What is?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Apparently she did since the state doesn't have a **** exception. I'm sure the AG, who should be the expert on the matter, would have brought up that she didn't need to leave the state if there was evidence her life was endangered. I agree her emotional and mental well being were endangered, but everything I've read states that Ohio law says her life must be in jeopardy.

Here's the problem with the pro-life crowd. They just can't admit when they're wrong. Of course there should be fuccing exceptions for **** and ****** but they won't admit it. Texas's civil enforcement of an abortion ban is so wrought with issues that clearly Texas should walk that back in light of Roe v Wade being overturned, but the won't. Colorado is going to become an abortion safe haven and we all know every one of her sister states will sue her and we know arrest warrants will be issued for Colorado docs who perform abortions for out of staters. So much for states rights

Here's a pretty good recap of the whole story...even without a **** exception and the 6 week ban...she would've qualified under the risk of health...
 

Here's a pretty good recap of the whole story...even without a **** exception and the 6 week ban...she would've qualified under the risk of health...
The Attorney General claimed she would have qualified. Did a physician confirm this?
Is the Attorney General medically licensed and did he perform an evaluation of the girl?
 
The Attorney General claimed she would have qualified. Did a physician confirm this?
Is the Attorney General medically licensed and did he perform an evaluation of the girl?
Ythe attorney General enforces the law...so pretty sure he knew the exceptions...and five minutes of googling will inform anybody how serious the risks are for a 10yo giving birth...had the referring doc done right by hjs/her patient and researched the exceptions instead of passing the Buck by referring the girl out of state...
 
Ythe attorney General enforces the law...so pretty sure he knew the exceptions...and five minutes of googling will inform anybody how serious the risks are for a 10yo giving birth...had the referring doc done right by hjs/her patient and researched the exceptions instead of passing the Buck by referring the girl out of state...
Law enforcement does not make medical evaluations or decisions.
A doctor wouldn’t know she would meet a medical exception, but the AG would?
Try again.
 
Law enforcement does not make medical evaluations or decisions.
A doctor wouldn’t know she would meet a medical exception, but the AG would?
Try again.
A doctor isn't a law expert...but you say they're experts on it...the ag is a law expert but you he doesn't know the exceptions...
 
No it really hasn't...the nih definition of gain of function changed right after that...and nowhere in that article references rand Paul in any way it was a letter to a representative from the night that is focus of the article...just shows you're a headline pundit...
 
A doctor isn't a law expert...but you say they're experts on it...the ag is a law expert but you he doesn't know the exceptions...
A medical professional determines whether someone will be at risk of health by a pregnancy, not an Attorney General.
Does the Attorney General review your x-rays, or a doctor? Does the AG determine whether someone is eligible for SSDI, or a medical professional?
 
Actually in court a Judge decides if you are eligible for SSD and SSDI. While the doctors can write notes saying this or that i.e recommending it to the court the final say is in a Judges hands. I know I was in said court for this in 2007. I was approved on the spot which is a rarity. Even the District Attorney for the Government who of course is there to fight any such thing was shocked. And said afterwords I had the most convincing case he had ever seen as we brought at least 6 or 7 3 ring binders each about 8 inches thick including tons of doctors notes, surgeries and letters from multiple facilities backing up all of my issues.
 
“Vaccine-induced AIDS”? What is your source? How exactly does the COVID vaccine cause AIDS?
Is Senator Johnson your source?
In interview, Sen. Johnson says it ‘may be true’ that COVID vaccines cause AIDS
BY: HENRY REDMAN - MAY 3, 2022 2:56 PM

The claim is conspiracy fantasy: https://www.reuters.com/article/fac...ccines-do-not-cause-hiv-or-aids-idUSL1N2UW10H

The body has longer memory of the vaccine than a natural immunity does, but you want natural immunity why?
How many deaths are acceptable until we build this natural immunity?
You fought against my greater good examples in the past, but it now seems you want to kill millions for the “greater good” of not using a vaccine that is tested and safe.

Please reconcile this contradiction.

WE aren’t building a vaccinated shit with MY body. The vaccine does have a long memory with the body, but that doesn’t include immunity from covid. Good job building unnatural immunity, because it’s working out great 🤡
 
This is claimed by Rand Paul, but the claims have been disproved.
No it really hasn't...the nih definition of gain of function changed right after that...and nowhere in that article references rand Paul in any way it was a letter to a representative from the night that is focus of the article...just shows you're a headline pundit...
Says the “headline pundit” linking to the right-wing Washington Examiner.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Activity
No one is currently typing a reply...

About this thread

Clifff150

10+ year member
Senior VIP Member
Thread starter
Clifff150
Joined
Location
Texas
Start date
Participants
Who Replied
Replies
19,273
Views
812,725
Last reply date
Last reply from
administrator
IMG_20260516_193114554_HDR.jpg

sherbanater

    May 16, 2026
  • 0
  • 0
IMG_20260516_192955471_HDR.jpg

sherbanater

    May 16, 2026
  • 0
  • 0

New threads

Top