Civil War-era abortion ban?
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 2 май 2024
- The Arizona state Senate voted to repeal a Civil War-era ban on nearly all abortions that - because of procedural hurdles - remains on track to temporarily take effect in June.
Приколы
Приколы
Bet she expensed that gavel.
if not I'll donate the 20$ for it 😂
And the pens
And the notebooks
I was just about to comment!! 😂
But I bet she hasn't expensed a bulletin board
American politics are a never ending mess, lol
thaaaaat's politics
If you liked this, you'll LOVE South Korean politics!
If Arizonans wanted a law in place, they could have voted for politicians who wanted a law in 2022. You get what you vote for.
All politics are messy, it’s by nature groups of people arguing for different things. American politics are just the most wildly broadcasted to every single corner of the world.
No, abortion was handled incorrectly. Each state has to make it legal before the feds should have an opinion about it. The legality of marijuana is being handled better then abortion.
Don't forget Arizona was still a territory when that ban was enacted.
What’s the relevance of that?
@@chavvy9074it speaks to how archaic it is, plus it’s a law that was never actually written under a recognized state in the union.
@@alexandrac6177 “it speaks to how archaic it is” that’s the same year that the 13th amendment was passed. Old does not mean bad.
“Plus it’s a law that was never actually written under recognized state in the union” yes, why does that matter? Do you think there’s a system reset of a territory when it become a state? All of our legal systems predate America.
And don't forget women could not vote back then so it piles up on the stupidity of the law
@@chavvy9074the only bit that predates American is the judicial system which was copied from British one but edited to work better in a democracy.And 13 overturned bunch of older and more wicked laws and was a national things, compared to it's siblings of state laws it fits in along the black codes
How many matching color sets of notebooks and pens does she have?
I need to know where the pens are from!
@@PolarBearChoujin2470idk where this creator got them specifically, maybe a multipack from Amazon, but if you just want one I’ve seen them at Popshelf & 5 Below, and Claire’s, sometimes Target.
I think she expensed them from a company called "Chroma Key", but don't quote me on this
I am going to blow your mind. What if she only has one notebook of every color?
Are the colours edited in?
Washington Post - We're a newspaper
America - We're an experiment
We are though lol
That is owned by Bezos, dont forget that part.
@@roscoejones374which one is owned by who?
@@jetpackjbd The Washington Post is owned by Nash Holdings, a private company founded by Jeff Bezos, the founder of Amazon.
Making the term newspaper questionable.
@@jetpackjbdhonestly in a way of speaking...both are owned by Bezos
If TRUMP says your going to far, I don’t even have a metaphor for this
A politician who bases decisions on getting elected rather than on principle can be likened to a weathervane, constantly spinning in response to the slightest breeze. Just as the weathervane shifts its direction with each changing wind, this politician alters positions and policies to align with the prevailing public opinion, seeking approval rather than standing firm on a consistent set of values.
Trump only said that cause he knew that would get him more votes. He would sign a national abortion ban if it came to his desk
Trump telling someone they're being too restrictive on abortion is the metaphor
@@shashi43526 ah ok
He only said that because conservative women voters started to freak out. The only reason that law resurfaced was because Trump said "states' rights".
Guh 16-14
14 people thought "yeah, civil war era total ban" was a good idea
Really starting to show you how far back they want to go to "make america great again"
Yeah, let’s bring back _that_ era of American history, it was famously _very_ fun for everyone involved
16 people choose that it was a mothers right to terminate the child growing inside her. That sounds medieval to me.
@@Bibbo8844hdbks14 people said that she cant get an abortion even if she was raped or giving birth would kill her
Make America have a civil war again???
@@Bibbo8844hdbks Hey can you genuinely explain to me your POV and beliefs when it comes to being pro life? I'm trying my best to understand all sides equally in life. I ask because everything I see online is refuting claims or being defensive/angry instead of just explaining their beliefs. Don't worry about "proving" your side, I just want to learn 😊
You know what’s more surprising? That there was an abortion law back then. I don’t think I wanna know how they went about abortions…
Mercury usually sometimes they poked it with a stick
Do you wanna know how they go about them now? Using pincers to tear the victim's limbs one by one?
@@HighAdmiralactually the vast majority of abortions nowadays are done using a pill within the 1st 10 weeks. The surgical abortions you're referring to usually only happen when things have already gone very wrong. Like if there are fatal fetal abnormalities or a miscarriage. There are only a handful of states that allow abortion after viability (~23 weeks), most of the time for the aforementioned complications. Later term abortions like you described are pretty uncommon.
I hope that makes you feel a little better about how things are.
@@sophiedowney1077 That doesn't really make me feel better, no, although I thank you for the elaboration. A less gruesome method of committing murder is still a method of committing murder. It's just less graphic.
@@HighAdmiral It's not murder to stop letting someone use your body.
So, the state where I grew up, Utah, actually had most of its territorial laws repealed when it became a state, such as allowing women to vote. How is it that the Arizona territory and Arizona the state are not two separate legal entities, and therefore don't necessarily have the same laws?
Because that’s the prerogative of the state and they just decided not to repeal all of their prior laws whereas Utah did.
@@chavvy9074 isn't it crazy how states are allowed to make their own laws and govern themselves. Man, it's almost like the country was set up like that. Something about the fed not being too powerful or something...
@@maybe_try_thinking_insteadyea, but there needs to be a balance. Because we are a UNIFIED country, we need to have some UNIFIED baseline laws, for many reasons. Not to mention, the structure of the country has changed from the inception. Originally, we were, essentially, the EU with each state essentially being independent countries with a shared set of rules and intrests. However, this means that states could, theoretically, come AND go (like brexit). That chabged with the civil war, where the structure changed to be more like canada (with the states acting like territories but still part of a singular country). Of course, this was necessary as a way to prevent the states from being cannibalized by Europe. So...things change.
@jangelaclough5457 pretty sure that's the exact opposite of what the founding fathers wanted. It HAS changed from their idea. It's time we went back to it...
The US isn't Europe. It will never be. There is nothing to compare the US with, that point is moot...
@@maybe_try_thinking_instead why are you saying this to me when I LITERALLY just said that.
The age of consent in Arizona in 1864 was 10 years old
Im sorry it was
How meny years old?
That is part of the law that Democrats wanted to be put back in.
The leopards-eating-faces party when leopards start eating faces:
Crazy how a law from 1864 included a provision to save a mothers life but some states do not have that provision in 2024
What states?
@@EnglishMemorial Texas.
@HituraRael Except not Texas. Exceptions for health of the mother are described in section 171.205.
The thing about ppl who are anti abortion is that they REALLY care about the babys untill they are born
IF free education is good
IF theres free and good healthcare
IF orphanages are good and
IF wages are livable
Then abortions should be banned any times before that is barberic
@user-yo5lr5jy2e That's just not true. Christians are far more giving of their time and money to charitable causes, and obviously there's a huge overlap with the pro-life crowd. I personally don't trust the government to be good stewards of my money, especially since 13% off the top is skimmed to drop bombs on kids overseas. And another 13% to interest due to reckless spending, but y'all aren't ready for that conversation.
It's cute how Trump says this is too extreme when hes the one who empowered these superstitious fanatics.
I love that the people with no values, morals, or sense of purpose, judge all the religious people who don't want baby k*lling to be legal, but don't care that 99% of abortions aren't from r*pe or incest.
I mean this point is mostly just we really shouldn't be turning killing babies into the national sport just behind football.
@@krossestarwind795 Ahh yes, a fetus that cannot feel pain (prior to 3rd trimester) and isn't able to be conscious (yet)- yes, unaliving that is totally comparable to unaliving someone that DOES feel these things. What next? Ur going to charge me for animal cruelty if I burn an ant with a spyglass? Omg.
I love how my comment gets deleted but it still let's me know when yall comment
@@krossestarwind795 Killing babies and shots fired in schools shouldn’t be national sports
Yet we ban “killing” fetuses, but there’s *nothing* we can do to stop school shootings
I haven't encountered any forced-birthers adopt or foster the kids they had a hand in creating. It's easier to act holier than thou than to actually DO something good.
This is a common argument I seen put forth, and to this I respond with a few simple examples. There are plenty of non-profit pregnancy clinics in The United States.
Alongside this, Catholics are one of the largest pro-life groups in America, and they noticably DO help people. There are Catholic Orphanages, Catholic Rehab Centers, Catholic Hospitals, Catholic Soup Kitchens, etcetera.
Ultimately there are genuine supports available from groups who are pro-life, rather than some holier than thou fallacy.
@@sw_nerd Although that may be true, in order to be pro-life you inherently have to ignore the repercussions of what mandating that causes.
The fact is making abortion illegal does not significantly decrease abortion rates, it only significantly increases the number of women injured. If someone wants to demand pro-life despite this it's because they're either A. Ignorant or B. unconcerned with the damage.
They're not all overtly theistic but the mindset as a whole stands in opposition to reality. Even the least restrictive laws have drastic harmful effects, especially when doctors are threatened.
@@Blewlongmunnumber of women injured by what? The abortion ban supports medically necessary abortions. That’s why they’re attacking the date as opposed to the actual legislation. This is actually the ideal abortion law, but they’re still opposing it.
It’s not ignorance - because the right to life is the first and foremost and without it you don’t get any other rights. You can’t have rights if you aren’t alive. So killing innocent people is the worst violation of rights there could be. That’s a firm and unreligious stance.
What is the “damage” you’re referring to in b?
What is the “opposition to reality”?
@@Blewlongmun number of women injured by what? The ban supports medically necessary abortions. That’s why they’re attacking the date as opposed to the actual legislation. This is actually the ideal abortion law, but they’re still opposing it.
It’s not ignorance - because the right to life is the first and foremost and without it you don’t get any other rights. You can’t have rights if you aren’t alive. So killing innocent people is the worst violation of rights there could be. That’s a firm and unreligious stance.
What is the “damage” you’re referring to in b?
What is the “opposition to reality”?
@@Blewlongmun making abortion universally legal saw a large uptick in abortion rates. You're wrong, and more importantly people being desperate to commit murder regardless of it being made illegal is not a justification to let it be legal.
Arizona didn't even become a state until 1912
On February 23rd, 1863 Arizona was made a territory and had separate laws from New Mexico
@@YannisKarageorgiou I know, it's just weird that in 2024 that they would use a law that was originally written in the 1860s
It was only a month? Felt a lot longer
How many did you try to get ?
@@itsnotatoober I'm not talking about experience I'm talking about actual time.
give it time i wouldn't put it past them to try this again if they win
If they can, they will.
The repeal doesn’t take effect until 90days after the legislature sine dies-which could be several months
90 days would be 3 months
Conservatives: Bringing you the beloved and new ideas of the 1860’s.
yeah lincoln was a republican
@@theextracator I said Conservative, not Republican. Lincoln was a progressive, and a pen pal of Karl Marx. He was killed by a conservative.
Liberals enshrining the eugenics of the 1940s
Republicans back then was more liberal leaning in the classical sense
@@charliekowittmusic
I didint know they were pen pals
Wait what? Even Trump said this ban was too far? Now I've seen everything
Trump changed his stance on abortion 5 times in 3 day the first time he ran for office. He says anything he thinks will appeal to voters.
Trump saying that, is more a commentary on how unpopular the abortion ban is.
@@DerekHise yeah, okay, that makes sense
At least they repealed it…
nah it was a good law
@@badclassicalmusicHELL NO. Bro is on something
@@b1chadledroid126 it stopped baby's being killed whats wrong with that?
@@badclassicalmusic Rape: Cases where the mothers life is at risk:
@@b1chadledroid126 Rape is obviously bad, but you shouldn't kill the child because of it, and if the mothers life has a high chance of ending i believe it a sacrifice that may be neescary
Love how women’s rights became negotiable 😭😭
I'm pro abortion but stop calling that shit a right?
@@MichaelJohnsonolohfghvit's literally the right to bodily autonomy
@@juliusdauksys2183 yeah that is a right, you have the right to your own body, not the babies
@@badclassicalmusic you realize bodily autonomy means you sat what happens to your body and organs. Like how you can just not let a parasitic human grow inside of you
@@juliusdauksys2183 "by parasitic human" do you mean a baby? cause if so that is a separate living entity and thus is not your body
Two of the Justices that renewed the ban are up for retention this year. They can kiss their benches goodbye.
quote from wikipedia: "During the first trimester, when it was believed that the procedure was safer than childbirth, the Court ruled that a state government could place no restrictions on women's ability to choose to abort pregnancies other than imposing minimal medical safeguards, such as requiring abortions to be performed by licenced physicians. From the second trimester on, the Court ruled that evidence of increasing risks to the mother's health gave states a compelling interest that allowed them to enact medical regulations on abortion procedures so long as they were reasonable and "narrowly tailored" to protecting mothers' health.[7] From the beginning of the third trimester on-the point at which a fetus became viable under the medical technology available in the early 1970s-the Court ruled that a state's interest in protecting prenatal life became so compelling that it could legally prohibit all abortions except where necessary to protect the mother's life or health."
aka, first trimester is protected (up to around 12~14 weeks) second trimester is up to the states (12~14 weeks to 26~28 weeks) and the third trimester is off the table unless it is to save the mothers life. if you disagree with these and this is the first youre hearing about it the congratulations, you never really cared about abortion law, you just wanted to argue.
Do not bring back the OG map
Men who make laws about forcing people to give birth should watch a birthing video and see if they’d be okay w/ it.
watched one when I was like 10 its not that bad
I love the colored pencil poffs to identify speakers, I need me a set of journals and matching pencil puffs
Oh no the consequences of legislators not keeping up to date laws and federal legislators being worse.
How could any of us have seen this coming? None of us can read or form rational opinions on the moral state of our political system
Rare Trump W. Also you know it's incredibly fucking stupid when even Trump says that it's going too far, and he's doing dumb shit 90% of the time.
Didn’t he win an entire election?
It's easy for him to spout those words for he only cares about getting reelected. If it means renouncing a state law that he allowed to go into effect by helping to overturn a higher law in the supreme court, so be it.
Wouldn't Republicans not want it enforced? Since ya know, a mother's life could actually be spared?
This comment is a perfect example on why the party system is a terrible decision. You put every single person in one category. It does nothing but divides Americans. I am my opinion believe abortion should only be taken place if the mother‘s life is in danger. If she consented the having unsafe sex and gets pregnant, that’s her fault.
or a babys could be
Unless the mother's life is at risk abortion should be 100 precent illegal
Bold of you to assume Republicans care about the life of the mother. Or the fetus'.
@@HituraRael We do, we care about both lives
Still no understand how a law created before the state even existed is allowed to be enforced today when it wasn’t previously enforced like if it was enforced shortly after it would be more understandable the fight would be more about removing it, but like it wasn’t so why try to now?
Arizona wasn’t even a state in 1864
lmao did you call women dying 'a lot of drama' 🤣
I always thought that for a decision in court, there had to be a 2/3rds majority vote? 16 from 30 is 8/15ths
pretty sure that’s only in the senate
Repealing laws does not require a higher burden than making laws.
This was the legislator, not a court. Simple majority with sign off by the governor is all that is needed. The court ruled that they couldn't repeal the law and that legislation would be needed to change the law.
@@jjquinn295 The Court ruled that the law was still active because it was never repealed. Most unconstitutional laws are simply dormant.
@EvyTallWoman yes and that since the Supreme Court overturned Rowe it would require legislation to repeal. Hence at the next session the state legislator past legislation to repeal it. You know like congress probably should have done sometime since the court ruling rather than just complaining.
Oh so the elected government changed the law instead of having an unelected judge "block" a law?
This is a good thing and exactly how the government should work.
Well a country without unellected judges being able to block laws is what we call a "dictatorship" my dear fellow
Means when the gop gets loving vs Virginia overturned, uou can expect old laws to be triggered as well.
Damn we early
Indeed we are.
Thanks democrats you guys really do your best
doing their best at destroying the country👍
Love the talking point "It's old so it's useless"
How many states held territorial laws over after statehood? I found it really odd that the State Supreme court took that kind of precedent and made it precedent to do so
Thankful to Arizona Democrats for doing their jobs!
Come November AZ Will go from purple the blue, baby!
She has to use it. She expensed it.
off topic, but I love the different colored notebooks and the matching pens (or gavel)
What era does the ban on murder come from?
but but i though the argument FOR abortions was them being historically allowed? Yet the law negates that idea.
This is probably the dumbest false argument I've ever seen, lmao.
The argument for abortion is and allways was women's rights and body authonomy
@@TheReal_Antreyyea, but the main argument AGAINST this law is “it’s old get rid of it”. This is actually the ideal abortion law but people are still against it and not for principle reasons.
@@user-xh9pu2wj6bhow is it a false argument?
@@TheReal_Antrey the argument for abortion is always "but I want to murder children" since it isn't a right to murder, and it isn't your body that you are killing.
Her all black, funeral colors are oddly apt for this deteriorating system.
Love the one that's writing in the back.
how tf does the video have 106 likes but only 157 views???
Black magic and devil worship.
Likes don't have to watch the video. But the count for views needs to watch the entire video
The counts are intermittently summed from servers around the country.
Not everyone likes wvery video they see lol
People in the comments should know cuz people believed something you agree with from 1860 does not mean it’s a bad thing
Ofc it's not fundamentally a bad thing. Why people are aggressive against it, is firstly, the historical context of it and why it was put into place, the conditions being different from today and not as relevant. Now more importantly, screw the dates, view it as a new independent legislation. Not even allowing abortion in rape and super risky situations is kinda absurd already. You know the conservative arg has a line that kinda hinges on "accountability" for "your own actions" . Yea u see, noone willingly gets raped, or I ll go ahead and say chooses to make it a life and death situation.
Agrees. Our constitution is older than that. Are we supposed to get rid of the first amendment? And here i though kids were smarter these days.
@sagunsingh7415 The first amendment isn't making rape a viable way to obtain a child. Bad example
Nobody is saying that is the reason. The point is that it is so archaic that ownership of other human beings was still permissible.
@@supremacy9097what is that? And do the intentions outweigh the effect? Cus we’d be getting rid of a hell of a lot of things, including planned parenthood actually, because that was promoted for population control of minorities. And it’s hard to “view it” as that when the only argument being presented is “omg this law is from 1864!” The legislation makes for medical abortions that’s the only reason it should be allowed, elective abortions should be unconstitutional.
Moral of all American politics: people big mad
The notion a "law" from before Arizona was even a state somehow superceded a century plus of precedent of abortion access is absolutely stupid. The Republicans who supported keeping it in place deserve to lose in November.
Abortion should only be legal under very specific circumstances. Like rape, or when the mothers life is at a threat.
It should NOT be legal as a form of "oopsies". If you're having unprotected sex, then you should face the consequences of those actions.
I agree with this one but i hought the one they wanted to ban was the oopsies one? And how the hell do we have these mistakes if condoms exist? Dont they use it?
do you think laws like this would result in less abortions? do you think people will just stop having sex and therefore abortions? what we need is more contraceptive access for everyone.
That’s exactly what this law was which is why they’re arguing against the date of it and not the actual law.
Do you think masturbation is genocide? Because fetuses are as human as semen discharged into a tissue
Except by putting abortion laws in place you risk the mothers life in those "allowed cases" because doctors then have to jump through hoops to justify it being an accepted case.
No one is using abortion as a form of contraception. Its surgery. It sucks to get. You want to reduce abortion? Support abortion as a protected right and then push for policies like better sex ed, better access to contraceptive, and the state providing financial aid to expecting mothers. All three of those things reduce abortions, and they dont put anyones lives at risk.
Incidentally republican politicians tend to be against all three of those things which increase abortions. Some states even went so far as to try to ban various forms of contraception in the wake of roe v wade being overturned.
Abortion is a sin.
If you do not want to get pregnant, don't have sex.
Not everyone is religious. Futhermore clearly you only see sex as a way to have a child meaning you have never had good sex. Futhermore there can be health complications. For example if the doctors suspect the child having a disability that can be hard on the parents and the child once it is born.
@@spidybat7658 I don't need religion to tell me murder is wrong, getting pregnant is the result of sex so if you don't want the risk don't have sex doesn't mean you haven't had good sex, also let's not go the eugenics route of thinking it's ok to kill someone because they have a disability
@@spidybat7658Sex is a way to have a child.
That is why people use condoms.
To not get pregnant.
@@spidybat7658 Even if you’re not religious, abortion violates the 14th amendment.
@@spidybat7658 Your parents obviously ignored their doctors because you were born.
eagerly awaiting the "i have to gavel - i expensed it"
THEN!!
what will their other reporter expense 🤔
Can we get a notebook and puffball pen tour? I need to see the collection.
Me being distracted by the different colors of the notebooks and pens : 👁👄👁
Extremely ungodly unfathomably rare, republican W.
Too bad all the trillions of L's counteract it.
so what? has the 1800s law been repealed?
TLDR: ye they did
Bro, we were right there! So close!
Just as a reminder in Virginia it's Illegal for a woman to give a man head.
Im scared of how they inforce that
Wait do you mean to tell me - she didn’t have a black puff pen to match her black notebook. Shameeeee
I’ve said this before, but the older I become the more politics seem like some sort of elaborate joke or prank.
partly accurate, the original law was civil war era but after Arizona became a state the law was re-passed. Then when Roe was decided the law was enjoined. It makes sense that when Roe was overturned the law would go back into effect. Now it's up to the voters of AZ and their representatives to decide what law they want.
Not my home state making horrible decisions 😪
It was resigned after roe
how bout we put it in a referendum so the ppl can vote for it and not have politicians force another law the ppl don't want. Democracy remember that thing the 50.1 get to tell the 49.9 then want or don't want something
We’re a republic.
@@ernimuja6991we are a democratic republic, which means that while the people get to vote, our representatives take our common beliefs and vote with that. this can be weird though and not completely work as seen in 2016, when even though Clinton won the popular vote meaning most people voted for her, she didnt win the electoral college meaning our representatives went against our will
@@essonyoutube We are a federal system, meaning representation goes by state not popular vote.
It is REALLY important that you understand this. Not all states votes are equal, but smaller states are protected from bigger ones.
Imagine if the EU became a federal state, smaller nations like Greece would want protection from bigger nations like Germany, otherwise German popular vote would decide 90% of all issues.
This is the same for the US where every state is a nation in and of itself. Smaller states need protection from bigger ones, otherwise they would demand self determination and break the union.
The electoral college did not go against the people’s will because the people are not one. Someone from California is not the same people as someone from Illinois. A Californian vote should have as much to say on matters of Illinois as a Russian on matters of Ukraine.
Plz learn the system, learn how this federated state holds itself together and how the “people” are not one. It’s a bunch of different people voting on how not to screw each other. Lumping them all together as if though you have anything in common with me is ridiculous.
arizona wasnt even a state in the 1800s
My question is how were anti-abortion laws still on the books are Roe v Wade? After the supreme court decision was decided in the 70s all those laws would have been illegal.
Texas still has laws requiring people to believe in a supreme deity to hold public office and the like.
They just can't be enforced.
All the liberals are commenting and all the conservatives are replying and war...war never changes.
Just remember: Liberals didn't start the war. They're not the ones that changed targets from denying gay rights to now denying women's rights. It's a consistent pattern of conservatives being bigots, getting backlash beyond measure, then changing their focused fearmongering and disinformation towards a different group of humans.
As a Catholic, I can understand there can be some strong value-based cases to be made from the side that wants to shun abortion. A law made even before doctors realized they must disinfect their hands when they help childbirth can NOT be one of those cases🤣
as a catholic shouldn't supporting banning abortion "thou shalt not kill" and all that?
Men and bears got nothing on the female K/D
Was the gavel expensed too?
Third world country
@washingtonpostuniverse, The U.S. is so backward now, especially in Arizona.
"Arizona did a bad thing".
*The cause was something the Supreme Court did
fun fact, there are loads of laws EVEN OLDER than this! Such as murder, theft, fraud.
And those are actually enforced and still beneficial. This is not the gotcha you think it is
And guess what? People that were affected by said law could vote on those! Unlike Arizona's abortion law in the civil war era!
I can barely follow this short
um, Abortions to save the Mother's life are the only abortions that should be allowed period..
Ok. Then we should add a tax to all Republican voters to pay the medical costs, maternity costs, food costs and stuff for all of those children forced into existence.
goodly gah
Im surprised Republicans were against it since its something they've wanted for a long time now.
Abortion(under the cdcs definiton), should be completely abolished.
You spelled there should be more miserable orphans with no healthcare no good schools and no money wrong
@@user-yo5lr5jy2ethat would’ve been a fantastic rebuttal if you spelled “spelled” correctly
I blame auto correct it ruins everything
@@CharliePerson_ i know 3 languges i cant keep track
YAY
Roe wasn't a law, but yeah.
Trump's dad went too far
Finally
I love how they keep pushing the term "civil war era" to make it seem evil and awful, because of the time period
It's over a 150 years old, it's like enforcing the English laws from 1000 years ago
@@sadfrog15 Murder laws are from 1000 years or more ago. Are they outdated?
I mean im no lawyer, but the age of a law doesn't mean its not legally binding.
The fact that it was made before it was a state it what makes it unleageally binding
@user-yo5lr5jy2e I don't know, kind of a gray area if it was already a self governing territory.
You left out the part where the Republican majority was speaking in tongues on the senate floor.
I think it’s a good law you don’t need an abortion unless the mother’s life can’t be saved and that is so rare that their would be no need for abortions
Just because you don't need an abortion doesn't mean that the law is good. I mean, you also don't need rights, but you have them, and you want them.
You also don't need an arm, a leg, or any limbs at all but what if those were taken away from you? You wouldn't be happy.
@@iru_arg that’s the point. You shouldn’t be able to kill someone just because you want to. Abortions are not for convenience.
@@chavvy9074they also aren't killing
@@juliusdauksys2183 for some reason whatever comment I made that you’re responding to isn’t showing up, what’d it say?
@@chavvy9074> kill someone
would you really consider a clump of parasitic cells a human? next time you have a tapeworm, be sure to not get it removed, because that would be killing someone
Funny when you agree with Trump, you say former president.
Yes because he's currently not the president
well you know 12 weeks is where it should be doesnt kill the child proven by science most people can abort by then.
Hey you're right if you take away the fact that states already had their own laws about abortion before Roe versus Wade
(1) This is literally about the consequences of those old laws because Roe vs. Wade is gone.
(2) Arizona wasn't even a state when this law was made.
@@kurtisl051 two is arbitrary as all states have laws from before they were states. You don’t just hit reset upon entering the union.
@@chavvy9074 When people point out #2 it's to put into perspective just how long ago this law was made so the idea of "we're just going back to how things were before Roe vs Wade" ignores the tragic comedy of surprises Arizona is finding itself in.
@@kurtisl051 that makes no sense because 2 also applies to the end of slavery and 13th amendment. And women voting. Theres nothing tragic or comedic, the very same law should and could be passed in 2022, banning abortion except for emergencies is a stable concept.
I think that abortions should be banned IF
theres good and free healthcare
Good and free schools
Good and well kept orphanges
And liveable wages
Untill then its a fat no from me buster
Huh. You know I personally think it should be their choice but.. you’re actually pretty reasonable about how you think it should be banned
I respect that. Although my opinion doesn’t matter I don’t live there lmao
excuse me? you want to murder kids because their lives might be bad?!
@@badclassicalmusiclove the use of inaccurate language for emotional manipulation
@@juliusdauksys2183 what language was inaccurate?
No make it a constitution amendment, no baby murder except to save the mother's life.
It should already people you have a right to life, freedom and the pursit of happiness this violates all 3
seems like a reasonable ban, just replace the jail time with a fine
But it's not...
Imagine if the government banned other life-saving surgeries.
There's a fine line when the government is in controlled of what you can do with your body, then the line has been crossed.
@@iru_arg it literally said abortion was banned unless the mother's life was in danger, pretty ahead of its time
@@folfielukather8083 Still doesn't matter the government should never be able to control what you do with your body.
And the government has failed to understand what life and danger is there are so many people with life threatening pregnancies that are denied abortions.
Relying on what the government considers life endangering just isn't a good idea.
Please stop trying to justify a ban that takes away people's rights.
@@folfielukather8083 ok, the life is in danger literally at every point of the pregnancy so...
@@iru_arg 96 of abortions are done out of convenience. Abortions kill not save
Yeah and while we are at it lets roll back those civil war era 13, 14, 15th amendments.
Just because it's old doesnt mean its bad.
the video never said it was bad becuse it was old. they never even said it was good. this is the official washington post so the video is entirely informational, no opinions within.
@@Braixen8 the washington post isnt biased sure buddy
@@somerandomdogedod7629 its a news source it cant be biased. and even if they are, this video wasnt
@@Braixen8 i suppose this video is alright, but they are clearly biased in other videos
@@somerandomdogedod7629 well then weve reached a mutual understanding
Bring back the ban
Imagine justifying homicide for the purpose of hedonism. Sad.
I think abortion should not replace contraception and should be limited to sincere worries about health of child, health of mother, dangerous environment of upbringing (extreme poverty, drugs, gang violence)
No one's trying to replace contraception with abortions It's just that some people are first of all, not able to get contraception and also some people specifically teenagers don't know how to use them and when they end up in that situation, they need an abortion.
But either way, you can't force a child on to someone because, at the end of the day, it's only gonna make both of their lives worse it's gonna ruin the mother's life then the mother's gonna hate the child and then abuse the child then the child will have trauma that's pretty much how it always goes with pro life.
The last part is literal eugenics.
Good thing that's not happening
@@juliusdauksys2183 it def is.
@@chavvy9074 it's not tho 🤦♂️