Bill would help protect abortion rights in Massachusetts should Roe v. Wade be overturned

They're your dollars. Do with them as you wish. I just wish there was more civility on the subject.
I mean that. It's a difficult thing for anyone to go through. It's a shame people make it worse.

"section twelve S; and if the abortion is during or after the thirteenth week of pregnancy, it is performed in a hospital duly authorized to provide facilities for general surgery. "

This section is struck. Unless I'm missing something, simply put, no abortions have to be performed in a hospital. I think this is a major procedural change. If there are serious complications, patient could be screwed. But, please don't try to tell me that these clinics won't be clamoring for money...Safe and Effective Abortions Here!!...until something goes wrong, then the fact is they're in over their head. But, it's no longer encoded in the law specifically.

Sect 19 banned abortion. It's struck, but the last sentence could be struck preserving the liability clause for a botched abortion. Hey, no problem. Whatever.
My summation was simple, "The only real change I see here is the change about an 'after thirteen week' abortion being done in a 'real' hospital, as opposed to a small clinic. Oh, and the 'procuring information' thing. The actual penalty for performing an abortion can be struck by removing one sentence."

[i]Eisenstadt[/i] will stand as long as any of the rest of it stands. Not an issue, except for the sneaky little change in 'proper person' versus 'person or persons' which implies a spouse as having a say in the matter. Therein lies the making of expensive case law...

Bottom line is, this had nothing to do with Rowe v. Wade until yesterday. It was a nice quiet tune up to state law that has a few interesting points that appear to be glossed over and was sold as 'helping women' where it's a bit more complicated than that.

"...a cleanup of current state statutes to make it even more difficult for somebody in the future to futz around with women's bodies."

Well, technically speaking, it's not the woman's body that's at risk, it's the baby's body, but that's another discussion for another time.

Other than that, the play wasn't too bad.

You are the one who wants legislators and police in every vagina. It is other people who want less government.

You must of not noticed:

http://thehill.com/blogs/pundits-blog/the-administ...

White, middle to upper class, and infused with the false sense of security that being the same brings. A fan of the current Administration of thieves and has no problem complaining about her taxes going to waste on anything but a wall that her idol promised Mexico would pay for.

I'll also venture a guess and say your personal relationships leave you unfulfilled to the point that being an obnoxious twit that pops up here occasionally gives you the satisfaction you are filled with too much shame to even consider other ways to satisfy yourself when you're alone and angry.

My issue is it's the emotional outrage it causes. To me it is very selective.

It sure is. Have you looked at the lunatics who picket clinics? They are very selective in their manufactured concern for human life. Calling them "Pro Life" as you do is the act of a disingenuous idiot who believes that she is somewhat cleverer than others, when in fact you are manifestly more stupid.

But you do you... My life does not, and will never, revolve around the abortion discussion.

Of course it doesn't. It doesn't have to.

"If your son will never be one of the 1 in 3 black men imprisoned in America, if you will never need an abortion, if you don’t have to fear watching your family die in a drone strike, debate can be vigorous fun — like being a freshman in Poli Sci all over again. When you have nothing to fear, the most important decisions in our government all turn into thought experiments where everything — even the lives of human beings — is up for compromise."

But for the rest of us, for those of us directly and horrifically impacted every day by the slow and comfortable pace of “progress,” the call for civilized debate is barbaric. The lack of yelling, the lack of protest, the lack of rage and urgency around issues that are literally killing people is a glaring testament, not of our manners, but of our lack of basic empathy as a society."

That's you in the first paragraph, Patricia. She's talking about you. You talk about "soldiers dying, getting maimed physically and emotionally daily", about the economy, about "what's going on in Europe" (what, exactly?), but you are entirely selective in your concern. You reserve it for situations where you have no skin in the game, where it IS a game that you can quit at will.

You are what's wrong with America.

Gee, "DMC", why not grow a pair of real balls and list your real name along with your moronic comments in a place you seem to loathe so much...?