Wayne Laugesen's Late-Term Lunacy Could Actually Be Dangerous

8 thoughts on “Wayne Laugesen’s Late-Term Lunacy Could Actually Be Dangerous”

1. You really haven't figured out yet that Wayne Laugesen just doesn't care?

   More could be coming. A recent issue of The Week magazine noted that all three candidates for the Republican nomination for attorney general in Michigan believe that banning birth control is a "states rights" issue. None of the three support the SCOTUS decision from 1965 that allowed married couples to obtain contraception, Griswold v. Connecticut.

   Log in to Reply

2. I see a lot of faux outrage but Pols doesn’t actually say how the Gazette is incorrect. If the law says postnatal “outcomes” can’t be questioned, doesn’t that mean an abortion could take place during the postnatal period?

   if the goal was just to put Roe into statute that’s one thing, but this bill seems to go much farther than that.

   Log in to Reply

   1. The legislation summary prepared by the nonpartisan staff says "The bill prohibits state and local public entities from:

      • Denying, restricting, interfering with, or discriminating against an individual's fundamental right to use or refuse contraception or to continue a pregnancy and give birth or to have an abortion in the regulation or provision of benefits, services, information, or facilities; and
      • Depriving, through prosecution, punishment, or other means, an individual of the individual's right to act or refrain from acting during the individual's own pregnancy based on the potential, actual, or perceived impact on the pregnancy, the pregnancy's outcomes, or on the pregnant individual's health.
        (Note: This summary applies to this bill as introduced.)

      If a mother consults with a medical professional and kills a child, existing statutes and penalties would apply.  If Laugesen, Moderatus, or state legislators want to explain specifically how the language is flawed, how it would grant some greater flexibility, I'm willing to read what they say. 

      But in the US as a whole, "In 2019, 79.3% of abortions were performed at ≤9 weeks’ gestation, and nearly all (92.7%) were performed at ≤13 weeks’ gestation." Very, very few are performed after what is the earliest sense of "viability" — abortions "at ≥21 weeks’ gestation (<1.0%)." 

      Log in to Reply

   2. Moderatus, I don't think that take is accurate. The bill as introduced states "the individual's right to act or refrain from acting DURING the individual's own pregnancy" before mentioning "potential, actual, or perceived impact" on… "the pregnancy's outcomes." I emphasized "during" as a key word, and Wayne did not mention the "during" part in his editorial. Birth ends pregnancy, and it seems to me that this section only addresses actions taken during pregnancy.

      But everyone can read the actual bill for themselves.

      Log in to Reply

   3. "Post-natal" means subsequent to birth. Abortions are performed prior to birth. So, there is no such thing as an abortion during the post-natal period.

       

      Log in to Reply

      1. When Republicans care as much about kids after birth as before, I’ll be impressed. Until then, not so much.

         Children in the United States are sicker and more likely to die as infants, and more likely to die from gunfire as young teens, compared to children from other wealthy countries. We’re right there with Somalia and El Salvador, when it comes to caring for  our young people. 

         Log in to Reply

   4. While it's true that infanticide was a key component of the "good old days" the GOP wants to bring back, the notion that 1279 legalizes the practice is straight up idiotic.

      If the law says postnatal “outcomes” can’t be questioned,

      It doesn't.

      doesn’t that mean an abortion could take place during the postnatal period?

      lol

      That's breathtakingly stupid even by your standards.

      if the goal was just to put Roe into statute that’s one thing, but this bill seems to go much farther than that.

      You have no idea whatsoever what the holding of Roe v. Wade was, what's happened to that holding in the intervening decades, or what 1279 actually says. Perhaps you should limit yourself to topics on which you have actual knowledge and experience, like kiddie porn.

      Log in to Reply

   5. "I see a lot of faux outrage"

      Moderatus is back. Did the Kremlin find a way to pay him under the table or is shilling pro bono?

      Log in to Reply