• Welcome to Christian Forums
  1. Welcome to Christian Forums, a forum to discuss Christianity in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to be able to join in fellowship with Christians all over the world.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

  2. The forums in the Christian Congregations category are now open only to Christian members. Please review our current Faith Groups list for information on which faith groups are considered to be Christian faiths. Christian members please remember to read the Statement of Purpose threads for each forum within Christian Congregations before posting in the forum.
  3. Please note there is a new rule regarding the posting of videos. It reads, "Post a summary of the videos you post . An exception can be made for music videos.". Unless you are simply sharing music, please post a summary, or the gist, of the video you wish to share.
  4. There have been some changes in the Life Stages section involving the following forums: Roaring 20s, Terrific Thirties, Fabulous Forties, and Golden Eagles. They are changed to Gen Z, Millennials, Gen X, and Golden Eagles will have a slight change.
  5. CF Staff, Angels and Ambassadors; ask that you join us in praying for the world in this difficult time, asking our Holy Father to stop the spread of the virus, and for healing of all affected.
  6. We are no longer allowing posts or threads that deny the existence of Covid-19. Members have lost loved ones to this virus and are grieving. As a Christian site, we do not need to add to the pain of the loss by allowing posts that deny the existence of the virus that killed their loved one. Future post denying the Covid-19 existence, calling it a hoax, will be addressed via the warning system.

The Texas Abortion Decision Is Bad For Everyone ( This is not abortion debate)

Discussion in 'General Politics' started by Paradox.79, Sep 14, 2021.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Paradox.79

    Paradox.79 Member

    143
    +48
    United States
    Non-Denom
    Single
    This is not debating abortion this debating the way this law was put into place

     
    Last edited: Sep 14, 2021
    We teamed up with Faith Counseling. Can they help you today?
  2. Paradox.79

    Paradox.79 Member

    143
    +48
    United States
    Non-Denom
    Single
    Something I have seen repeatedly buy certain political groups is the complete destruction of the constitution. If Trump had pulled of his stunt during the election...I believe Mike Pence would have been hanged. I believe Donald Trump would have crowned himself King of America
     
  3. Sketcher

    Sketcher Born Imperishable

    +7,908
    Non-Denom
    Single
    US-Republican
    My understanding of this law is that it enables women to sue abortion providers if the abortion took place after six months of fetal development.

    Seems to me that many such cases would rely on retroactively withdrawing consent after the deed is done.

    This principle has been noted as legitimate by feminist voices in other situations. Specifically, when women seem to retroactively withdraw consent to a sexual encounter, that consent is assumed to have never really been there because coercion and abuse can bully a woman into just going along with it. Now, with abortion, there are many abortions that are not the woman's choice - she's strongarmed into it by an abusive parent or partner. Or, perhaps it was her choice but the clinic itself was shadier than she anticipated and made the experience traumatic for her. Those are cases of abuse too. When there's abuse, why shouldn't a woman be able to sue?
     
  4. Oompa Loompa

    Oompa Loompa Against both police brutality and cop killing.

    +1,190
    United States
    Christian
    Married
    The law is good for the unborn who now have a chance to live.
     
  5. Oompa Loompa

    Oompa Loompa Against both police brutality and cop killing.

    +1,190
    United States
    Christian
    Married
    The law is good for the unborn who now have a chance to live.
     
  6. Paradox.79

    Paradox.79 Member

    143
    +48
    United States
    Non-Denom
    Single
    Yeah except it does not take into account the various legitimate reason for a abortion. There are medical reason, ignore rape and incest if you want. There are woman who can not carry to term. The point of the law is it circumvents the constitution. Its like what Trump did...only and fool denies he was not trying for a coup. When the majority of people support a law, a smaller group tries to use dirty trick to overturn the law...that little bit closer from us being a democracy and turning into a dictatorship. Its cheap stunt and it can be used in other ways not involving abortion.
     
  7. Paradox.79

    Paradox.79 Member

    143
    +48
    United States
    Non-Denom
    Single
    Your right to agree...but ignore rape and incest, there are legitimate medical reasons for one...the fetus is not viable...the mother can not carry without dying, and many Christians especially in Texas it seem does not want to acknowledge that. And the thing is that law could be used in other ways...republicans and democrats seem have no problem destroying our constitution to get there agenda about. Only a food does not think Trump was not trying to pull of a coup. More than one person said trump would have gotten a bullet if he had managed it.
     
  8. hedrick

    hedrick Senior Veteran Supporter

    +9,167
    Presbyterian
    Single
    The problem I see is that anyone can sue, so one abortion could result in 300,000,000 cases. Normally you can only sue if you are involved, which limits things, but this law abolishes that kind of limitation. It also eliminates the ability to get attorney fees if you are found not responsible. So you could bankrupt someone you don’t like, as long as someone is prepared to fund the prosecution. Imagine Colorado passing such a law for failing to serve LGBT customers. This invites using the law for persecution. If it passes constitutional review, there’s no reason to think it will be limited to abortion or to conservative states.
     
    • Informative Informative x 2
    • Agree Agree x 1
    • List
  9. SkyWriting

    SkyWriting The Librarian Supporter

    +7,172
    United States
    Non-Denom
    Married
    US-Others
    It is likely to not stand time well.
     
  10. hedrick

    hedrick Senior Veteran Supporter

    +9,167
    Presbyterian
    Single
    My thought is someone needs to get together a group of people to sue Gov Abbott 1000 times. I’d be willing to pay for one. I believe anyone in the US can file one of these suits.

    Actually not Abbott. He would have the State represent him. Pick a pastor who is opposed to sex education and sue him for encouraging abortion. The law also prohibits picking a forum convenient to the defendant so you'd distribute the suits across every county in Texas.
     
  11. SkyWriting

    SkyWriting The Librarian Supporter

    +7,172
    United States
    Non-Denom
    Married
    US-Others
    It's just a fact that such drastic changes don't hold up well. It's just a nonpartisan fact. It may be possible for one village to implement such changes and I encourage villages to push the limits as far as they legally can, even if I don't agree with the changes.
     
  12. hedrick

    hedrick Senior Veteran Supporter

    +9,167
    Presbyterian
    Single
    I think we're at the point where some state legislatures and courts are unwilling to be reasonable. I'm not as optimistic as you are. The US Supreme Court is now originalist. Unless the text of the constitution prohibits this kind of abuse they're OK with it. Since nobody thought of it before, there's no expllcit prohibition.

    I think the only way to stop it would be to use it for obviously abusive purposes such as I suggest. However if the court system is sufficiently biased, they will throw out harassment except for unpopular victims.
     
  13. Paradox.79

    Paradox.79 Member

    143
    +48
    United States
    Non-Denom
    Single
    Ive seen both republican and democrat abuse the constitution. But I see a willingness to ignore the constitution to get a agenda across from extremist republican's ( and I am not saying all republicans) that are just as dangerous as extremist democrat both seem to be willing to turn our country into a dictatorship to get there agenda across.
     
  14. hedrick

    hedrick Senior Veteran Supporter

    +9,167
    Presbyterian
    Single
    I should note that I consistently voted Republican until the last few elections. My problem is that the extreme you refer to has taken over the party.
     
  15. Sketcher

    Sketcher Born Imperishable

    +7,908
    Non-Denom
    Single
    US-Republican
    What I'm talking about is the right to sue based on retroactively withdrawn consent. This basis is used to bring criminal complaints after questionable sexual encounters, and defended by feminists when that happens. Yet, this same basis is somehow horrible when it's suing abortion providers all of a sudden? Even though abuse of women does happen at abortion clinics?
    How does this law destroy the Constitution? As a lover of the Constitution myself, I legitimately want to know.
     
  16. tz620q

    tz620q Regular Member Supporter

    +803
    Catholic
    Married
    US-Republican
    If you read the wording of the law, you will see that there is an exception if the doctor deemed the woman's health at risk.
     
  17. Arcangl86

    Arcangl86 Newbie

    +5,153
    Anglican
    Single
    US-Green
    Sure there is. The SCOTUS would find some way to say "This law is different!" if a similar law is passed involving something else.
     
  18. JimR-OCDS

    JimR-OCDS God Cannot Be Grasped, Except Through Love

    +2,166
    United States
    Catholic
    Married
    No because it puts obstetricians out of helping women have babies as they'll face
    frivolous lawsuits from every self-righteous person who misunderstands what took
    place in the delivery room.
     
  19. Brihaha

    Brihaha Active Member

    309
    +341
    United States
    Christian
    Single
    Rooster Cogburn is readying his posse now!
    Haha. Just kidding, tho it ain't far from true. I don't think our Supreme Court ruled on the merits of the law. They simply declined to enforce a stay on implementation.
     
  20. Paradox.79

    Paradox.79 Member

    143
    +48
    United States
    Non-Denom
    Single
    Yes and it still be can abused...all it takes is someone to use that law to attack someone they do not like. How long till someone is ticked at there neighbor or ex and uses that law. As the defendant in the trial you have pay all the fines and lawyer bills if you lose...if you win you still have to pay the lawyer fees which can go into the thousands. What happens when they make another law based after it to go after another issue they have a problem with.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
Loading...