- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: California passed a law that could allow babies to be killed up to 28 days AFTER birth.
Posted on 7/10/26 at 7:41 am to onmymedicalgrind
Posted on 7/10/26 at 7:41 am to onmymedicalgrind
quote:
You absolutely have not.
So, if I filled in the blank like this, would you agree with the following statement?
"I am against this bill because it now allows women to kill their babies up to one month after delivery without facing legal consequences."
Privacy•Advertising•Contact•Terms
Yes, that's what the law says, as has already been demonstrated to you.
Posted on 7/10/26 at 7:47 am to imjustafatkid
quote:
Yes, that's what the law says,
Yes, California passed a law where a mother can throw her 27 day old off a bridge just because she feels like it and face no legal consequences. It would concern me that you actually believe that, if I didn't find it so comical first.
Posted on 7/10/26 at 7:48 am to Figgy
Do the clergy and laypeople of those churches have a guiding hand in the California political system?
Posted on 7/10/26 at 7:49 am to bamadontcare
quote:
The Democrat Party is soulless and they worship Satan.
I want every one of them to respond
to this thread.
you believe this clickbait article that month old infants in california will be killed?
Posted on 7/10/26 at 7:50 am to hubertcumberdale
quote:
you believe this clickbait article that month old infants in california will be killed?
Alot of people who post here are really, really, really dumb.
See: imjustafatkid
Posted on 7/10/26 at 8:01 am to imjustafatkid
quote:I suspected the "perinatal" language was designed to support a Ralph Northam "make 'em cumferble" abortion-born-alive premise.
Now those same psychopaths are arguing this OP is wrong
It turns out the intent is only a bit less loathsome. The intent is to protect mothers from birth outcome liability. E.g., child's lifelong disability following botched abortion, or drug abuse during pregnancy.
However, given a live-birth, both MD and mother are obligated to normal pediatric standard of care. IOW they must do all they can to ensure survival.
California Health and Safety Code 123435 is unchanged, and states:"The rights to medical treatment of an infant prematurely born alive in the course of an abortion shall be the same as the rights of an infant of similar medical status prematurely born spontaneously."
This post was edited on 7/10/26 at 8:03 am
Posted on 7/10/26 at 8:09 am to NC_Tigah
quote:
It turns out the intent is only a bit less loathsome. The intent is to protect mothers from birth outcome liability. E.g., child's lifelong disability following botched abortion, or drug abuse during pregnancy.
Correct. I am all for a discussion if the actual intent of this bill is worth supporting. Personally, I think negligence during pregnancy that leads to a poor outcome that was preventable should face legal consequences.
Mischaracterizing this bill as giving mothers carte blanche to do whatever harm they want to their infant as long as it is within the "perinatal" period only deflects the focus from legitimate criticism of this legislation.
Posted on 7/10/26 at 8:14 am to BigPerm30
California? Likely a POS.
You can guarantee it won’t be Hispanic children sacrificed.
You can guarantee it won’t be Hispanic children sacrificed.
Posted on 7/10/26 at 8:35 am to Snipe
quote:
Do the clergy and laypeople of those churches have a guiding hand in the California political system?
Locally, yes without a doubt. We went to church with our current mayor. Who was chief of police before becoming mayor. Even our Dems aren’t as radical as what you see coming from the Bay Area and SoCal.
You guys tend to fall into a trap that the Bay Area and SoCal represent all of California when they simply do not. They grab the headlines but Central California does just fine. Here’s our city council chamber representing 530,000 people:
It’s nothing like what you read about on this board and elsewhere.
Posted on 7/10/26 at 8:50 am to onmymedicalgrind
quote:
quote:
(a) Notwithstanding any other law, a person shall not be subject to civil or criminal liability or penalty, or otherwise deprived of their rights under this article, based on their actions or omissions with respect to their pregnancy or actual, potential, or alleged pregnancy outcome, including miscarriage, stillbirth, or abortion, or perinatal death due to causes that occurred in utero.
The fact you read this to mean "its now legal to kill a 27 day old in California" is....not surprising actually
Congratulations. You are the useful idiot that gets targeted and duped by clickbait media.
So a mother can poison her unborn child at 39 weeks, give birth to it and if it dies 27 days after birth, she can't be charged....and you see a significant difference?
Posted on 7/10/26 at 8:51 am to Figgy
quote:
You guys tend to fall into a trap that the Bay Area and SoCal represent all of California when they simply do not. They grab the headlines but Central California does just fine. Here’s our city council chamber representing 530,000 people:
I think it's about time for California to be broken up: Commiefornia consisting of Bay Area and SoCal and California making up the rest.
Posted on 7/10/26 at 8:58 am to Powerman
quote:
They upheld the existing interpretation.
They expanded it further to include the spawn of illegals.
Posted on 7/10/26 at 9:39 am to RedSoloSpitCup
Yes, I see a difference between a mother smoking in her third trimester versus a mother throwing her 27yr old infant off of a bridge, even if I think both are wrong. You don't?
Posted on 7/10/26 at 9:46 am to onmymedicalgrind
quote:
Around birth.
Not an answer.
And absolute undeniable proof that you are not interested in having an honest conversation about this topic because it’s more important to defend your progressive insanity.
Posted on 7/10/26 at 9:50 am to Open Your Eyes
quote:
Not an answer.
Perinatal literally means "around birth." What answer were you looking for?
And is it consequential to this very predictable "gotcha" you are setting up whether I define this to mean 2 weeks, 4 weeks, or 6 weeks post delivery?
This post was edited on 7/10/26 at 9:51 am
Posted on 7/10/26 at 9:57 am to onmymedicalgrind
quote:
Perinatal literally means "around birth." What answer were you looking for?
The question wasn’t the definition of the word. That’s why your response is not an answer.
quote:
And is it consequential to this very predictable "gotcha" you are setting up whether I define this to mean 2 weeks, 4 weeks, or 6 weeks post delivery?
Yes. And that’s the reason you don’t want to do it.
Posted on 7/10/26 at 10:08 am to Open Your Eyes
quote:
Around birth.
---
Not an answer.
Were you looking for a timeframe?
This post was edited on 7/10/26 at 11:48 am
Popular
Back to top



1







