the ends justify the means. ending abortions is so monomaniacally vital that any tactics are valid. lying, needless medical procedures, and if need be, murder.

the GOP has to pay the RTLers off now, or they might start listening to Jim Wallis.

You have it exactly correct. Most women want to be able to not only bear children but to care for them.

If only it were as simple as the anti-choicers believe. "Choose life," ha! More like, "Choose poverty."

Some abortions are for medical reasons, either a problem with the mother or the fetus. Interfering with those is nothing short of a criminal act on the part of these zealots. The vast majority of the rest are for economic reasons.

In a country where right-wingers oppose any form of social welfare, early childhood education, publicly-provided daycare, subsidized healthcare, raising the minimum wage, and every fucking other thing that would make life more bearable for people with children, and at the same time stress independence and self-reliance, how the fuck can they even propose laws forcing or coercing women to bear children they can't afford?

If you're looking for proof there is no Biblical God, here it is, right there. Because if there were, they'd be burning in Hell right this second, do not pass Go, do not collect $200.

I totally agree with everything you've said, but one quibble: I don't think "around 60 percent" qualifies as "most." to hit that threshold, I should think you'd need at least 75%.

60% is known as a "solid majority."

So Texas wants to sink it's economy in poverty now? At the expense of women's lives. Great.

Any way we can set up some sort of escape fund? Or underground railroad to get those women out of there?

As horrifying as this situation is, I do appreciate that these people are doing whatever they can to drown out the doctor's own voice, because everyone in the room knows that it's a thoroughly bullshit law.

And, when Texas comes to the federal government wanting money - since welfare and medicate or ensuring there are enough foster parents for all those children that their reluctant parents (mothers) couldn't afford to look after isn't going to be cheap....

I hope the government says no. You can't create a clusterfuck because of bad policies, and then expect someone else to fix it for you.

@8: That is exactly the point. People on the religious right want to force women to carry to parturition and then stick them with the bill. We say that if they're so keen on preventing abortions, they should put a little money into helping women avoid unwanted pregnancies and properly raise their little urchins.

Maybe women should reconsider being "religiously affiliated" since religion seems to be doing them and their families a great deal of harm.

What we need are mandatory abortions for any woman who has not proven:

1) That she is of sound mind to be a mother

2) That she has in escrow at least $2 million dollars set aside for each and every child in a trust

@8 You should read @9's message very carefully, for he is explaining to you that your position is the very definition of "unfunded mandate." Your side supposedly doesn't like "unfunded mandates," right? Also, what about this "liberty" you're always speaking of? How come women can't have the liberty to make their own reproductive decisions? Your side is so completely inconsistent and hypocritical, you have no right to share our oxygen. There's a particularly sulphurous circle of Hell all you holier-than-thou hypocrites belong in. Right now.

Dumbest troll ever?

@6 So apparently women who choose to terminate a pregnancy based on a Maternal Serum Screen or amniocentesis for chromosomal abnormalities are SOL in France?

Quelle horreur!