SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
Iowa approves one of strictest abortion bills in US
The US state of Iowa has approved one of the most restrictive abortion laws in the country, banning most abortions once a foetal heartbeat is detected. Republican lawmakers, who control both chambers, passed the bill in back-to-back votes, sending it to the governor's desk to sign into law.
If [signed], the bill would ban most abortions after six weeks of pregnancy. Critics argue the bill makes having an abortion illegal before most women even realise they are pregnant.
[...] If [Governor Kim] Reynolds signs the bill into law, it will likely be challenged in court for possibly violating Roe v Wade, the US Supreme Court ruling that legalized abortion in 1973. [...] Some Republican lawmakers welcomed the challenge. "I would love for the United States Supreme Court to look at this bill and have this as a vehicle to overturn Roe v. Wade," Republican Senator Jake Chapman said.
Also at NPR, Reuters, the Waterloo-Cedar Falls Courier, and The Hill:
Nineteen states adopted a total of 63 restrictions to the procedure in 2017, which is the highest number of state laws on the issue since 2013, according to the Guttmacher Institute. State legislatures have proposed 15 bills that would ban abortions after 20 weeks and 11 bills that would ban abortions if the sole reason is a genetic anomaly like Down syndrome.
Related: Ohio Bill Would Ban Abortion when a Prenatal Test is Positive for Down Syndrome
These 9 Places in America Will Pay You to Move There
(Score: 1, Offtopic) by Runaway1956 on Friday May 04 2018, @04:27PM (1 child)
Given my feelings, tax money should never be used to pay for an abortion UNLESS something like the mother's life is in danger. And, given that many other Americans feel the same way, that should be the law.
Neither you nor I have the right to tell a woman that she can not ever abort a child. But, that woman doesn't have the right to demand that we pay for her abortion, unless she is willing to justify the abortion, and our responsibility in regards to funding her abortion.
When someone comes to you, in person, asking for money, do you, or do you not, want to know WHY that person needs money?
"To save my life" seems reasonably legit - I may well hand money over. I'll want some details, but that seems a legit reason to hand over cash money.
"Because I'm not mature enough to handle my own problems" seems a lot less legit. I may not be willing to hand any money over.
Roe vs Wade didn't establish that women may demand an abortion at any time, for any reason. It ONLY established that women might have a right to abort. Roe vs Wade didn't address funding at all. It doesn't even hint at taxpayers funding abortion on demand.
Long story short - you need to back up and reconsider the demands made upon you and I as taxpayers, in the name of some imaginary rights that you seem to have defined very poorly.
(Score: 3, Informative) by NotSanguine on Friday May 04 2018, @07:30PM
The above is the TFS, copied here for your reference. What does your off-topic rant about tax money, especially given that the Hyde Amendment [wikipedia.org] (sadly, IMHO) prohibits the use of federal funds for abortions, and has done so for more than 20 years (since 1997) have to do with this new Iowa law?
Regardless, your blather has zero to do with the topic at hand. You have no right to decide what other people do with their bodies. If you don't like how your state and local governments handle funding for health services, that's between you and your elected officials.
tl;dr: Mind your own fucking business. If you don't like how your tax money is spent, I suggest you start a tax revolt. Perhaps they'll let you post to SN from prison.
No, no, you're not thinking; you're just being logical. --Niels Bohr