MA: Abortion Liberalization Act (Passed over veto)

[Hatman 🍁]

Parental consent? That flies in the face of the whole mantra of "freedom of choice". Why does it matter what the grandparents of the fetus think?

Anyways, everything except section one is terrible, so I hereby would like to propose an amendment striking sections 2 through 4.

[Hatman 🍁]

aye

[Hatman 🍁]

Parental consent? That flies in the face of the whole mantra of "freedom of choice". Why does it matter what the grandparents of the fetus think?

Anyways, everything except section one is terrible, so I hereby would like to propose an amendment striking sections 2 through 4.

I object to that amendment.

I am by no means anti-abortion, and even a cursory examination of my record will show that I have been at the forefront of the movement to repeal MRLA and other reactionary abortion laws since my first term in the Assembly. That said, eliminating all regulations on this issue goes too far. Allowing a woman to receive an abortion in, say, the 35th week of the pregnancy crosses a moral line and is far outside the grey area on this issue. And while I oppose burdensome limitations on the rights of women to receive legal medical services, I have serious doubts about the ability of a 13-year-old to make such a serious decision without adult guidance. Note that Section 4 does not require the consent of the parents, but rather that they be notified, so the "problem" addressed by this amendment does not even exist.

If this amendment is adopted, I will not support this bill, period.

Having the parents notified is a horrible idea. It could ruin the poor girl's life. Not all parents are loving and forgiving individuals.

I will in no way support this bill as long as Section 4 is in place. As a father, I personally find it repugnant.

[Hatman 🍁]

With a majority voting against, EarlAW's amendment has been defeated.

Having the parents notified is a horrible idea. It could ruin the poor girl's life. Not all parents are loving and forgiving individuals.

I will in no way support this bill as long as Section 4 is in place. As a father, I personally find it repugnant.

I would be willing to strike that requirement as long as Sections 2 and 3 remain in place.

I will not oppose this bill of those sections remain.

Since he opposed my amendment, I am curious to hear what vivaportugalhabs thinks about this bill.

[Hatman 🍁]

Nay on the amendment.

[Hatman 🍁]

Aye

[Hatman 🍁]

BUT MAH MEN'S RIGHTS

We get it, you're pro life. This bill is not about implementing the beliefs of the pro-life movement. Quite the opposite.

What does the pro choice movement believe? That a woman has the choice of what to do with her body, which includes the fetus inside her.

That means:
A) If a woman is old enough to be pregnant, she is old enough to have the choice of what do with the fetus inside her. Even if she is a minor. (18 is an arbitrary age anyways; for issues like this, biology is much less arbitrary)
B) Since this doesn't effect the father's body in any way, what he thinks is moot.

I also believe this means that a woman has the right to have an abortion beyond the 20th week, but this belief does not have the majority support in this assembly.

[Hatman 🍁]

Abstain

[Hatman 🍁]

I'll change my vote to aye. Not happy that the governor has vetoed this.