Guess I'll weigh in and say that I'm pro-choice, but I feel that counseling should absolutely be available in those same organizations and a mandatory session for anyone who shows up to have a 2nd done. That way they can get guidance on what birth control methods may be best for them
AND/OR to have the opportunity to privately discuss if it's the result of a situation they need help getting out of.
Because lord knows there are people stuck in sex trafficking, families with sexual abuse, abusive partners who refuse the use of birth control, and other situations that could be a root cause of needing an abortion in the first place and it and pregnancy might have been against their own will.
Texas however, with this scheme that could create bounty hunters as a means of trying to keep it in check is seriously fricked up.
The twisted way they went bout this is a serious Pandora's Box Texas may have decided to open, as that tactic, as I've heard, would not be limited to just other red states possibly deciding to do the same on abortion, but could also be used against a lot of other rights that people, including conservatives, would not be happy about.
I'll let a couple paragraphs from an article say it best, so that no one need scream at me for being a meanie suggesting threatening other "rights" issues as if I came up with it myself:
Quote:
https://reason.com/2021/09/03/conser...rtion-law-too/
The law bans most abortions but says that state officials are not the enforcers. Rather, the abortion ban "shall be enforced exclusively through…private civil actions." According to the law, "any person" may sue "any person who…aids or abets the performance or inducement of abortion" and win a $10,000 award plus legal fees if the civil suit is successful. According to Texas, this unique scheme means that the state cannot be hauled into federal court to account for its own law because it has handed over the law's enforcement to private parties.
Conservatives should be just as outraged by this legal ruse as liberals are. After all, if the Texas scheme actually succeeds in the long run, what's to stop an anti-gun state legislature from banning handguns in the home, in clear violation of SCOTUS precedent, and then placing state officials beyond the reach of federal judicial review by outsourcing the ban's enforcement to an army of private-sector gun control activists? Most gun shops would probably go bankrupt overnight when faced with the wave of private-sector civil suits that such a state law would unleash.
|
People don't want government controlling our lives (well, maybe women's lives are still okay to
), but yet here is a government not only trying to do exactly that BUT also shield itself and give itself immunity from any accountability of being the one upholding it.
That could get quite scary if people run off with that same idea and start applying it to other things, too.