. At 20 weeks, not a person....20 weeks and 1 hour....1 second....it is? Working that backwards, I don't see how someone could separate the micro from the macro. Considering every human's development is unique, I don't know how you could reasonably put a definition on person-hood, aside from the point of creation of a unique genetic code.

(04-12-2019 08:53 AM)BobcatEngineer Wrote:  

Quote:DeWine's action came a day after the latest version of the bill, which outlaws abortions once a fetal heartbeat is detected, cleared the Republican-controlled Legislature. Doctors say a fetal heartbeat can be detected using transvaginal ultrasound technology as early as five weeks into pregnancy, before many women know they are pregnant.

The embryo at 5-weeks is the size of an apple seed. IMO, a 5 week old embryo the size of an apple seed is not a person.

So little people can be killed off? Are we allowed to go around purging the earth of midgets?

see y’all in court....

(04-12-2019 09:23 AM)UofMemphis Wrote:  see y’all in court....

Yep, that's where this is headed.

(04-12-2019 09:07 AM)ummechengr Wrote:  

(04-12-2019 08:53 AM)BobcatEngineer Wrote:  

Quote:DeWine's action came a day after the latest version of the bill, which outlaws abortions once a fetal heartbeat is detected, cleared the Republican-controlled Legislature. Doctors say a fetal heartbeat can be detected using transvaginal ultrasound technology as early as five weeks into pregnancy, before many women know they are pregnant.

The embryo at 5-weeks is the size of an apple seed. IMO, a 5 week old embryo the size of an apple seed is not a person.

The struggle I have is understanding how at some seemingly arbitrary point of development, it suddenly becomes a person. At 20 weeks, not a person....20 weeks and 1 hour....1 second....it is? Working that backwards, I don't see how someone could separate the micro from the macro. Considering every human's development is unique, I don't know how you could reasonably put a definition on person-hood, aside from the point of creation of a unique genetic code.

The laws are like that now.

Baby is premature and mother decides on an abortion = LEGAL

Baby is premature, mother gives birth then kills it = MURDER

Born on April 12, 1998 = Legal to drink

Born on April 12, 1998 but it's April 11 @ 11:59 PM = NOT legal to drink

Arbitrary points are all over the law.

First, this law already exists in other states, 6 others to be exact, and is pending in 11 others. Yes, there will be court challenges, but don't assume a conclusion on which way that will go considering our revamped SC.

Second, to say a 5 week old baby isn't a person because it's so small is akin to saying that a 30-year old dwarf isn't an adult because they are too small.

This bill, and the laws on the books in other states, are directly a result of the left continuously pushing to take things too far. Roe v Wade gave a woman the right to choose, within a reasonable time frame. It has been around for nearly 50 years and was under no threat of going away. This push to be able to kill a baby at any time up to delivery, and in some cases a little bit after, is going to produce a backlash and the potential loss of gains the baby killers had already made. It's the left's wheelhouse to never be satisfied with co-existence regardless of how many of them have that bumper sticker. They push and push to have it their way and their way only. I'm tired of an overly vocal minority thinking they can have whatever they want.

(04-12-2019 12:50 PM)banker Wrote:  First, this law already exists in other states, 6 others to be exact, and is pending in 11 others. Yes, there will be court challenges, but don't assume a conclusion on which way that will go considering our revamped SC.

Second, to say a 5 week old baby isn't a person because it's so small is akin to saying that a 30-year old dwarf isn't an adult because they are too small.

This bill, and the laws on the books in other states, are directly a result of the left continuously pushing to take things too far. Roe v Wade gave a woman the right to choose, within a reasonable time frame. It has been around for nearly 50 years and was under no threat of going away. This push to be able to kill a baby at any time up to delivery, and in some cases a little bit after, is going to produce a backlash and the potential loss of gains the baby killers had already made. It's the left's wheelhouse to never be satisfied with co-existence regardless of how many of them have that bumper sticker. They push and push to have it their way and their way only. I'm tired of an overly vocal minority thinking they can have whatever they want.

My concern is that this will trigger the Kevorkians like in Virginia and Vermont. I'd rather the focus be on changing minds, not laws.

(04-12-2019 01:47 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(04-12-2019 12:50 PM)banker Wrote:  First, this law already exists in other states, 6 others to be exact, and is pending in 11 others. Yes, there will be court challenges, but don't assume a conclusion on which way that will go considering our revamped SC.

Second, to say a 5 week old baby isn't a person because it's so small is akin to saying that a 30-year old dwarf isn't an adult because they are too small.

This bill, and the laws on the books in other states, are directly a result of the left continuously pushing to take things too far. Roe v Wade gave a woman the right to choose, within a reasonable time frame. It has been around for nearly 50 years and was under no threat of going away. This push to be able to kill a baby at any time up to delivery, and in some cases a little bit after, is going to produce a backlash and the potential loss of gains the baby killers had already made. It's the left's wheelhouse to never be satisfied with co-existence regardless of how many of them have that bumper sticker. They push and push to have it their way and their way only. I'm tired of an overly vocal minority thinking they can have whatever they want.

My concern is that this will trigger the Kevorkians like in Virginia and Vermont. I'd rather the focus be on changing minds, not laws.

Well, it will give a pretty clear choice on where to live by state depending on your beliefs. It's a shame that Virginia is being ruined by the growth of the DC metro.

(04-12-2019 09:07 AM)ummechengr Wrote:  

(04-12-2019 08:53 AM)BobcatEngineer Wrote:  

Quote:DeWine's action came a day after the latest version of the bill, which outlaws abortions once a fetal heartbeat is detected, cleared the Republican-controlled Legislature. Doctors say a fetal heartbeat can be detected using transvaginal ultrasound technology as early as five weeks into pregnancy, before many women know they are pregnant.

The embryo at 5-weeks is the size of an apple seed. IMO, a 5 week old embryo the size of an apple seed is not a person.

The struggle I have is understanding how at some seemingly arbitrary point of development, it suddenly becomes a person. At 20 weeks, not a person....20 weeks and 1 hour....1 second....it is? Working that backwards, I don't see how someone could separate the micro from the macro. Considering every human's development is unique, I don't know how you could reasonably put a definition on person-hood, aside from the point of creation of a unique genetic code.

Yup. And every one of us as babies certainly don't look the same as we do at 2 years old, at 3, at 7, at 15, at 21, at 25, at 30, at 45, at 56, at 67, at 79, etc... The arbitrary point picking is problematic at beast, illogical at worst. Each person has a completely separate and unique set of DNA and chromosomes at the moment of conception. THAT never changes throughout a person's life, not at Conception+1 hour, C+1day, C+5 weeks, C+ 6months, Birth, 2, 5, 39, 52, hut hut, etc....If we focus on the things that DON'T change, we have our answer that a person is created at the moment of conception. Many people don't want this for the selfish reason that they don't want to be responsible for their own actions (the decision to engage in sexual relations, whereby a byproduct of that activity might include the conception of a unique person that is their responsibility.

The "Choice" that is truly desired by those who frame the issue in that way is the woman's (AND the man's) choice not to have any responsibility for their action s, which is a complete fallacy repudiated in just about any and every area of law, except for this one.

You want choice...take responsibility for YOUR actions and don't kill someone just because you consider that you "made a mistake." There is no crying in baseball...there are no mulligans in sex.