Completely independent of the baby having rights or not it is obviously endangering someone if they do not let them leave to see a doctor when the person has pain.
this post was submitted on 12 Aug 2023
324 points (97.9% liked)
politics
19144 readers
2663 users here now
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
Yeah. This struck me as depraved and insane that an employee could not leave work for more than 2 hours for medical reasons. How completely bozotic.
Probably so understaffed to cut costs that her leaving would leave the prisoners unsupervised. Mammon rejoices.
If she's having a medical emergency, is she capable of supervising the prisoners? Seems to me like they were unsupervised whether she was there or not.
Exactly. Swap out the pregnant woman having pains with a man having a possible heart attack. Saying "sorry, but you can't leave for to go to the hospital for at least 2 hours" would be a massive violation of that worker's civil rights and would open the employer to a huge lawsuit.
Of course, the added "fetus' rights" element just exposes the hypocrisy of the Texas government. When it benefits them, every fetus is a full blown person and doing anything that could hurt said fetus is murder. However, when it doesn't benefit them, then the fetus has no rights and contributing to its death should have no legal repercussions whatsoever.
They don't actually give a shit as long as there is an ass in a chair and a stamp in the logs. Unless something goes wrong, then it would have been her fault.
Aka literally any security, police, EMS, or really any first responder work.
Too fucking right.
The takeaway is that being pro-life is a very profitable enterprise until it isn’t, then it’s just another liability to the bottom line that needs to be stripped away. This is what it looks like to serve greed
I honestly hope they’re too far up their own asses to realize its a liability yet. If they consider it profitable into next years election cycle, and the trend of the last few special elections holds, then having them double down could really benefit the democrats.
Then, maybe the US could get the majority required to enshrine abortion rights into law nationally and put an end to this nonsense.
I acknowledge this could all just be wishful thinking, however.
Only if we got the lazy 1/3rd of the country to vote that refuses to
I don't think its fair to characterize itcall as laziness. I wanted to vote in my state's Supreme Court election, but the booth was in a megachurch; not super workable for me as a trans woman.
Thankfully, Wisconsin's court flipped anyway.
This is what it looks like to serve greed
I disagree only slightly. This is what it looks like to control women's bodies and deny any sense of agency.
Doctors tend not to believe women when they are in pain, or what they experience in their own bodies. This is even worse for black women, which is why more black women die during or after childbirth. Even Serena Williams almost died after giving birth because the doctors didn't believe her.
Personally I don’t see a difference. Controlling women’s bodies and denying them free agency causes financial strain and keeps the funnel of resources flowing in one direction. Any moral justification or religious zealotry is just part of the act used to sell this idea to the small brained and weak willed, lining pockets is the real endgame. How women are treated by doctors is simply a symptom of the system.
Imo the baby isn't really important here. It's the fact that she wasn't allowed to leave after experiencing abnormal pain while pregnant! We should be taking so much better care of pregnant people.
Hypocrisy is pretty on brand for Republicans.
More proof that the anti-abortion movement is about controlling women, not about being "pro-life".
I wish I could say I’m surprised.
To the right, the “rights of a fetus” are only relevant when its convenient to their agenda. Otherwise, they don’t exist. They’ll shamelessly use whatever arguments are in their arsenal to achieve their version of reality. Consistency and hypocrisy be damned.
Remarkably consistent.
"We control your body, you don't. Need an abortion? Too bad. Need to see a doctor? Too bad. Pregnant with abnormal pain? Too bad. Need childcare? Too bad."
GOP is so remarkably despicable
Where's the pro-life crowd at?
Not on the internet with all them filthy libs.
they're not with the filthy liberal Jesus and his weak-ass "turn the other cheek" either.
We're jumping back in the big Old Testament pile bois! They terk er fascism!!! Terturkerterfs!!!
As a Jew, I can attest that they don't like the Old Treatment either. Too much "don't eat bacon" and "don't worship a golden calf." Not enough "worship the rich, especially those who art named Trump."
Now the Revised (with gold sharpie) Old Testament... that they'll follow.
This is the best summary I could come up with:
The argument from the Texas attorney general’s office appears to be in tension with positions it has previously taken in defending abortion restrictions, contending all the way up to the U.S. Supreme Court that “unborn children” should be recognized as people with legal rights.
“Just because several statutes define an individual to include an unborn child does not mean that the Fourteenth Amendment does the same,” they wrote in legal filing that noted that the guard lost her baby before the U.S. Supreme Court overturned the federal right to an abortion established under its landmark Roe v. Wade decision.
That claim came in response to a federal lawsuit brought last year by Salia Issa, who alleges that hospital staff told her they could have saved her baby had she arrived sooner.
While working at the prison, Issa began feeling pains “similar to a contraction” but when she asked to be relived from her post to go to the hospital her supervisors refused and accused her of lying, according to the complaint she filed along with her husband.
Issa, whose suit was first reported by The Texas Tribune, is seeking monetary damages to cover her medical bills, pain and suffering, and other things, including the funeral expenses of the unborn child.
Laura Hermer, a professor at the Mitchell Hamline School of Law in St. Paul, Minnesota, described Texas’ legal posture as “seeking to have their cake and eat it too.”
I'm a bot and I'm open source!
So, they’re hypocrites. Yeah. Seems on brand. It’s either a person and has rights or it’s not. I wish someone would/could bring criminal charges against the supervisors for murder.
Sounds like she was more a prisoner than the actual prisoners. Denied access to health care seems so wrong, and to be told she was lying on top of it all.
The throughline here is that Texas will take whatever position most hurts the powerless.
There's a slightly different line: whatever position hurts women.
why the hell is everyone so focused on the fetus' rights when it was the mother's rights that were denied?
Or is everyone assuming the mother just didn't have any rights?
As far as I can tell it’s more about the state wanting to have it both ways. They want to be a champion of the unborn while denying the fetus was a person because of it happening before Dobbs.
The “pro-life” superposition stance: a fetus is both simultaneously a person and not a person depending on which position reduces a woman’s power over her life and health.
I wish I was more surprised pikachu face.
Unfortunately this seems pretty on brand, and very much celebrated collectively by the people of Texas.
No, no, no, see the fetus only has rights when it's convenient for those in charge.